|
Basebf555 posted:He had a split second to react and defend himself from a live grenade. The fact that he caused a violent criminal's death doesn't make it cold-blooded murder regardless of what other options he may have had. You don't seem to understand what the term "cold-blooded" means. So Batman is a Blue Lives Matter kind of guy?
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:29 |
|
|
Squinty posted:So Batman is a Blue Lives Matter kind of guy? Has Batman ever killed a cop in the comics? Or just the mentally ill and predominantly minority homeless populations?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Squinty posted:So Batman is a Blue Lives Matter kind of guy? When SWAT teams storm a building where hostages are being held at gunpoint, its not the same thing as when a black man gets gunned down because he had a brake light out. This isn't a situation where Batman went looking for a fight for no reason, these guys had an innocent woman and were threatening to kill her.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Squinty posted:So Batman is a Blue Lives Matter kind of guy? Batman is given a situation where either he and an incapacitated mercenary (and possibly more people as the grenade will go off in a crowded room) will die or the incapacitated mercenary and the grenade thrower will die. Go ahead and figure out how to tie that to LEOs attitude of "if you fail to comply with me for any reason or with any hesitation I will interpret that as a threat to me and torture you will electricity or shoot you (and I might just do that anyway)"
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
gently caress you, Batman! You could have froze the grenade in mid air or turned it into a loving butterfly!
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
Squinty posted:He couldn't have thrown something else? His cable-shooting thingy maybe? It HAD to be the helpless guy? Violence is wrong, especially in films.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
I mean, or he could have used his handy crate-flinging device to fling an inanimate object at him. But a helpless human projectile was clearly the most reasonable response.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
Do you have some kind of wizard curse/geas on you where you can't type the words "grapple gun"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
Squinty posted:I mean, or he could have used his handy crate-flinging device to fling an inanimate object at him. But a helpless human projectile was clearly the most reasonable response. Again, when you carry assault rifles, explosives, and have taken innocent women hostage, you don't get to complain about how "reasonable" the response is. If they were all incapacitated and Batman went around snapping necks, then you'd have cold-blooded murder. One thing isn't the other. Take Batman out of the equation. If a police SWAT team had entered and shot all the mercs to death, would that be cold-blooded murder? Basebf555 fucked around with this message at 21:18 on Sep 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Again, when you carry assault rifles, explosives, and have taken innocent women hostage, you don't get to complain about how "reasonable" the response is. If they were all incapacitated and Batman went around snapping necks, then you'd have cold-blooded murder. One thing isn't the other. Cold-blooded was probably an overstatement on my part. But if a SWAT team had knocked a merc unconscious and used his body as a human shield rather than the actual ballistic shields they brought with them anyway, I'd call that unreasonable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
Squinty posted:Cold-blooded was probably an overstatement on my part. But if a SWAT team had knocked a merc unconscious and used his body as a human shield rather than the actual ballistic shields they brought with them anyway, I'd call that unreasonable. It would certainly be wrong for them to do that, but if were in the heat of the moment and they were trying to protect themselves from a live grenade, its not murder.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:I meant it flips Stark to being friends with Rogers again. He gets a little smile at the thought of Steve breaking out his buds from SuperPrison. I mean, that's definitely one way to read the smile, but I took it less as that and more as him thinking "oh, that's just classic Steve, gently caress everything up and then send me a nice apology letter about why he had to do it."
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:I mean, that's definitely one way to read the smile, but I took it less as that and more as him thinking "oh, that's just classic Steve, gently caress everything up and then send me a nice apology letter about why he had to do it." Well that's fair too, although if he were still mad at Rogers I imagine he would have been waiting for him at the prison (or would have got there fast). You're right, though, it's ambiguous.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
HIJK posted:Captain America is about doing the right thing -- which is defined by what he thinks is right and correct, as it is with all individuals. I'm not saying this to be spiteful to Steve or to any other real person, I'm only pointing out that as squishy and irrational humans "the right thing" is a very slippery concept. What point are you even trying to make? Every human being operates under the idea that they are right. The more interesting question is: do you think what he's doing is right? That would put you somewhere in the political ideology spectrum, regardless of whether you think you believe in one or not.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Guess what would have happened to this guy if that thug had thrown a live grenade at Batman, who was standing right next to him? Another circle of violence ended. Thanks Batman. Thatman. quote:Well that's fair too, although if he were still mad at Rogers I imagine he would have been waiting for him at the prison (or would have got there fast). You're right, though, it's ambiguous. I assumed he was doing or already had done the jailbreak when Stark got the letter.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Squinty posted:I mean, or he could have used his handy crate-flinging device to fling an inanimate object at him. But a helpless human projectile was clearly the most reasonable response. So you admit you'd prefer a more repetitious action scene, because it would give you slightly more confidence in Batman's moral authority. See, this is what's hilarious about you attempting to bandy around the conservative boogeyman of Blue Lives Matter: Black Lives Matter does not actually espouse that there are no scenarios in which lethal force is necessary for the protection of the people. They are not, as you are, narrowly concerned with preserving an unconscious faith in the police as agents of moral authority so that we can just turn off our brains and passively enjoy an infantilized spectacle of justice. Rather, Black Lives Matter opposes the ideology of colonial white supremacy. In fact, some BLM anti-colonialists I know are very passionate about defending the "intelligence" of lethal force, not the least because this is a crucial component of rejecting the 'colorblind'/#alllivesmatter mentality indoctrinated by the colonial oppressor, in which the subjective of the oppressed citizen facing racist or classist police violence is never allowed to veer towards self-defensive lethal force, no matter what the circumstances. No kill rule is the same exact poo poo as #alllivesmatter: It's platitudinal nonsense trickled down from positions of colonial, economic, racial privilege concerned narrowly with political respectability rather than protecting any lives in particular. This critique is as old as Huey P. Newton and Malcolm X, and older still.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:So you admit you'd prefer a more repetitious action scene, because it would give you slightly more confidence in Batman's moral authority. I'd probably combine the crate-shot and the grenade shot. And I don't think I've ever said that I think Batman follows or should follow a no kill policy, but the warehouse scene goes out of its way to show him killing a helpless, subdued man.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
The grenade guy is the culpable one
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
Squinty posted:And I don't think I've ever said that I think Batman follows or should follow a no kill policy, but the warehouse scene goes out of its way to show him killing a helpless, subdued man. So he was already dead from the force of Batman's blow when the grenade went off. Interesting reading.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
Squinty posted:I'd probably combine the crate-shot and the grenade shot. You are being willfully dense at this point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Tezcatlipoca posted:You are being willfully dense at this point. Willfully? ...I'm not so sure. There's a distinct lack of awareness through these types of posts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Willfully? I was giving him the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
seravid posted:They matter so little, in fact, that Falcon turns his back on them, remaining completely unaffected by their weapons. He's got a shield on his back you big dummy Tezcatlipoca posted:The past 30 years of Batman movies do not have that dumb rule. So, yes, you are a weird fetishist for demanding Batman have a no kill rule no matter the circumstance. Nobody's demanding anything and nobody insulted your preference. Stop being a dick.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
Sidebar from Batchat: Holy crap. Ming Na Wen is almost 53 years old?!? Also, Taika Waititi says Thor's roommate Darryl will be in Ragnarok. So apparently the Thor Civil War Short is canon now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Sidebar from Batchat: 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
Drifter posted:There's a distinct lack of awareness through these types of posts. I think we're approaching the unavoidable conclusion that comic book fans push this No Kill Rule, or that Captain America stands for nothing, because they have no sense of ethics or even basic morality. Nobody's thought about what justice is, or what law is. Human rights. Democracy. These things are all irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:Every human being operates under the idea that they are right. Since this has now been flatly asserted multiple times in this thread, I have to ask: am I the only person here who has done something despite believing it to be wrong? Who has knowingly failed to live up to their own standard?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 01:33
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Since this has now been flatly asserted multiple times in this thread, I have to ask: am I the only person here who has done something despite believing it to be wrong? Who has knowingly failed to live up to their own standard? Wait, are you saying that there's a third option between moral and immoral? I wish there were a word for that...
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:Wait, are you saying that there's a third option between moral and immoral? I wish there were a word for that... To be clear, I'm talking about belief in a moral standard that one knows they fail to live up to, which I actually don't know a single word for. I'm not saying I'm amoral.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 01:54
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Since this has now been flatly asserted multiple times in this thread, I have to ask: am I the only person here who has done something despite believing it to be wrong? Who has knowingly failed to live up to their own standard? People commit acts that they perceive to be wrong because the end would justify the means. It's ultimately a compromise between what they think is worth it. In that sense, they still believe they are right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:People commit acts that they perceive to be wrong because the end would justify the means. It's ultimately a compromise between what they think is worth it. In that sense, they still believe they are right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:That is far from the only type of situation where people do things they think are wrong. Sometimes you gently caress your girlfriend's sister, know it's wrong, and know you have no real excuse. It's not about an excuse, it's about justification. You might regret doing it long term, but in that instant, your desire to gently caress your girlfriend's sister felt more right than anything else. Our primal desires especially ebb and flow. KVeezy3 fucked around with this message at 02:15 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:It's not about an excuse, it's about justification. You might regret doing it long term, but in that instant, your desire to gently caress your girlfriend's sister felt more right than anything else. Nope, part of the fun is that it feels wrong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:15
|
|
|
You made a decision to choose "fun" over being less "fun." You still believe you're right in that moment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:You made a decision to choose "fun" over being less "fun." You still believe you're right in that moment. That's really not how being human works. For a lot of us at least. Knowing full well you're doing something wrong and feeling like poo poo about it even as you're in the act of doing it is a very human thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:20
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:You made a decision to choose "fun" over being less "fun." You still believe you're right in that moment. Not necessarily. Not in personal experience. The idea that one is always completely sure, in the moment, that one is right is a little odd. It feels like an overextension of the common human tendency for self-justification to an absolute, ignoring such things as guilt and self-loathing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:He's got a shield on his back you big dummy Indeed he does. Both him and the all-powerful sorceress are impervious to the men's bullets from any angle. There is quite simply nothing those poor bastards can do to stop or even hinder the Avengers' mission, yet they are condemned to die engulfed in flames. Interestingly, the movie spares us their screams.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
seravid posted:Indeed he does. Both him and the all-powerful sorceress are impervious to the men's bullets from any angle. There is quite simply nothing those poor bastards can do to stop or even hinder the Avengers' mission, yet they are condemned to die engulfed in flames. Interestingly, the movie spares us their screams.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Not necessarily. Not in personal experience. We're mixing things up here. When I say that it feels right, I don't mean relative to society's perspective. The decision to have sex is difficult to logically untangle, because it overrides so much. Homosexuals who have been brainwashed to believe that it's "just a choice" also feel immense guilt and self-loathing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:29 |
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:We're mixing things up here. When I say that it feels right, I don't mean relative to society's perspective. The decision to have sex is difficult to logically untangle, because it overrides so much. Homosexuals who have been brainwashed to believe that it's "just a choice" also feel immense guilt and self-loathing. One of us is, because your example seems to speak against your point. Someone with homosexual desire who engages in homosexual relations may feel that they are doing the wrong thing, by their own standard, at the time they are engaging in the act. Some will, of course, justify it in the moment, and feel guilty later. Some will justify it in the moment and for the rest of their lives. But some will just hate themselves in the moment and do it anyways. You can't break people down to some absolute that they always believes themselves to be in the right. edit: To bring this back to comic book movies, note that Clark is in no way convinced that he's doing the right thing in killing Batman to save his mother. He even says "no one stays good in this world" while flying away from Lois, if it wasn't clear just from his existing characterization, performance, and the logic of the situation. Sir Kodiak fucked around with this message at 03:07 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 02:58
|
|