He might not be one of the good guys, but he’s a good person (for the most part). He managed to do a thing for the greater good (Bruiser was willing to kill so many people, possibly even his son, depending) even though it was morally wrong. I love the juxtaposition of that sort of thing.
Yes, sometimes you need to talk out your problems. Other times, action is required. So all that’s left is to see what kind of damage that gun did to Bruiser.
HOT DAMN!!! Someone did the RIGHT thing,,, which here, is the SMART THING!!! I love the whole red cloud effect, with flying teeth. I was hoping for this, or one of the Henchmen going Roid Rage on Bruiser, big time.
Now bury the remains in a live volcano. I can recommend several.
Unfortunately I can’t attribute +1 to these comments.
An interesting situation would be someone, aware that someone else is legally untouchable and they’re going to keep on doing bad things, murdering the murderer and then surrendering themselves to justice, because even if they did what was neccesary, it was still wrong and they accept the consequences of their act. The system may not be perfect but they still believe in it.
Evers for the win! Cos yeah, Bruiser was not going to stop coming, lots of people would end up getting hurt in the crossfire, and we’ve seen how effective they are at keeping him locked up.
Good man, Evers.
Killing a murderer isn’t the same thing as killing someone who will murder. If you do it just because the label “murderer” applies, you are no better than those who killed Jews just because Hitler put a label on them and allowed it. Bad laws may change, but you cannot undo following it.
Also if you don’t kill just because it’s a law (or commandment), you don’t act morally better than a stone laying on the ground and following Newton’s law. It’s useful because mostly laws are made to be that way, but morally, it’s just random.
Only if you grok the reasoning why you do or hopefully do not kill, you can act morally.
You know going with the Hitler/Nazi argument is basically the quickest way to cheapen one’s own argument, no?
As an aside, Bruiser was a confirmed serial murderer, IMPRISONED for it and had just escaped, killing AND murdering people along the way, just to “evaluate” his son. something that ON HIS OWN words included, among other things, potentially mutilating the boy AND killing at least his adopted father. Things have gone considerably beyond “putting a label” long, long ago….
Morally, when someone commits murder, they deserve execution. The only reason I know of to argue against the death penalty is the poor system of its administration (which is a pretty good argument, mind you).
“The system” is an attempt at codifying morality, but it falls short. In fact, it even RECOGNIZES that it falls short, which one of several reasons for the concept of “jury nullification”.
The example AceOfSpade gives might well be a good example of that, in that a jury might well acknowledge that legally, it was murder, but MORALLY, it was not, and thus acquit.
Putting too much faith in “the system” is how tyrants get people like you to do and support terrible and immoral things.
The justice system might not be capable of executing him, if high tech hero weapons to the mouth can’t do the job. Right now death penalties have been halted because drug companies wont give States the drugs to do it, despite the fact $20 worth of Tylenol will kill anyone.
Bruiser was still comming to kill him. Sö extended self defense, I guess?
damn son. evers just levelled up in badassery 10 points
He might not be one of the good guys, but he’s a good person (for the most part). He managed to do a thing for the greater good (Bruiser was willing to kill so many people, possibly even his son, depending) even though it was morally wrong. I love the juxtaposition of that sort of thing.
and that is how you handle cavities on semi-invincible super villains!
Yes, sometimes you need to talk out your problems. Other times, action is required. So all that’s left is to see what kind of damage that gun did to Bruiser.
HOT DAMN!!! Someone did the RIGHT thing,,, which here, is the SMART THING!!! I love the whole red cloud effect, with flying teeth. I was hoping for this, or one of the Henchmen going Roid Rage on Bruiser, big time.
Now bury the remains in a live volcano. I can recommend several.
Preventing murders is not morally wrong. Executing a murderer is not morally wrong.
Thinking like that is why the Joker keeps getting to murder people. Letting murderers murder more people is what’s morally wrong.
The morally wrong thing is performing the execution outside the justice system.
Unfortunately I can’t attribute +1 to these comments.
An interesting situation would be someone, aware that someone else is legally untouchable and they’re going to keep on doing bad things, murdering the murderer and then surrendering themselves to justice, because even if they did what was neccesary, it was still wrong and they accept the consequences of their act. The system may not be perfect but they still believe in it.
Evers for the win! Cos yeah, Bruiser was not going to stop coming, lots of people would end up getting hurt in the crossfire, and we’ve seen how effective they are at keeping him locked up.
Good man, Evers.
Killing a murderer isn’t the same thing as killing someone who will murder. If you do it just because the label “murderer” applies, you are no better than those who killed Jews just because Hitler put a label on them and allowed it. Bad laws may change, but you cannot undo following it.
Also if you don’t kill just because it’s a law (or commandment), you don’t act morally better than a stone laying on the ground and following Newton’s law. It’s useful because mostly laws are made to be that way, but morally, it’s just random.
Only if you grok the reasoning why you do or hopefully do not kill, you can act morally.
There is a odd concept that is rarely discussed:
A person can be declared guilty of a crime, but still receive no punishment:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discharge_(sentence)
You know going with the Hitler/Nazi argument is basically the quickest way to cheapen one’s own argument, no?
As an aside, Bruiser was a confirmed serial murderer, IMPRISONED for it and had just escaped, killing AND murdering people along the way, just to “evaluate” his son. something that ON HIS OWN words included, among other things, potentially mutilating the boy AND killing at least his adopted father. Things have gone considerably beyond “putting a label” long, long ago….
Eh, no.
Morally, when someone commits murder, they deserve execution. The only reason I know of to argue against the death penalty is the poor system of its administration (which is a pretty good argument, mind you).
“The system” is an attempt at codifying morality, but it falls short. In fact, it even RECOGNIZES that it falls short, which one of several reasons for the concept of “jury nullification”.
The example AceOfSpade gives might well be a good example of that, in that a jury might well acknowledge that legally, it was murder, but MORALLY, it was not, and thus acquit.
Putting too much faith in “the system” is how tyrants get people like you to do and support terrible and immoral things.
The justice system might not be capable of executing him, if high tech hero weapons to the mouth can’t do the job. Right now death penalties have been halted because drug companies wont give States the drugs to do it, despite the fact $20 worth of Tylenol will kill anyone.