I know real life masked vigilantes are few to none existant (I only know of a few but they don’t really fit the same mold as the costumed vigilantes in comics) but why would their actions be unethical if they were prevalent in our society? I understand why it would be illegal but what would be so wrong if a vigilante used the Batman’s or Moon Knight’s methods. Most of the time those guys are more responsible than cops. I mean would you feel safer in the presence of overweight middle-aged cops (which most are) or in the presence of the Dark Knight Detective? I’m not going to get into the issue about if those vigilantes really operated they would be killed on their first mission out. First of all we don’t know that for sure, even though, it’s very possible and hell even likely but we still don’t know since no one ever attempted to mimic Moon Knight or Batman. The Guardian Angels didn’t really get killed and they were kind of like vigilantes. If a vigilante was well-trained, had considerable weapons (they would have to carry a gun if they were smart), and used guerrilla tactics I think they would be okay. I think crime would go down fast especially in dangerous cities (Detroit, Newark) if guys like Batman were busting heads. It would be icing on the cake if they had Batman’s same moral compass (even though he would have to realize he would have to kill sometimes).
Would liberals be against vigilantes? How about conservatives?
Would you support a masked vigilante or would you think it would be against the Constitution?
True. Good point and a point I should have clarified. I’m not talking about those types of vigilantes I’m talking about vigilantes in the Batman like vein.
Well, the KKK can qualify as vigilantes but there more of a racist group I’m talking about men or women taking the law into their own hands. I really dont want this to be a debate about the KKK if it can be helped. I know the KKK are wrong I’m just talking about a person trying to do the police’s job.
The KKK really isn’t relevant to the discussion as framed. It’s not about the legality of vigilantes or even about the morality of any and all vigilantes, but about the morality of vigilantes that have the same moral compass as Batman.
While I do think that Batmen should be illegal and I do think that the police should be trying to apprehend Batmen, I can also see the benefit of having a few Batmen running around. The main problem as I see it, and the reason that I probably wouldn’t approve of real-life Batmen, is that real life isn’t as black and white as comic book life. In the comics, Batman knows who is a criminal and who isn’t, and he can calmly beat someone up for information. In real life, you’d never really know and probably end up beating the shit out of innocent people.
Right Priceguy; it’s a “perfect information” problem. If Batman always knew who committed a crime and only got the real criminals - and the police couldn’t do what he did - it’s hard to say we shouldn’t allow Batman to patrol Gotham. But if the police and the justice system get the wrong people sometimes, a real-life (less prepared) Batman probably would, too. And there’s no appeals process with vigilantes, and no correction mechanism. With that in mind, allowing vigilantes to operate reduces everybody else’s Fourth Amendment rights and the principle of “innocent until proven guilty” that is the foundation of our justice system. You know what they say about superheroes being fascist…
The KKK are relevent, because, unlike Batman, they really exist. Do you really think that the American public (and//or TV stations) will ignore the parallels?
The KKK, themselves, believe that they are doing a vital function for the American Race. They’re wrong, of course, but that doesn’t matter. Since vigilantes, by definition, are self appointed, then the KKs right to perform lynchings will be morally acceptable. Why couldn’t they hang a treefull strange fruit, so long as it’s black drug dealers or Jewish pedophiles?
And if we want vigilantes with Batman’s moral compass, doesn’t that lead us to Rorschach? Torture, summary execution - doesn’t matter as long as “justice” is served.
Listen, I see where your coming from but I don’t think the KKK applies because Batman does not kill and I’m debating the merits of a Batman like vigilante. The KKK are more about race than actually stopping crime.
Vigilantes like Batman are possible but just very unlikely. So I think it’s worth debating. It’s more possible than the Mutant Act (which is a great thread by the way).
Now your Rorschach post is more like it and you raise a good point. Yes, I guess a Batman like vigilante could end up like Walter Korvacs over time. It depends, really.
What does that have to do with anything? We’re discussing whether the actions of a real-life Batman would be ethical. We agree that the actions of the real-life KKK are not.
Yes, it does. Excellent analogy. Rorschach is, I believe, very close to what a real-life Batman would be like. Note that when looking for information with the second Nite Owl, he tortures several people without getting the information he needs, and only gets it on the tenth victim or so. This illustrates the “perfect information” problem.
Now, given that the first nine were scumbags too, they just didn’t know anything about the particular case Rorschach was investigating at that particular moment, what do you think of this method? Why?
I was trying to make the point that if Batman were to suddenly arrive into our world, then he would face an ethical problem not encountered in Gotham City. If he goes out and does his thing with the bad guys, he could easily be the role model of a new wave of thugs over whom he has no control.
If just one of the wannabes kills an innocent bystander, doen’t Batman bear at least some of the responsibility?
Priceguy. Batman copycats? Think of the mutants in Dark Knight Returns.
Disagree immensely that a real life Batman would necessarily be destined to become a mentally ill sociopath like Rorschach. Even Rorschach wasn’t like himself originally – after a miserable and abusive childhood, he confronted crime in new identity then suffered an acute nervous breakdown episode which left him a remorseless became a killer of felons. There’s no likelihood Batman would react the way Rorschach did: Homocide detective and vice cops become jaded, bitter divorces and quit the force, they don’t typically go out and start murdering serial killers and rapist pimps.
The closest real life analog to superhero vigilantes is bounty hunters, and few people roundly condemn that profession or call for legislation. There’s little inherently unethical or morally objectionable about bounty hunting as they currently conduct themselves – they have much wider latitude than the police.
Not only did they beat up criminals, they beat up any one who didn’t “do enough” to fight or prevent crime, such as the shop owner who they saved from being robbed. They then cut of HIS fingers because he didn’t “do enoguh” to prevent or stop the criminals himself.
This occured AFTER Batman defeated their leader and they turned to Batman as a role model.
The reason Batman and others exist, is to fight crime that the regular police can’t handle. Batman rarely stops low level crime and there’s been a few stories on how the Masked Vigilantes seems to ignore the crime that slowly destroys communities everyday while they’re off fighting eight-legged freaks.
If Masked Vigilantes existed, in order for them to mirror the “spirit” of the comics, they would have to after OUR version of criminals that they police seem not to be able to handle…that’s not the local crack, prositute or meth dealer; the cops can handle that.
It would have to be White Collar Crime, the type of crimes that really influence the numbers of people that a Joker would, if there wasn’t a Batman to hold him in check.
What kind of costume would strike terror in the hearts of accountants, lawyers and CEOs?