I see you’ve never seen an episode of The Rifleman. He went way outside of ‘justifiable homicide’. Just because Reacher or McCain can justify killing to themselves, doesn’t mean it’s OK as far as society is concerned.
Do you consider Mr Wick’s killings justifiable?
But they killed his dog.
(Those films seem to take place in a weird parallel reality with weird codes about how and when it’s okay to kill people.)
Just checked the FBI definition and you are wrong:
“A serial killer (also called a serial murderer) is a person who murders three or more people, with the killings taking place over a significant period of time in separate events. Their psychological gratification is the motivation for the killings. The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) states that the motives of serial killers can include anger, thrill-seeking, attention seeking, and financial gain.”
Anger and psychological gratification definitely play a part in Reacher’s, McCain’s and Wick’s killings.
Reacher was enjoying a break from killing, watching a Blues show at the dive bar in the rough part of the town he was in that day. After his 12th cup of black coffee, he realized he had a call of nature to take care of. The bathroom had a long line, so he stepped out into the back alley.
Three suspicious looking men were loitering in the alley. Reacher calculated the most efficient way to take them all out. He hit one with an elbow to the face, and shoved another into a dumpster, slamming the lid down onto his head. The third man ran off.
The bartender came out and said “what the hell did you do? That was my waitstaff on a smoke break!”
Reacher said nothing.
Reacher, etc. are all cartoon violence on par with the way the Roadrunner abuses the Coyote or Bugs abuses Elmer.
The villains / victims are thin characters whose sole visible features are Bad. And we never get to see their funerals, watch their wife / dependent GF descend into destitution, nor their kids cry and go hungry.
The thing that killing does is Stop. The. Problem. Every other problem in everyone’s real life just doesn’t stay fixed. You can successfully shush the neighbors dog, and it’ll be barking again tomorrow. You can avoid the bully at the bar this week, but next Friday he’ll be back. If he’s jailed for beating somebody else, he’ll get out and be back at the bar all too soon. Etc.
Kill the dog or the bully and The Problem Stops. And more importantly, Stays Stopped.
It’s also a very easy way for scriptwriters to clean up loose ends. Done with Bad Guy #3s brief couple of set-up lines? Have the hero casually off him.
Like Star Trek’s redshirts, ever notice that the mental casualness and practical ease with which the hero kills somebody is inversely related to their plot importance? Henchmen die like flies all but unnoticed by the hero that just killed them, while the Big Bad takes hours to finally corner and kill after an epic battle.
All formulaic. Has been since ancient times.
It’s not a complete Reacher takedown without a resounding head butt, followed by his snagging guns and cash from the guys’ pockets.
That’s for damn sure.
He is not a serial killer because for him killing is a means to an end. For a serial killer, killing is the end.
I watched the Tom Cruise movies first, then the series on streaming video, then got interested enough to read a couple of the books. The character is depicted quite differently in all three. In the books he is the most brutal and least discriminating about who and how he kills. But even so, he doesn’t kill to satisfy an urge to kill.
I also suspect he may be slightly autistic.
All this talk deflects from the truly monstrous aspect of his being - he throws away perfectly good clothing!
Cambodia. Pol Pot. “The one bullet manager” ( Kenneth Blanchard, Spencer Johnson, 1981)