- Location
- Hampden Park
Problem is, that would have meant letting off the man who actually comitted the murders.
With This Ring (Young Justice SI) (Thread Twelve)
- Thread starter Mr Zoat
- Start date
- Status
- Location
- United States
Do you have evidence that the League tsks at people?
The only reason the no kill rule really exists is because of the ridiculous Comic Code Authority.
Don't forget saving the joker whenever he's going to get killed but total deserved it.
it starts from 3:30 to about 5:55
Last edited by a moderator:
Knightfall
Nui lover and Slaaneshi
- Location
- New York, New York
Basically don't hurt kids in front of Batman.
BlackLantern2814
Hello darkness my old friend.
- Location
- Earth
No, the best way to deal with the Joker is to make him an Indigo Lantern.So you're saying...the way to deal with the joker...is to give him a spaceship?
Punish the Joker by making canon Harley Quinn (not WTR-Harley) into a Star Sapphire.No, the best way to deal with the Joker is to make him an Indigo Lantern.
Truly a fate worse than death.
=
Who is president in Paragon-OL's universe?
I ask because presidents often have children who are in high school or college, which could cause problems if OL's growing popularity/notoriety catches the eye of the president's daughter.
Scene inspired by "Captain America: Winter Soldier":
Malia: "Daddy, I want to invite Orange Lantern to my birthday party."
Obama: "No problem, sweetheart."
Malia: "You're the best, Daddy!"
[later]
Michelle: "Where were you?"
Obama:
"Oh, just having a little chat with Orange Lantern before the party started."Michelle: "You gave the Shovel Speech(TM) to a boy who can move the Moon on a whim?"
Obama:
"Put the fear of God into him."Michelle: (lustful purring)
[meanwhile]
Eris: "CHAOS!!! "
Cornuthaum
Be kind to each other.
- Location
- Austria
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Why would an Orange Lantern settle for 5% of the populace whose preeminence is largely based on an industry the orange lantern can render largely obsolete through focused application of ring power, and damn the consequences to the global economy?
I was with you till this line.
He'd save the Joker if Red Hood or some other random dude tried to murder him. He wouldn't save the joker from Death Row.
There's a difference between vigilante murder and court ordered execution.
There has been zero examples of Batman breaking into prison to free criminals from Death-Row. (unless, presumably, he has evidence that the guy is innocent.)
Joker getting the death penalty would probably be the happiest day of Batman's life. He's finally rid of Joker, and in a way that doesn't infringe on his conscious or morals at all.
Last edited:
- Location
- USA
Ted Cruz was born a US citizen, a natural born citizen (someone who is born a citizen) is either someone who is born on US soil OR someone born off US soil whose parents are citizens. IIRC there is a clause that if 2 generations in a row are born off of USA soil they aren't born citizens but don't quote me on that part.
So while Ted Cruz was born in canada, he was born a US citizen in Canada
Last edited:
SparraNova
Dead Account Walking
- Location
- Some Wasteland
Yeah, he'd be more likely to try and become King of England and create a new British Empire (COLONIALISM. IN. SPACE!)
Cornuthaum
Be kind to each other.
- Location
- Austria
- Pronouns
- He/Him
No. It's about the sort of writing where the Hard Decision - the deaths of the fewer to preserve the greater whole, for instance - is made by the Hard Man, the single, visionary intellect capable of doing this deed and carrying it through, and the narrative itself warping itself to justify the Hard Decision as being the only correct one that can be taken. It is the fascist narrative, where the singular man with vision far outweighs the collective rule, because they are greater, better, more suited and fit to make the decisions than their inferiors.
With This Ring goes a long way to avoid this sort of narrative, and is a much better story for it. If anything, the Renegade parts are a pretty even-handed condemnation of the HMMHD(WH) phenomenon.
Er, I'm going to need a cite for that. I'm not saying some writer didn't portray him like that, but I can't recall such a version.
As a counter-example, we've literally had a story in which Robin (and a bunch of other heroes) explicitly said that it wouldn't be right to break a teammate's parent out of jail to help them avoid being executed for a murder they committed.
(From Young Justice #52. Backstory: Harm was a supervillain who sacrificed his sister to a demon for power. She got better and became Secret, a member of Young Justice. His father believed that killing Harm was the only way to stop him and save lives, did so, and was then convicted of murder.
This was from Peter David's Young Justice series, some elements of which later showed up in the TV show, particularly the episode "Secrets", which Peter David wrote.)
I'm not sure the single man has to be opposed to the collective rule. To me, the archtypical HMMHD(WH) story is The Cold Equations, about which I find Cory Doctorow's commentary appealing, that it's basically a story set up so the MC (and by proxy, the reader) can kill a teenaged girl because she was foolish and feel good about it.
Last edited:
Grayven needs more 'morality pets'.
Indigo Mister Tawney for the lulz? Of course, an Awakened tiger god's concept of compassion might mean a swift and painless death, or fighting someone as a way to acknowledge their opponent's strength rather than an act of maliciousness.
Link: Morality Pet - TV Tropes
Am I the only person who hopes to see Grayven join the Indigo Tribe willingly or unwillingly?
Prolonged exposure to a yellow power ring might enhance Grayven's fear of becoming a well-intended extremist, increasing the likelihood of him having a "My God, what have I done?" moment if/when he goes too far. Fast forward a few weeks, where several heroes seek out Indigo!Grayven who has gone into self-imposed exile, saying that for all their moral differences they need Grayven back.
Indigo Mister Tawney for the lulz? Of course, an Awakened tiger god's concept of compassion might mean a swift and painless death, or fighting someone as a way to acknowledge their opponent's strength rather than an act of maliciousness.
Link: Morality Pet - TV Tropes
Am I the only person who hopes to see Grayven join the Indigo Tribe willingly or unwillingly?
Prolonged exposure to a yellow power ring might enhance Grayven's fear of becoming a well-intended extremist, increasing the likelihood of him having a "My God, what have I done?" moment if/when he goes too far. Fast forward a few weeks, where several heroes seek out Indigo!Grayven who has gone into self-imposed exile, saying that for all their moral differences they need Grayven back.
You know, a cool old lady might just be a great recruit for the OLC. Already approaching the end of her days, so it's likely that her priorities and her soul are rather solidified. A history of protecting her country...
Think about it, OL!
daimahou
Hear... Feel... Think...
- Location
- 「 」
Yes, older is better. *nod*
Last edited:
Night_stalker
Slava Ukraini!
- Pronouns
- He/Him
So you're saying...the way to deal with the joker...is to give him a spaceship?
Nah, send him into a Larange point. Once he's no longer in Earth's jurisdiction, he's free game, I think.
What.
What the actual fucknuggets DC? SERIOUSLY, WHY WOULD ANYONE BOTHER INTERVENING IN THIS CASE? BREAK OUT THE CIGARS AND POPCORN, AND WATCH THE SUCKER FRY ON OLD SPARKY.
A little stupid?
Buddy, it was very goddamn stupid. Why the Batman would save Joker from being legally executed, despite his graveyards full of victims....
As someone else pointed out, the truely stupid part of that storyline, is that the courts were willing to give him the death penalty for this one particular crime while waiving all the other crimes he's committed.
What, was he suddenly determined to be competent to stand trial? In that case there's several hundred (several thousand?) outstanding murder charges laying around that they can finally charge him with.
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA
Even if it meant letting some random dipshit get away with murder, I'd happily do whatever I could to see the Joker fry in that story, because the Joker is absolutely going to be more dangerous than the random dipshit if he lives.
Batman saving him from being executed because this was the one time Joker didn't kill the guy is definitely following the spirit of the original laws, where it's better to let ten guilty men go free than allow a single man to be wrongfully punished, but the Joker stopped being the kind of entity those laws were meant to deal with somewhere around the seventh recreational killing spree.
The Joker, Klarion, and others who really do just kill people for the lulz constitute a conceptual blind spot in most legal codes, because those codes were written with the assumption that their subjects had at least some semblance of a normal human psychology.
Batman saving him from being executed because this was the one time Joker didn't kill the guy is definitely following the spirit of the original laws, where it's better to let ten guilty men go free than allow a single man to be wrongfully punished, but the Joker stopped being the kind of entity those laws were meant to deal with somewhere around the seventh recreational killing spree.
The Joker, Klarion, and others who really do just kill people for the lulz constitute a conceptual blind spot in most legal codes, because those codes were written with the assumption that their subjects had at least some semblance of a normal human psychology.
- Location
- United States
What I am more concerned with is why Joker was deemed worthy enough to be killed off now and not for any of his earlier crimes, which are usually about this magnitude.
- Location
- Canada
Cause an author wanted to write about that kind of story and decided it'd be easier to just ignore the past rather than make a logical explanation as to why things are proceeding in this fashion this time around, not that he'd be able to explain himself since there's no good reason for this kind of dumb scenario to occur.
VaporWare
Futuristic Robot with Turing Compliant Action
- Location
- The Future
Pretty sure the stock apologetic for 'why nobody has sentenced Joker to death' is 'insanity plea'.
This was just the first time in a long time anyone had decided to treat Napier like he knew exactly what he was doing and the hell with making exceptions for those of uncertain mental competence.
Which, again, they should have done a long time ago, but there's a reason society as a whole is the butt of his jokes.
Probably the only reason Batman felt it necessary to intervene is that, for once, Napier /wasn't/ claiming responsibility for something he'd been accused of...because, for once, he hadn't actually /done/ it.
There's an argument to be made that, if one is going to execute someone for something, it should indeed be a thing they did...there are good, moral and ethical reasons not to want to kill someone for something they didn't do, even if you pretty much know they deserve it for the other things they've done. Certainly, no one should be used as a scapegoat for someone else's sins.
It's difficult to meaningfully tabulate all of Napier's crimes against any one version of Napier, because not all of them share all their sins. It's very easy for us to sit back and say "Batman should have let this ass fry by now." because we have a relatively omniscient view of the character across multiple incarnations. But we probably wouldn't say that the West-verse Joker should die, if only because he never really got up to that kind of crime. Certainly, he can't be meaningfully held accountable for Napier-16's deployment of Smilex in urban environments, and so on.
Beyond the events of the show, we don't know the full extent of Napier-16's crimes against society, though the whole Injustice League schtick was bad enough on it's own. It was not, however, something implausible for him to wriggle out of...I'd find it very likely that the Joker enjoys working with other supervillains because it makes it easier to pawn responsibility off on them while taking refuge in his own obvious lunacy...if Batman bears guilt for leaving the Joker alive, knowing how he acts and reacts to the world, then it follows that the Injustice League, too, was responsible for exploiting those tendencies for their own ends.
Where does that leave Napier, in terms of legal culpability? If he's just a mad dog with no capacity to be meaningfully responsible for his actions, that leaves us in the position of needing or wanting to execute him simply to stop him...not to punish him, because he is clearly insensate to punishment. Certainly, we don't want to kill him as an article of retribution...which is all too easy to fall into, and which he would gleefully invite for the sake of finally getting to deliver the punchline of his life. It may be the /practical/ choice, but it's not one anyone has a terribly easy time making, come the hour. Nor should they.
Humans are, generally speaking, much less comfortable putting down a mad human than they are a mad dog...if only because it tends to set dangerous precedents. The kind of precedents that ultimately serve to make the Joker's point, such as it is, for him.
- Location
- Canada
See I think a lot of people misunderstand what kind of actions you can avoid being punished for due to insanity, generally it's when the insane party isn't aware of what they're doing and/or can't understand why it's bad, they're kinda given the same benefits as you'd give a child.
In the Joker case though, it's not the case. He knows that people will suffer and he knows that they won't enjoy, it just so happens that his insanity doesn't allow him to feel bad about it, there's not an hint hint of sympathy in his psyche, it's what makes him insane.
He's not really a mad dog, he's not feral, he's very aware of what he's doing, he's evil. He's pretty much the worst kind of person someone can be and the only way to be that way is to be insane, because humans aren't programmed to be that way, only someone with a broken mind can be free of something like sympathy and by that default that makes him insane.
People have no problem executing bad people, who they're not comfortable executing are people who are no different from children or animals when they do bad things.
And when the next 'Joker' shows up?
You catch him, of course. Might take a while, and there would be a mountain of bodies, but in the end, you'd put him behind bars. And like the last one, he might very well prove impossible to safely contain. Certainly, a mind like that can't be rehabilitated.
Would he be prosecuted?
Before, the answer would have been 'dear god, yes!'. Seeing the Joker as nothing more than a cancer, is easy. Understanding him as a pure evil, a thing to be feared, a monster in man's skin, is simple. Lashing out at someone who is completely, inarguably guilty to such a degree the mind cannot comprehend their malice, is all too human.
The scenario within Devil's Advocate changes that.
Sure. It's not likely to change public opinion from 'oh god it's another Joker kill it kill it killitwithfire!'. It's unlikely the fiasco would really impact prosecution.
But the chance goes from 'effectively zero' to 'greater than none'.
It's not a solid argument, per-se. Not one I even buy, really.
But the Joker is a bit like Worm's Jack Slash. That kind of crazy, is viral. It infects. Kill the first, and some day, there will be a re-run. Might be a cheap knockoff that takes a few minutes to deal with.
But the next one might be worse.
So taking that chance, no matter how minimal, that the legal system will hesitate to deal with 'the next one' because they objectively screwed up last time?
That little chance, could see an unholy fusion of the Joker's psychotic rampages, and Vertigo's 'special' status.
And that miniscule chance, legitimately makes me shiver.
VaporWare
Futuristic Robot with Turing Compliant Action
- Location
- The Future
Sure. You and I know that, but that's partially thanks to our audience omniscience and the fact that we're rarely, if ever, in the courtroom.
Most people are going to tend to fear and not understand the Joker. Even Batman himself doesn't always seem to have a clear view of who and what he's dealing with. We do, and that puts us in a clearer position to judge an individual instance of the character. All he has to do is keep people guessing or keep them convinced that he /is/ feral...or just make them really uncomfortable with the idea of killing him by actively wanting and daring them to.
Part of my point is, the people /in/ the DCU don't generally have that luxury. They can reach that conclusion, but they don't have the level of evidence and certainty we do from the outside.
I'm not saying it's /right/, or that the insanity plea /should/ work in the case of a given Joker, just that I can understand why he might get away with things for longer than we might deem appropriate or tolerable in a given timeline, and why people like Batman might be less than enthused at the prospect of killing him/letting him die out of hand when the opportunity arose.
- Status