[TokuKnight89]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mesnick

Well, this is unique because most often childhood trauma is used to explain murders. In principle, I have nothing against this rule, but there are two significant ?buts?:
1) It is taken to the point of absurdity and even distorted when Batman is ready to allow the death of hundreds of innocents so that the Joker survives;
2) It is stated, but ignored when it is inconvenient, as in the Nolan trilogy. My favorite moment: when Bruce declared that he didn't kill, and then set off an explosion that killed about a dozen people.
It seems to me that it is sufficient to limit ourselves to the principle: ?does not seek to kill.? Because 100% Batman cannot know what old injuries a random back alley robber has. What about the evil ones who have heart problems?Not using lethal weapons, not playing the role of executioner, handing over criminals to the police is normal. But when Batman shields the Joker from a policeman's bullet, it's already too much.
But you also need to understand that this is the world of comics. Popular villains aren't going away. They will not be killed, and if they are killed, they will be resurrected. The Joker will always be in Gotham, whether Batman kills or not. Another thing is that in the case of Batman being a killer, this means that he cannot kill his archenemy. And in the case of the non-killing Batman - that he does not want to do it. That is, the second option clearly demonstrates that Batman is stronger.
And the stupidest thing in Snyder?s version is that he kills random bandits, but the Joker is quite intact.

Found a blog post that goes into the matter further.

https://www.dc.com/blog/2022/03/02/w...an-doesnt-kill

In short, Bob Kane and Bill Finger were not on equal ground with this subject. The No-Kill thing was to make the comic "kid-friendly" cause parental complaints were apparently a thing from the very beginning. Kane hated taking lethal force away, but Finger hated the fact that it was ever allowed in the first place.

One of the arguments put forth is the idea that Bruce has a darkness in him which could run wild if he doesn't keep it in check.

The other side is that the World's Greatest Hero can't kill the World's Greatest Killer lest he become the Greatest Killer himself.