THe Penguin is the smartest man in the DCverse

[SAMAS]

I wonder how many innocent by standers frank kills?

Not a whole lot, IIRC. He usually makes a point not to kill innocents. He even killed a copycat vigilante because of his disdain for collateral damage.

[Lord of the Abyss]

hell one time someone even mind fucked him so bad he killed jaywalkers and litterbugs.

Kingpin, with some sort of drug.

[Adrian Laguna]

I wonder how many innocent by standers frank kills?

Not a whole lot, IIRC. He usually makes a point not to kill innocents. He even killed a copycat vigilante because of his disdain for collateral damage.

Speaking of sparing innocents: Is it my imagination, or in the picture Shep posted Frank is deliberately trying not to kill the butler? He's completely uninjured, and while a stream of bullets passes of uncomfortably close, it doesn't seem to be going for him.

[GuppyShark]

Back to the Original Topic - the talking heads make the same point in The Dark Knight Returns, so it's not like the idea is revolutionary. Didn't Joker make the same comment a lot in the AU?

Hell, I was watching Spider-Man cartoon episodes with my little brother on the weekend and one of the two-bit supervillains begged Spidey to save him from falling to his death - because that's what heroes do!

[LordShaithis]

Yeah, I remember in one issue of Hitman... Tommy and Nat are walking down the street when fifty ninjas with swords and crap come leaping down from the top of a building. The guys whip out their guns and kill the whole lot of them.

Nat: "They ain't here for me. Dudes I know get into a gunfight, they remember to bring a gun."

And afterward it's never mentioned again. Going by Hitman, the GCPD is almost totally oblivious.

[TheDarkling]

Because it's about as heroic as winning a bar fight with the aid of a chainsaw.

Frank Castle isn't a hero; he is a serial killer who just happens to target scum.

[The Yosemite Bear]

Because it's about as heroic as winning a bar fight with the aid of a chainsaw.

Frank Castle isn't a hero; he is a serial killer who just happens to target scum.

hey it's a good target, whose going to miss them?

which is why most serial killer's target homeless and prostitues.

[MadSorcerer]

It may not be "heroic" but it's effective.

So would be executing anyone suspected - You'd save the problems of the expensive legal system and cut out any criminals escaping.
(Wank about Frank never killing anyone innocent aside).

Why should we put aside? As long as Frank is killing known villains and not innocents then it's a good thing.

[Eleas]

Why should we put aside? As long as Frank is killing known villains and not innocents then it's a good thing.

Yeah, cause who needs those pesky checks and balances? As long as a known and unstable vigilantee decides who lives and dies, there's no harm done, right? Because these people are "known villains"?

Jesus. Sometimes, newbies pick the most fitting usernames.

[Edward Yee]

At least as portrayed in MAX (maybe by Garth Ennis in general), he has consciously taken measures to avoid collateral damage and cited that as the reason; in "Slavers" he specifically planned a house clearing to ensure no firefight, and in the current "Man of Stone" arc he's taking the fight to the mountains rather than Kabul. In the first three arcs there weren't many (if any) such confrontations with the risk thereof, so the only time where I found MAX Punisher questionable was in the fourth arc, "Up and Down, Black is White."

P.S. He doesn't seem to have been as clear about it in the "Barracuda," especially not at the end, but that was a bad, somewhat out of character (for the writer) arc.

[MadSorcerer]

Why should we put aside? As long as Frank is killing known villains and not innocents then it's a good thing.

Yeah, cause who needs those pesky checks and balances? As long as a known and unstable vigilantee decides who lives and dies, there's no harm done, right? Because these people are "known villains"?

Jesus. Sometimes, newbies pick the most fitting usernames.

Do you know what "known villain" means? It's when you know without a doubt that a person is guilty. And if you know someone committed a crime like murder or rape and was going to do it again what would be the harm in putting them down? It doesn't hurt society; one can argue that it improves it.

[Drunk Monkey]

Do you know what "known villain" means? It's when you know without a doubt that a person is guilty.

So? Just because everyone in the world knew that O.J, Michael Jackson, and Charles Manson did there respective evil deeds, but the fuckers still deserved a trial.

And if you know someone committed a crime like murder or rape and was going to do it again what would be the harm in putting them down?

Careful when fighting monsters youngling, you just might become one.

It doesn't hurt society; one can argue that it improves it.

Mass murder doesn’t harm society? Bullshit. I’m sorry buddy but going around killing people is never helpful for society, no matter how you spin it.

Think of the grief Frank causes to those mobsters friends and families. Many of which probably wouldn’t have a problem with there executions if they were decided by a court, not a fucking vigilantly.

[Loner]

One of Frank's motives.

[weemadando]

Awww... Poor widdle Franks about to get one hell of an idiot cut from that shot...

[Loner]

Awww... Poor widdle Franks about to get one hell of an idiot cut from that shot...

Not quite. DD does pull the trigger, but Frank removed the firing pin from the revolver.

[MadSorcerer]

Do you know what "known villain" means? It's when you know without a doubt that a person is guilty.

So? Just because everyone in the world knew that O.J, Michael Jackson, and Charles Manson did there respective evil deeds, but the fuckers still deserved a trial.

And if you know someone committed a crime like murder or rape and was going to do it again what would be the harm in putting them down?

Careful when fighting monsters youngling, you just might become one.

It doesn't hurt society; one can argue that it improves it.

Mass murder doesn’t harm society? Bullshit. I’m sorry buddy but going around killing people is never helpful for society, no matter how you spin it.

Think of the grief Frank causes to those mobsters friends and families. Many of which probably wouldn’t have a problem with there executions if they were decided by a court, not a fucking vigilantly.[/quote]

[MadSorcerer]

The previous post was a mistake. Sorry.

Do you know what "known villain" means? It's when you know without a doubt that a person is guilty.

So? Just because everyone in the world knew that O.J, Michael Jackson, and Charles Manson did there respective evil deeds, but the fuckers still deserved a trial.

Except we don't know if they were responsible for there deeds. A known villain would be someone like Hitler.

And if you know someone committed a crime like murder or rape and was going to do it again what would be the harm in putting them down?

Careful when fighting monsters youngling, you just might become one.

Better to be a monster than a person like Batman who never gets anything done. People would be a lot safer if he killed the Joker or any of his other enemies.

It doesn't hurt society; one can argue that it improves it.

Mass murder doesn’t harm society? Bullshit. I’m sorry buddy but going around killing people is never helpful for society, no matter how you spin it.

Think of the grief Frank causes to those mobsters friends and families. Many of which probably wouldn’t have a problem with there executions if they were decided by a court, not a fucking vigilantly.

So going around killing people akin to the Joker or Hitler wouldn't help society? If Batman had killed the Joker the third time he escaped many people would still be alive or sane. That seems like a plus.

Also do you seriously expect me to care about grieving mobsters? You have to be joking. Mobsters callously rip families a part all the time and know we're suppose to care about them?

[Vendetta]

Except we don't know if they were responsible for there deeds. A known villain would be someone like Hitler.

And yet even those accomplices of Hitler that chose not to put a bullet to their brains and were caught were tried. Their punishments, up to and including execution, were not decided by individuals but by the due process of law.

Better to be a monster than a person like Batman who never gets anything done. People would be a lot safer if he killed the Joker or any of his other enemies.

No, it isn't. Because once an individual starts believing that they are the sole arbiter of "justice" they are prone to making decisions based on their own subjective morality, not the wider code of ethics that informs actual justice. Frank Castle only spares people he thinks are innocent, and, well, he's mentally unstable and should be in a loony bin.

So going around killing people akin to the Joker or Hitler wouldn't help society? If Batman had killed the Joker the third time he escaped many people would still be alive or sane. That seems like a plus.

No, it just creates something just as dangerous as the person you just killed. If Batman had killed the Joker, he would have been a murderer. The continuing failure of the DC's Justice system to execute the Joker after following the due process of law notwithstanding.

[Shroom Man 777]

Well, so far it seems like Frank's choices have been sound - the people he's killed happen to be guilty, according to that wide code of ethics that informs actual justice you've mentioned.

They allow the likes of Superman and whatnot to punch villains into the sun, then why not allow Frank to put a bullet in a rapist's brain? If comic book physics differs from that of reality, then maybe comic book psychology does too

[Zed Snardbody]

The state can not execute a sick man. Joker being about as sick as they come. All they can do is lock him in the nut house.

[Shroom Man 777]

What happens if he keeps on escaping and killing? Will the state go "okay, back to your cell" and then he breaks out and murders everyone again, what? "Time for your lockdown time"?

[Edward Yee]

Think of the grief Frank causes to those mobsters friends and families. Many of which probably wouldn’t have a problem with there executions if they were decided by a court, not a fucking vigilantly.

Incidentally, that's the topic of the next arc, "Widowmaker." (Albeit it's the wives as the antagonists -- but in a preview page, he kills the female of a couple.)

[Zed Snardbody]

What happens if he keeps on escaping and killing? Will the state go "okay, back to your cell" and then he breaks out and murders everyone again, what? "Time for your lockdown time"?

Thats about the size of it, sad to say.

[Shroom Man 777]

Well, if the justice system is that fucked up, you can't really criticize citizens who take the law into their own hands and slaughter bad guys, citizens who take the law into their own hands and slaughter bad guys...responsibly

I'm sure there's a wise saying I've heard that applies to that...uhhh...I think it was from the Punisher movie

[Loner]

Think of the grief Frank causes to those mobsters friends and families. Many of which probably wouldn’t have a problem with there executions if they were decided by a court, not a fucking vigilantly.

Incidentally, that's the topic of the next arc, "Widowmaker." (Albeit it's the wives as the antagonists -- but in a preview page, he kills the female of a couple.)

Apparently that couple were child molesters.