YAAAAAAY ROBIN ICONS. OMG that "subject of schoolgirl fantasies" one is amazing. I HEAR YOU, KARA. (My brain is pretty much a backdrop of Dick and hearts right now, with frequent appearances by Babs and Dinah. It's... getting a little ridiculous.)
So in his view, it's okay to carry a gun and use lethal force when you've got official sanction?
Interesting point. I'm just starting Nightwing now, so I haven't really gotten to the issues yet where he becomes a cop, but... I would suspect he wouldn't ever actually USE his gun to exert lethal force? I dunno. If that never came up one way or the other, it's a wasted opportunity (especially during the time before his partner figures out his secret identity, because she, at least, would expect him to be prepared to shoot if necessary). Iiiiinteresting.
Also the more I think about it, in my very limited knowledge of canon, it seems like the "no killing" thing is a line that Bruce clings to because it's symbolic to him (though Alfred echoes it often enough, about how once you kill, you're stripped of your humanity, yadda yadda), but it's also very particular to his demons and Dick and Cass and Tim and everybody else go along with it because it's one of Batman's rules (not because they have to, but because they're loyal to him, Dick especially), but it might not work quite the same for them if they ever came up against it. (Well, maybe Cass is a bad example, because I believe she actually HAS killed people, but. She had a massively fucked-up childhood.) (And there is also the part where Dick kills the Joker for, like, three seconds, and then he's revived, but Dick has all this angst about it because HE KILLED SOMEONE OMG. And it's like, DICK. CHILL. HE GOT BETTER.)
I mean, it's not like I support killing people, even criminals. It's just that Bruce's insistence on that one single thing and nothing else is inarguably weird. And actually I was wondering the other day how they all manage to fight with just exactly non-lethal force all the time, because that would be extremely difficult. I guess it's the same way they all fly around on jump-lines all the time. Hee.
Also: Robin and Starfire 4eva! SO CUTE. ♥ And Robin/Raven, d'awwwww.
(So sorry for the novel. *facepalm* I have a LOT of thoughts/feelings about the DCU right now and very little in the way of time and appropriate locations to direct them.)
My brain is pretty much a backdrop of Dick and hearts right now, with frequent appearances by Babs and Dinah. It's... getting a little ridiculous
I'm in a similar boat, with added Jason!
would suspect he wouldn't ever actually USE his gun to exert lethal force? I dunno. If that never came up one way or the other, it's a wasted opportunity
Yeah, I'd like to know if it was explored. And it's not like I expect that he would, but I imagine it raises eyebrows if one uses one's superhero skills to subdue suspects on patrol as a member of the police force. At least, once one has to write up a report. ("Suspect attempted to flee the scene by running into the street, but Officer Grayson apprehended him by doing a backflip over oncoming traffic and landing in the spot the suspect was aiming for.")
(especially during the time before his partner figures out his secret identity, because she, at least, would expect him to be prepared to shoot if necessary).
Yes. This. If your partner doesn't believe you've got their back, that is a huge problem. Of all people, Dick would know that.
it seems like the "no killing" thing is a line that Bruce clings to because it's symbolic to him (though Alfred echoes it often enough, about how once you kill, you're stripped of your humanity, yadda yadda), but it's also very particular to his demons and Dick and Cass and Tim and everybody else go along with it because it's one of Batman's rules (not because they have to, but because they're loyal to him, Dick especially), but it might not work quite the same for them if they ever came up against it.
Right. I get that, and I get that possibly Dick takes it more to heart than the others, but I also get the impression that while it's Bruce's thing, he does enforce it pretty stringently among the people associated with him - like, I guess the gun thing is particular to him, but also, that without guns in the mix, the theory is that there's less chance of actual lethal force being brought to bear, and maybe that's so with regular criminals, but I think there are some pretty large exceptions in the universe they inhabit, you know? (When Jason in the midst of his rage-and-rejection-fueled diatribe is able to distinguish between the Joker and everyone else, it might be time to listen to see if he has a point - not that Bruce ever would have done it, but clearly even Jason was able to make a distinction there.)
And actually I was wondering the other day how they all manage to fight with just exactly non-lethal force all the time, because that would be extremely difficult.
Right? When I watch the cartoons and see people getting tossed off bridges into the river, and they just pop to the surface like they'd just dived into a pool, I'm like, really, show? Really? Sometimes I do feel that the "not killing anybody" is very much nothing but authorial fiat (not that I want random henchmen and/or civilians dying in my cartoons, but you know what I mean), especially in situations where people should be a lot more injured than they are, even accounting for cartoon physics.
So sorry for the novel. *facepalm* I have a LOT of thoughts/feelings about the DCU right now and very little in the way of time and appropriate locations to direct them.
Don't apologize! Again, I am in a similar boat! Please come and flail to me about Dick and Babs and Dinah!
"Suspect attempted to flee the scene by running into the street, but Officer Grayson apprehended him by doing a backflip over oncoming traffic and landing in the spot the suspect was aiming for."
HEEEEE. Yes! Actually, from what I've noticed so far (I've only read the first five or so issues all the way through but I admit to doing some skimming of later issues for Dick/Babs goodness *koff*), crime very often seems to occur RIGHT as Dick is getting off his shift, so he can conveniently slip into a phonebooth his costume! PERFECT. *g*
I think there are some pretty large exceptions in the universe they inhabit, you know
I agree. And what I meant to say, I think, was not so much that they don't all believe in the no-killing approach, but that I think that when Bruce says, "Once you kill one person, it's a slippery slope," the truth is that once HE kills someone, it would be a slippery slope FOR HIM, but--as you say--that's not necessarily true for everybody. Just because Bruce is a giant ball of rage waiting to explode doesn't mean they ALL are. Heh. IMHO. But I'm not sure he sees that. So basically, I agree with you! Hee.
Sometimes I do feel that the "not killing anybody" is very much nothing but authorial fiat
Yeah, I think that's definitely the real reason behind it. And fair enough, because that's hardly an example you want to be setting for kids, especially when it comes to making vigilantes into heroic figures. But at the same time, it's weird that they make such a big deal of it--it MAKES it an issue all the time. Like, I'm pretty sure Superman doesn't go around all like, "I CAN'T KILL PEOPLE. MUST NEVER KILL PEOPLE. IF I KILL SOMEONE MY SOUL WILL DIE." He just, you know, doesn't kill people. (That I know of.) Then again, it's not like the Batfamily resists drama, as a general rule. :D
And YAY, thank you for sharing the flail! And speaking of Dick being a cop, and Dick and Babs: NGGGH.
crime very often seems to occur RIGHT as Dick is getting off his shift, so he can conveniently slip into a phonebooth his costume! PERFECT.
It's lovely that the universe crime orders itself around his schedule. Otoh, if I had to be caught by someone in the DCU, I'd choose him, so maybe the criminals are smarter than they look. Hee.
but that I think that when Bruce says, "Once you kill one person, it's a slippery slope," the truth is that once HE kills someone, it would be a slippery slope FOR HIM, but--as you say--that's not necessarily true for everybody. Just because Bruce is a giant ball of rage waiting to explode doesn't mean they ALL are. Heh. IMHO. But I'm not sure he sees that.
Yes. This. Not everybody is like you, Bruce! Some people don't feel angry all the time! (Um, or so I'm told. *cough*)
But at the same time, it's weird that they make such a big deal of it--it MAKES it an issue all the time.
Yeah. I mean, I get that it does make for lots of drama? But it's also kind of like, um, we know they're not going to do it - even the criminals know they're not going to do it - so it's kind of a false drama.
I think, with my ability to ignore the comics, part of what makes Jason interesting to me is where he's drawing his lines - a bag of drug dealers' severed heads = okay! but selling drugs to kids = bad! Like, clearly he has some mental calculus going on that fails on some level, but what nuances is he missing or does he just not care about? And how much of it is because he's overly emotional or doesn't think things through? And how do you know which Jason will show up on any given day?
And YAY, thank you for sharing the flail! And speaking of Dick being a cop, and Dick and Babs: NGGGH.
Cass killed one person as a child on her dad's instructions, and that's what made her realize it was wrong and run away from him. Until then she'd been raised to kill.
Iirc, Dick and Bruce do sort of have a talk about his carrying a gun as a cop. I don't think they go into details. It's more like Bruce is like, "So you're a cop. You'll be carrying a gun." And Dick's like, "Yes." But it's left open about how that might be a problem since Dick isn't planning to kill anybody as a cop and would presumably avoid it.
Of course, the big thing, too, was when Dick blamed himself for letting Blockbuster die by letting Tarantula do it (right before she raped him) and he went very angsty about that. And Tim, I think, also points out that it's a practical measure and that if they started killing people the cops wouldn't be able to let them operate etc.
So I'd say everyone goes along with it because they actually agree with it, but they feel really strongly about it because of Bruce (except for Cass, maybe?). Like Tim is more intellectual about it. Dick is emotional about it because it means that he let Bruce down. But they all actually agree with it.
But it's left open about how that might be a problem since Dick isn't planning to kill anybody as a cop and would presumably avoid it.
Oh, I totally didn't think he had any plans to use it (or ever actually did use it, tbh), but I do think it's an interesting tidbit, given how anti-gun they all seem to be. (Otoh, I think brynnmck makes a solid point about having his partner's back in terms of them relying on him to be willing to shoot [or otherwise disable a suspect] when necessary.)
And Tim, I think, also points out that it's a practical measure and that if they started killing people the cops wouldn't be able to let them operate etc.
That makes a lot of sense to me. I mean, yes, obviously, the moral implications and the effect killing has on the person doing it etc., but they don't necessarily make a strong argument to me when dealing with fictional recidivist supervillains, where killing them would be more likely to save a lot more people (and taxpayer money).
Oh yeah, I didn't think you thought he would use it. I just remember the scene as being interesting the way everything had to be unsaid. Because Dick wasn't going to promise Bruce that he wouldn't use his gun as a cop because when he was a cop he was a cop. And Bruce wasn't going to forbid Dick to use it, obviously, but felt the need to point out that it was a big conflict between what he would do as Nightwing etc. So it was one of those "my boy's all grown up now" moments because Bruce almost made a show of letting him do what he thought was right, even though he never ever liked Dick being a cop.
At least that's the way I remember it. I could be totally getting it wrong in my head!
So I'd say everyone goes along with it because they actually agree with it, but they feel really strongly about it because of Bruce (except for Cass, maybe?). Like Tim is more intellectual about it. Dick is emotional about it because it means that he let Bruce down. But they all actually agree with it.
Yes, right, that makes total sense. That's an excellent way of putting it. (And thank you for the clarifications about canon, too--I am WAY new to all of this so there is a staggering amount of canon I'm missing. Not for lack of trying, but. It's just gonna take a while. *g*)
Like I said to Victoria, though, it is interesting to me that the slippery-slope idea may be true for Bruce (or at least he thinks it is), but I'm not sure that it would necessarily be true for the rest of them. And really, Dick's angst over letting Blockbuster die, or (kind of) killing the Joker, is kind of an example of that--it's obviously not something he would do lightly, ever. Nor would the rest of them, of course, including Bruce, but I have been pondering that rule not just for itself, but for what it says about Bruce and the ways he tries to leash his own rage and fear. (I fear I'm being totally incoherent here--sorry. Sleep deprived. :) )
And again, I'm not arguing at all that there aren't a ton of reasons why they shouldn't go around killing people. But I do find it interesting to mull over the different shades of it for each of them. :)
Oh yeah, I definitely agree with that. I think that Bruce knows himself and he knows that if he gave into that darkness he'd be lost. And he's communicated that as a really important thing to the others even though it's not really something they struggle with. Although ironically Jason kind of does, and that's why Jason's the one walking around like Dark!Bruce unleashed.
Yeah, I guess I feel like part of his failure with Jason was a failure to recognize that Jason is not Dick, and that he DID need something more than, "killing people is wrong, yo, so don't do it." I mean, I don't think Jason, pre-death, was a sociopath; I think he did know right from wrong, but without the clarity that comes from experience, and it can be hard at 13 or 14 to understand why you can go this far but no farther, and the amount of control necessary to stop on the right side of that line. And I think Bruce figured Jason would get the moral component inherently and so he only brought up - that we saw in the movie, anyway - the practical one, which made sense to Jason, but which he also didn't push hard enough.
I feel like if he'd said to Jason, "listen, kid, I know you think killing these guys is the answer, but it's not. Not just because it's morally wrong, but because if we do that, then the cops shut us down, and nobody gets helped. And that would be bad. So don't do it." Because then there's the hard and fast practical rationale to stick do (kids need boundaries!), and it gives him time to do more of the moral cultivation. Well, if he'd had time.
And I feel like in some ways, Jason's still stuck as a 15yo who doesn't understand why his dad doesn't love him anymore even though he's doing everything he can to be what he thinks is the apotheosis of what Bruce was trying to make him and what Bruce would never let himself become. Um, that's a really convoluted sentence. Hopefully it makes sense. What I mean is, I think Jason is trapped between knowing that Bruce would never ever approve of him going around killing people and making himself a drug lord, and that's part of why he does it (as a fuck you for not avenging him, for replacing him etc.), but on the other hand, it IS a faulty yet understandable extrapolation of what Batman does, so he can't quite grasp why Bruce et al. are unhappy with him. He knows, but he doesn't know. And he doesn't believe there's any way to atone even if he thought he needed to.
Man, I could just talk about Jason all day. Sorry for the tl;dr!
So in his view, it's okay to carry a gun and use lethal force when you've got official sanction?
Interesting point. I'm just starting Nightwing now, so I haven't really gotten to the issues yet where he becomes a cop, but... I would suspect he wouldn't ever actually USE his gun to exert lethal force? I dunno. If that never came up one way or the other, it's a wasted opportunity (especially during the time before his partner figures out his secret identity, because she, at least, would expect him to be prepared to shoot if necessary). Iiiiinteresting.
Also the more I think about it, in my very limited knowledge of canon, it seems like the "no killing" thing is a line that Bruce clings to because it's symbolic to him (though Alfred echoes it often enough, about how once you kill, you're stripped of your humanity, yadda yadda), but it's also very particular to his demons and Dick and Cass and Tim and everybody else go along with it because it's one of Batman's rules (not because they have to, but because they're loyal to him, Dick especially), but it might not work quite the same for them if they ever came up against it. (Well, maybe Cass is a bad example, because I believe she actually HAS killed people, but. She had a massively fucked-up childhood.) (And there is also the part where Dick kills the Joker for, like, three seconds, and then he's revived, but Dick has all this angst about it because HE KILLED SOMEONE OMG. And it's like, DICK. CHILL. HE GOT BETTER.)
I mean, it's not like I support killing people, even criminals. It's just that Bruce's insistence on that one single thing and nothing else is inarguably weird. And actually I was wondering the other day how they all manage to fight with just exactly non-lethal force all the time, because that would be extremely difficult. I guess it's the same way they all fly around on jump-lines all the time. Hee.
Also: Robin and Starfire 4eva! SO CUTE. ♥ And Robin/Raven, d'awwwww.
(So sorry for the novel. *facepalm* I have a LOT of thoughts/feelings about the DCU right now and very little in the way of time and appropriate locations to direct them.)
Reply
INORITE?
My brain is pretty much a backdrop of Dick and hearts right now, with frequent appearances by Babs and Dinah. It's... getting a little ridiculous
I'm in a similar boat, with added Jason!
would suspect he wouldn't ever actually USE his gun to exert lethal force? I dunno. If that never came up one way or the other, it's a wasted opportunity
Yeah, I'd like to know if it was explored. And it's not like I expect that he would, but I imagine it raises eyebrows if one uses one's superhero skills to subdue suspects on patrol as a member of the police force. At least, once one has to write up a report. ("Suspect attempted to flee the scene by running into the street, but Officer Grayson apprehended him by doing a backflip over oncoming traffic and landing in the spot the suspect was aiming for.")
(especially during the time before his partner figures out his secret identity, because she, at least, would expect him to be prepared to shoot if necessary).
Yes. This. If your partner doesn't believe you've got their back, that is a huge problem. Of all people, Dick would know that.
it seems like the "no killing" thing is a line that Bruce clings to because it's symbolic to him (though Alfred echoes it often enough, about how once you kill, you're stripped of your humanity, yadda yadda), but it's also very particular to his demons and Dick and Cass and Tim and everybody else go along with it because it's one of Batman's rules (not because they have to, but because they're loyal to him, Dick especially), but it might not work quite the same for them if they ever came up against it.
Right. I get that, and I get that possibly Dick takes it more to heart than the others, but I also get the impression that while it's Bruce's thing, he does enforce it pretty stringently among the people associated with him - like, I guess the gun thing is particular to him, but also, that without guns in the mix, the theory is that there's less chance of actual lethal force being brought to bear, and maybe that's so with regular criminals, but I think there are some pretty large exceptions in the universe they inhabit, you know? (When Jason in the midst of his rage-and-rejection-fueled diatribe is able to distinguish between the Joker and everyone else, it might be time to listen to see if he has a point - not that Bruce ever would have done it, but clearly even Jason was able to make a distinction there.)
And actually I was wondering the other day how they all manage to fight with just exactly non-lethal force all the time, because that would be extremely difficult.
Right? When I watch the cartoons and see people getting tossed off bridges into the river, and they just pop to the surface like they'd just dived into a pool, I'm like, really, show? Really? Sometimes I do feel that the "not killing anybody" is very much nothing but authorial fiat (not that I want random henchmen and/or civilians dying in my cartoons, but you know what I mean), especially in situations where people should be a lot more injured than they are, even accounting for cartoon physics.
So sorry for the novel. *facepalm* I have a LOT of thoughts/feelings about the DCU right now and very little in the way of time and appropriate locations to direct them.
Don't apologize! Again, I am in a similar boat! Please come and flail to me about Dick and Babs and Dinah!
Reply
HEEEEE. Yes! Actually, from what I've noticed so far (I've only read the first five or so issues all the way through but I admit to doing some skimming of later issues for Dick/Babs goodness *koff*), crime very often seems to occur RIGHT as Dick is getting off his shift, so he can conveniently slip into a phonebooth his costume! PERFECT. *g*
I think there are some pretty large exceptions in the universe they inhabit, you know
I agree. And what I meant to say, I think, was not so much that they don't all believe in the no-killing approach, but that I think that when Bruce says, "Once you kill one person, it's a slippery slope," the truth is that once HE kills someone, it would be a slippery slope FOR HIM, but--as you say--that's not necessarily true for everybody. Just because Bruce is a giant ball of rage waiting to explode doesn't mean they ALL are. Heh. IMHO. But I'm not sure he sees that. So basically, I agree with you! Hee.
Sometimes I do feel that the "not killing anybody" is very much nothing but authorial fiat
Yeah, I think that's definitely the real reason behind it. And fair enough, because that's hardly an example you want to be setting for kids, especially when it comes to making vigilantes into heroic figures. But at the same time, it's weird that they make such a big deal of it--it MAKES it an issue all the time. Like, I'm pretty sure Superman doesn't go around all like, "I CAN'T KILL PEOPLE. MUST NEVER KILL PEOPLE. IF I KILL SOMEONE MY SOUL WILL DIE." He just, you know, doesn't kill people. (That I know of.) Then again, it's not like the Batfamily resists drama, as a general rule. :D
And YAY, thank you for sharing the flail! And speaking of Dick being a cop, and Dick and Babs: NGGGH.
Reply
It's lovely that the universe crime orders itself around his schedule. Otoh, if I had to be caught by someone in the DCU, I'd choose him, so maybe the criminals are smarter than they look. Hee.
but that I think that when Bruce says, "Once you kill one person, it's a slippery slope," the truth is that once HE kills someone, it would be a slippery slope FOR HIM, but--as you say--that's not necessarily true for everybody. Just because Bruce is a giant ball of rage waiting to explode doesn't mean they ALL are. Heh. IMHO. But I'm not sure he sees that.
Yes. This. Not everybody is like you, Bruce! Some people don't feel angry all the time! (Um, or so I'm told. *cough*)
But at the same time, it's weird that they make such a big deal of it--it MAKES it an issue all the time.
Yeah. I mean, I get that it does make for lots of drama? But it's also kind of like, um, we know they're not going to do it - even the criminals know they're not going to do it - so it's kind of a false drama.
I think, with my ability to ignore the comics, part of what makes Jason interesting to me is where he's drawing his lines - a bag of drug dealers' severed heads = okay! but selling drugs to kids = bad! Like, clearly he has some mental calculus going on that fails on some level, but what nuances is he missing or does he just not care about? And how much of it is because he's overly emotional or doesn't think things through? And how do you know which Jason will show up on any given day?
And YAY, thank you for sharing the flail! And speaking of Dick being a cop, and Dick and Babs: NGGGH.
They are very hot.
Reply
Iirc, Dick and Bruce do sort of have a talk about his carrying a gun as a cop. I don't think they go into details. It's more like Bruce is like, "So you're a cop. You'll be carrying a gun." And Dick's like, "Yes." But it's left open about how that might be a problem since Dick isn't planning to kill anybody as a cop and would presumably avoid it.
Of course, the big thing, too, was when Dick blamed himself for letting Blockbuster die by letting Tarantula do it (right before she raped him) and he went very angsty about that. And Tim, I think, also points out that it's a practical measure and that if they started killing people the cops wouldn't be able to let them operate etc.
So I'd say everyone goes along with it because they actually agree with it, but they feel really strongly about it because of Bruce (except for Cass, maybe?). Like Tim is more intellectual about it. Dick is emotional about it because it means that he let Bruce down. But they all actually agree with it.
Reply
Oh, I totally didn't think he had any plans to use it (or ever actually did use it, tbh), but I do think it's an interesting tidbit, given how anti-gun they all seem to be. (Otoh, I think brynnmck makes a solid point about having his partner's back in terms of them relying on him to be willing to shoot [or otherwise disable a suspect] when necessary.)
And Tim, I think, also points out that it's a practical measure and that if they started killing people the cops wouldn't be able to let them operate etc.
That makes a lot of sense to me. I mean, yes, obviously, the moral implications and the effect killing has on the person doing it etc., but they don't necessarily make a strong argument to me when dealing with fictional recidivist supervillains, where killing them would be more likely to save a lot more people (and taxpayer money).
Reply
At least that's the way I remember it. I could be totally getting it wrong in my head!
Reply
Reply
Yes, right, that makes total sense. That's an excellent way of putting it. (And thank you for the clarifications about canon, too--I am WAY new to all of this so there is a staggering amount of canon I'm missing. Not for lack of trying, but. It's just gonna take a while. *g*)
Like I said to Victoria, though, it is interesting to me that the slippery-slope idea may be true for Bruce (or at least he thinks it is), but I'm not sure that it would necessarily be true for the rest of them. And really, Dick's angst over letting Blockbuster die, or (kind of) killing the Joker, is kind of an example of that--it's obviously not something he would do lightly, ever. Nor would the rest of them, of course, including Bruce, but I have been pondering that rule not just for itself, but for what it says about Bruce and the ways he tries to leash his own rage and fear. (I fear I'm being totally incoherent here--sorry. Sleep deprived. :) )
And again, I'm not arguing at all that there aren't a ton of reasons why they shouldn't go around killing people. But I do find it interesting to mull over the different shades of it for each of them. :)
Reply
Reply
I feel like if he'd said to Jason, "listen, kid, I know you think killing these guys is the answer, but it's not. Not just because it's morally wrong, but because if we do that, then the cops shut us down, and nobody gets helped. And that would be bad. So don't do it." Because then there's the hard and fast practical rationale to stick do (kids need boundaries!), and it gives him time to do more of the moral cultivation. Well, if he'd had time.
And I feel like in some ways, Jason's still stuck as a 15yo who doesn't understand why his dad doesn't love him anymore even though he's doing everything he can to be what he thinks is the apotheosis of what Bruce was trying to make him and what Bruce would never let himself become. Um, that's a really convoluted sentence. Hopefully it makes sense. What I mean is, I think Jason is trapped between knowing that Bruce would never ever approve of him going around killing people and making himself a drug lord, and that's part of why he does it (as a fuck you for not avenging him, for replacing him etc.), but on the other hand, it IS a faulty yet understandable extrapolation of what Batman does, so he can't quite grasp why Bruce et al. are unhappy with him. He knows, but he doesn't know. And he doesn't believe there's any way to atone even if he thought he needed to.
Man, I could just talk about Jason all day. Sorry for the tl;dr!
Reply
Leave a comment