#no-kill rule

[mashounen2003]

For all the talk about Batman's no-kill rule and why it has to be a thing and how much it's the proof that it makes superhero stories worse, it's shown quite a lot in canon, both in comics and in cartoons, that Batman's methods do work pretty well. We have Harley Quinn, Poison Ivy, Mr Freeze (who's still shoehorned into villain roles sometimes from what I've heard, but everyone tacitly agrees this is dumb), and I guess Catwoman is still doing her own thing and being an annoying wild card at worst.

It's just that both writers and readers straight-up forget about all those successful examples and focus so much on the Joker, the one villain who seems to be doing villain things with the very specific purpose of forcing Batman to break his no-kill rule.

So, people looking from the outside see this and think "Clearly, no-kill rules are always bad and the entire superhero genre is dumb". Either that, or they get the impression that these stories' underlying message (perhaps even intended by the writers) is actually "Batman is wrong, rehabilitating criminals doesn't work, these comics show why", which in turn lures all the terminally online Armchair Sociologists who then start ranting about the superhero genre inherently being food for fascists.

[sparkyyden]

My Thoughts on the 'No-Kill Rule', in Relation to Batman and Joker

One of the things that Batman is most known for is his iconic 'No-Kill' rule, it's quite arguably one of the Caped Crusader's main defining characteristic.

There are multiple reasons that people give for why Batman has this rule, but the one I want to focus on right now is that Batman greatly values human life.

The question this poses, at least for me, is "What exactly about human life does Batman see that makes him so firmly against taking it?". I think the answer to this question is humanity's capacity to be good.

To choose good, to be loving, to create, to connect. I think Batman sees that in everyone. So, it makes sense that the adversary for Batman would be someone who chooses evil, who is sadistic, to destroys, who rips and tears apart. That's the Joker.

But even then, Batman still doesn't kill the Joker. From what I've seen, this is because Batman still believes that even someone as cruel and vile as the Joker can change for the better, and that's worth keeping him alive for. Emphasis on 'can'.

Based on what I know, with Batman, there's no specific crime, no amount of buildings destroyed, no number of lives taken, that would change his mind on the possibility that anyone can still change, because their human.

This is where I bring up 'The Killing Joke', and how I interpret the ending as Batman finally killing the Joker. In the story, Batman is already grappling with the choice of killing the Joker or letting him live.

Fast forward to the ending, Joker once again does as the Joker does, so Batman does the last thing he can do, he reaches out completely to the Joker, making the genuine offer to help him, help him be better.

And the Joker says no. That is why I think Batman killed the Joker, not because of any specific thing he did that pushed him over the edge, just the 'no'. The complete denial of goodness. The absolute rejection of everything Batman values and cherishes about human life.

And in the face of this, Batman laughs, at how he finally got the answer he was looking for, at how after all this time, all the times he spared the Joker's life, he still couldn't get through to him.

Stories where Batman kills are, to my knowledge, few and far between, but I really think there's potential for some good thought-provoking, compelling storytelling about what makes life valuable and what makes people "irredeemable", even outside of the Joker.

Anyways, I don't know how to end this in a way that isn't awkward, so yeah. I might revisit this somewhere down the light, but these are my thoughts for now.

[jessieraves]

been thinking about batman a lot lately and hate how most stories frame his no-kill rule as either a repression of an unhinged violent drive or a self deluded pat on the back that makes him responsible for all the future actions of the criminals he stops

like maybe he doesnt kill not because its that he can't stop once he gets started, or it'll make him just like them, but maybe he doesnt kill because he values ALL life!

he was the son of a surgeon, do no harm + studied for years for the path of enlightenment (tho he dropped out lol) before becoming batman

id love a story that approachs his no-kill with the earnestness and care that trigun did for vash, a batman that believes EVEN the joker's life has value, a batman that believes ANYONE can be redeemed

instead of grrr imma kill everyone if i dont keep a tight lid on me, it seems the hardest thing for ppl to believe is that batman just thinks killing is wrong simple as

[zayray030]

Bruce doesn't kill the joker and refuses to break his No-kill rule and Jason starts hating him and the fandom starts calling him a coward.

Bruce ends up killing the joker and breaks his No-kill rule and Jason hates him and the fandom call him a sycopath.

This man can never really, ever win, can he?

[potatoofpotato]

The No-Kill Rule means far much more to a character like Batman, than it does to literally any other superhero.

No-Kill rule. Heroes in comic books are supposed to be beacons of light that show us that we can be better as people. How many of us had our lives changed because we had people like Superman to look up to? How many women looked to Wonder Woman as their hero? How many people could relate with someone like Spiderman, who was just a regular guy who gained superpowers? So of course, showing these heroes butchering the villains in cold blood was something that just wouldn’t and couldn’t fly back in the Golden Age. But things are different now. People have a want for more action, people generally want more violence. People want the hero to kill the villain. They want to see the hero kill the badguy and end it all! If the bad guy was dead, there would be no more problems. And yeah, it makes sense in some way. Spiderman’s problems all would be over if he just threw Green Goblin off the empire state building. Or smashed Rhino’s head with a cement block. Or etc. Green Lantern’s problems all could have been lessened if he willed a green sword and stabbed Sinestro through the chest. Any superhero’s lives would be better if they just killed. However, Batman is different. For Batman the no-kill policy is far more than just a cliche. It’s his life. To Batman, all lives are precious. Every life is sacred. No matter how cruel and murderous they are, Batman does not have it in his heart or even in his capabilities to kill someone. Because of how his parents were killed, because of how his mind was warped, he couldn’t bring himself to be a murderer. To him, every crook, every villain, every person had someone who cared. SOMEONE. To that person, if he killed someone, he’d become that thug who took his parents. It’s his biggest weakness, his biggest achilles heel. The thing is, he’s just as messed up as the Joker is. Yes, he could potentially be in Arkham as well. His mental upbringing, his very being, his every self cannot fathom killing another. Look at the scene from Batman: The Animated Series, when H.A.R.D.A.C  created his own Batman, the clone was almost a perfect replica. Down to his inability to kill. How he viewed all human life. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuuSOuWNvNE The fight between Batman and Robo-Batman ended with Batman seemingly dying and robo-Batman absolutely losing his mind with an overwhelming guilt to the point where he literally kills himself whilst destroying H.A.R.D.A.C in the process. That is what Batman is. That was who he is. So when you see Batman suddenly gun down a car with his batmobile in one scene, then threatening to murder Superman in another scene. Or when you see him pulling out two guns... it makes you go, “That’s not Batman.” Do not forget, in Batman Beyond, it wasn’t JUST his old age being the reason he gave up being Batman, but it was when he picked up a gun and pointed it at a man who would have killed him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llBexiLzK5U Look at the raw look of genuine horrified fear as he looks at he gun, dropping it in pure disgust and walking away in shame. Bruce Wayne would never. Ever. EVER use a gun to kill another person. It goes against his very moral code. More than any other superhero. If you see Wonder Woman stab someone through the chest, you go, “You go Wonder Woman.” But if you see Batman beating a man half to death merclessly, leaving nothing but a walking corpse left behind, you don’t go “Yeah that’s awesome!” you go, “...that’s not Batman...” If people want a Batman that kills? That’s fine. But have it be another person. Give someone else the mantle of Batman. But for Bruce Wayne? The No-Kill rule isn’t just a policy, it’s what makes him, Batman.

[captainxtra]

Batman would look at 90% of analog horror villains and say:

“yeah no, they need to die”