Who do you agree with here?
Punisher basically calls Daredevil a tough guy on a playground who beats up the bullies while Daredevil accuses Punisher of determining the value of a man's life and playing god by killing them. I can't find flaws in Punisher's logic
Aside from the fact that you would have to be a literal sociopath to believe one person should have the right and power to go around deciding who lives and who dies and passing judgement on every walk of criminal.
...
Frank is always right.
>literal sociopath
You used both words incorrectly. Amazing.
What gives Daredevil the right to beat the shit out of people?
It's one of the privileges of being blind
>Daredevil doesn't kill Frank
>Frank goes on to kill more dudes
Frank wins again
I believe he's more entitled to beat the shit out of people and hand them over to the local authorities in a world of superheroes and vigilantism than Frank is entitled to gun them down in the streets regardless of the severity of their crimes, enforcing his own brand of street justice which only gets in the way of police procedure and sends the local community into a fit of hysteria.
The Punisher is a very interesting and entertaining character and perhaps one of my favourites of all time, but I'm not delusional enough to think that his way works or, more the fool me, that it's somehow honorable/necessary.
Matt
The sparrows fly at midnight.
Plenty of his "victims" would've gotten away with it without him.
I never noticed this before but is Daredevil wearing trainers?
True. There are some top-tier scumbags I'd love to shoot right in the head, and it would make the world a better place. But if I was going to kill everyone who pissed me off? Damn, that's too much work.
>Who do you agree with here?
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes"
Batman vs Joker can't be resolved without killing, but Superman vs Lex can.
Honestly Wolverine is the right answer.
>Doesn't want to kill
>But will, so don't press the issue
The Punisher ran through a fucking hospital firing indiscriminately. He's a public menace who doesn't kill bystanders by blind luck.
That happens anyway, they're called judges.
this scene was so retarded as a comic too
>Only a Sith deals in absolutes
>Only
That's an absolute statement. Was being revealed as a Sith Lord a part of your plan?
I sympathize very strongly with this, it bugs me to no end when people like Joss Whedon don't see the value in the character, especially in a world like Marvel's.
The fact that his methods and ideology resonate with so many people prove that he's a worthwhile exercise in the genre. And in my opinion a great character regardless of how you where you stand on his methods.
the line is intended to show the hypocrisy of the jedi order
That doesn't make it right. The Punisher is a mentally unstable war veteran who is on a personal crusade to kill any criminal he can get his hands on. There's no justice in what he does, only vengeance. Whether or not his actions end up genuinely bettering the world, he's still a crazed gunman who operates outside of the law and interferes with how things are supposed to be handled. Worse still is that he'll only encourage people to believe that his way is the only way: people will end up inspired by his massacres, spurred into mimicking his tactics and ideology. Is that how the world should be? Everyone believing that they are the one true hand of god and exacting punishment on any minor criminal that happens to inconvenience them?
I'm not naive enough to think giving a hardened career criminal another chance to do what he does. Petty ones like burglers, thieves, small time drug dealers can get away with a few broken bones but major ones? Rapists, murderers, pedophiles and criminal heads I'd off without losing a bit of sleep.
>what is a jury
After sitting through the prequels I'm not giving Lucas the benefit of the doubt.
wow, your smart
...
Why is it that people say that playing god is evil? I'm doing it all the time and it is a lot of fun.
I think you have to be crazy to agree with Frank.
Even Frank canoincally disagrees with Frank's ways, remember Frank's copycapts from Welcome Home Frank? The only thing that sets him apart from them is plot armor and meme "military precision".
Realistically, Frank should have plenty of innocent blood to kill himself already.
>Batman vs Joker can't be resolved without killing
If the police and legal system weren't so incompetent for the sake of keeping the Joker around, then it would be. Batman catches the Joker and then the court decides his fate, which would definitely be the death penalty in any real scenario.
I think they both have points to certain degrees. That's what makes them such a great dynamic. The Punisher makes a point that there are people who do nothing but make others miserable, and they will never stop that trend, and just killing them saves potential lives. However, Daredevil has a point that you can't really gage that, and so there's a point where you're basically killing people out of a personal opinion, which is why there are laws in place against it.
Shut up Matt
So you're fine with letting a rapist or murderer get away or get a slap on the wrist because a lawyers time is too expensive? Laws fail or are corrupt sometimes the only justice is criminal justice.
You mean the Gary Stu answer.
Punisher:
>kills hundreds, don't feel bad about it.
>No one in the super hero community wants to hang out with him.
Wolverine
>kills hundreds, sometimes feels bad about one or two.
>people line up to meet him, children mutants see him a dad figure, women wet themselves in his presence.
Regardless of where you stand on the character's methods or the justness of what he does, I don't think you can deny that he is unique and engaging when written correctly. When the Punisher is done right, you SHOULD be asking yourself if his actions are justified. You SHOULD be questioning him and having an internal debate on whether the man is a murdering psycho or a modern day crusader. Or maybe you should just be enjoying the story for what it is rather than using it as an excuse to indulge your own revenge fantasies. Regardless, the Punisher at his best makes for some terrific storytelling.
>Realistically, Frank should have plenty of innocent blood to kill himself already.
Realistically, so would almost all other street level superheroes.
>regardless of the severity of their crimes
what are you talking about, Frank won't kill you for jaywalking (inb4 that page with hypnotized frank) or speeding or tax evasion
It's a simple rule, if you feed off suffering of other people, you die.
Okay, we should totally let Cristu and his Albanian buddies keep selling girls as sex slaves because Frank is evil too!
Logan doesn't go around sniktbubbing people because he thinks they deserve to die. Frank is on a one man crusade against evil.
Ok. The first fifteen years of Wolverine versus the first fifteen of Punisher. Ignore the later flanderization and softening of Wolverine as "Marvel's Batman."
But he's not guilty, he's insane!
Who fucking cares.
Those threads are basically not even Sup Forums, they're just there for you faggots to discuss your personal projected sense of ethics.
It's like if you made a thread about the better way to eat a steak because Batman likes them well done.
That's why to this day I am still not sure what the fuck Ennis was trying to say by that chaining the Daredevil scene. It's garbage, what the fuck is Frank trying to prove to Matt even?
The most hypocritical part about it that let's say Matt started killing after it (although, he has killed and had full intention of killing before), Punisher would be first one to put him down.
You can't just let someone run wild with the privilege to take people's lives into their own hands
Punisher would die really quickly if he didn't have such an itchy trigger finger and kill people on suspicion irl. Besides, he really ought to at least wear a mask in the comics considering by about a month into him doing his thing somebody would just put a fucking bullet in his brain while he's on the street
Bruce is a rich dick, no way does he eat it well done.
Only if they kill people
he did in "kingdome come"
The difference being that Wolverine usually only kills in situations where he's being forced to fight for his life and, while many of his fellow heroes disapprove of his methods, they're able to reason with him and convince him to stay his hand in most instances.
The Punisher, on the other hand, actively goes out looking to murder people. And he isn't murdering HYDRA terrorists or ninjas or mutant-hunting human supremacists or even super-villains: he's going out murdering people who honestly don't even need to be murdered. Mafia enforcers, drug dealers and gangbangers who could just as easily be subdued by Spider-Man in a matter of moments. And he's doing it as an unstoppable killing machine who can't be reasoned with or talked down. He's not flying off of the handle in a berserker rage and he wasn't programmed to be an assassin like Wolverine: he wants to pull the trigger and he does it with the cold, calculated mind of a serial killer.
The difference, then, is the context: the Punisher doesn't have the same excuses as Wolverine. He can't justify his choice in victims like Wolverine. He doesn't WANT to stop like Wolverine. He won't cooperate with the established rules like Wolverine. And the result is that he ends up being a blemish on the face of all crime-fighters.
Although, that being said, Wolverine himself wholly supports what Frank does.
Well that's an Elseworld story.
Thing is there is just something fundamentally wrong with their world. How is Joker still alive? How did Luthor become President?
Exactly, like i think him being a part of the Marvel universe is what makes him work so well because he's a contrasting dynamic to the usual ideologies.
Yeah that one falls apart pretty easily but i appreciate that you can tell those kinds of stories with the character
I think user is trying to say that if I am trying to view Frank though realistic lens, then vigilantes that don't kill should be viewed in the same manner.
That's precisely my point. Except for maybe Spider-man(who can always use webs), you can't take down hundreds of people with your fists or whatever without killing some of them and causing permanent damage to others. And that's not even taking into account all the collateral damage some of those fights would cause.
This pisses me off. In the U.S. the precedence for the death penalty and mental illness is that they won't be executed as long as they aren't competent enough to understand the fact they are being executed and why they were being executed. The Joker, and none of the other "insane" villains in Arkham should never get away with their mass-murder.
>Two vigilantes bickering over who takes the law into their hands best.
>But they deseeeeeerve it
That's not important. It was never a question of whether or not these people deserved to die. It's about allowing someone the power to go around with an arsenal of weapons blowing people away in direct defiance to law and order because we happen to be okay with the kind of people he kills. It's a slipper slope: what's to stop the next guy from seeing how the Punisher gets away with killing sex traffickers and decide that the asshole who sells weed on his street corner needs a bullet in his head? What's to stop the outcast kid at the back of his classroom from deciding the bullies at his school need to be rubbed out?
When you let the Punisher do what he does without opposing him, you send a clear message to anyone who might share his knight templar mindset: it's okay to take the law into your own hands and exact punishment on those who you feel have wronged society, whomever they may be.
Though they might not always work, this is why we have judges and courts and cops: so people feel as if there's an order to how these things work. So they know that it is a democratic society which ultimately has a say in how its deviants are persecuted for their crimes. When you put that power into the hands of a single person ungoverned by any kind of authority, it isn't long before people start asking themselves "why not me?"
it's okay to harm people, but if you kill them you'll be just like them
I don't know if you've heard of it but there was a policy in the 90's Spider-Man cartoon where he wasn't allowed to punch people; i actually think that's awesome. It resulted in him grabbing innocents and swinging away from danger or creating nets to stop falling debris from killing bystanders. I think a superhero being more like a firefighter is a really important dimension of the archetype that is underrepresented purely because people prefer punching and fighting
Like the Arkham games with Batman; he basically just goes around beating people to death in those games. I mean, he beats the everloving fuck out of them. Punching someone while they are lying on the ground makes me laugh out loud, so i feel you on this subject for sure.
But yeah for me being a hero should be more about saving lives than getting vengeance on criminals; that is one preventative way to save lives yes, but that isn't the only way.
What Daredevil does is essentially an elaborate kind of citizen's arrest.
What the Punisher does is akin to a guy walking out of his house with a shotgun and blowing someone away with no provocation.
Matt did both and I'd sleep safer knowing he's around to stop Punisher from killing me for loitering.
>It's about allowing someone the power to go around with an arsenal of weapons blowing people away in direct defiance to law and order
But it's not defying law and order if we allow it.
...
>if we turn a blind eye to it because we like it, that makes it cool
Stop. Why does every Punisher thread have to be overrun with edgy children who think we should be entitled to pick up guns and start murdering our way through the seedier elements of our society?
Agree with this. I love Frank, but I cringe when law enforcement is depicted as loving hin in the comics(soldiers are fine); he's a fucking serial killer.
I think you misunderstood what I said on purpose in order to pick a fight.
Yes it is
In that case, I feel like you cherrypicked a part of my argument to make a pointless response to in order to create the illusion of argumentative superiority.
Not even just in the games, most Batman comic books have him punching the shit out of criminals. I don't think the writers know how little it takes to do permanent brain damage or worse. Even leaving them knocked out could lead to their death due to brain hemorrhage
I can only suspend disbelief so far, if DC wants Batman to be absolutely no kill, then he shouldn't punch peolpe to dead so much
>every trial uses a jury
>things that are allowed by society are illegal
No.
>cherrypicked
If that's your response then that's your response.
I haven't read the scene in a while, but from my memory of it you could argue that Frank is showing Matt that his methods fail to stand up to philosophical criticism the same way that Frank's does. If I remember right, Matt ends up pulling the trigger, which to the reader immediately shows him as the loser of the debate. He was willing to kill the Punisher in order to save a criminal's life, which is objectively worse than the Punisher killing criminals to save the lives of innocents.
Daredevil's idealism is admirable, but ultimately the Punisher's position, while more morally grey, is more pragmatic and realistic. Also guns > sticks
t. /k/
Because it's a direct intervention on a crime(he doesn't just punch people because they looked at him funny) to assist those in trouble, that still allows for things like
>The individual was forced into the situation despite not wanting to/their life at risk through denial
>The individual was in a dire situation and saw no alternative, but with proper counseling could be made to understand
>The individual was only in this area due to lack of other options, which as a lawyer he could help them find though counseling of law
>The individual was on a substance that impaired his judgement and would never have done something like this normally
Etc...
None of these discount the actions of the criminal and they should absolutely be sentenced for the full extent of their crimes, but all of them are part of the spectrum of different situations where lethality is not needed, would be wanted, or would help the situation aside from the immediate.
The point is, non-lethal measures allow someone like DD to address the situation with direct intervention without allowing the criminal to continue on their actions, and allow for a much more thorough examination of why this individual is working for some shady characters. That's the key thing, examination, they can learn afterwards, which is impossible should they choose the lethal route.
Keep in mind that the legal system in marvel universe(s) doesn't work well. People like Kingpin can murder people on camera and get away with it(admittedly that happened in the Ultimate universe), Norman fucking Osborn was made the most powerful law-enforcement official in the US, one supervillain or another seems to break out of prison every other week... And while he does hit targets of opportunity, the people he really goes after are the ones who can more or less act like they're above the law and get away with it. So while cops probably shouldn't be his fans, I can see them having sympathy for him.
He's more of an extremely trigger happy cop without a badge.
The choices you make and the actions that follow are a reflection of who you really are. Take responsibility for it. You cannot run from your self and if you try, mayhem within and without is sure to follow.
Personally, I liked the predator style of gameplay in the Arkham games. I mean, it got boring and repetitive after a while, but it fell in line with how I felt Batman SHOULD fight. Not with brute force, but quietly sneaking around, scare tactics, jumping out of nowhere and incapacitating them. I feel like, given how intelligent Bruce is, a fistfight should be his last resort.
Well yeah that's why that part sucks, is because killing the Punisher to prevent him from killing a mob boss is drastically inequivalent. Ennis just wrote that to portray DD and his ideology as a cuck. Realistically Daredevil has zero motivation to pull the trigger at all, it isn't his responsibility to kill Frank to save a life, least of all a mob boss. That part really shows that Ennis doesn't understand Daredevil's ideology.
>no provocation
I love the games but when you get into a fistfight he does basically kill them
You know how he uses his full body weight to knock their fucking head against the ground to finish them off? Lol
Ennis hates capeshit. Punisher is his self-insert to laugh at it.
Yeah I agree with you on that, I remember feeling like Matt was incredibly out of character to try and shoot Frank.
The Arkham games aredfinitely a master-class in making you feel like the character you're playing. I hadn't felt that much like a supehero since Spider-Man 2 on the PS2.
Most of the Punisher's victims aren't actively committing a crime when he confronts them whereas most of the people Daredevil fights are literally doing something illegal prior to his intervention.
If you can't see the difference then you're already too far gone and I sincerely hope you're never placed in a position of authority.
The situation where the punsher makes sense is if the justice system is so corrupt to be useless. There is no justice but what you can take in your own two hands there. Think wild west posses, or mexican autodefense forces.
Pic related. It's a homemade narco armored car. Fuckers are driving those around. Everyone knows where the narco bases are.
Rescue is the only character I think that fits that concept right now, but she isn't used, possibly because bendis.
The TV show honestly did a better job at evenly portraying both characters by having Matt shoot at the chains.
Yeah that's why it's hard to discuss the ethics of the Punisher. In real life all supervillains with bodycounts would be put to death pretty quickly if they didn't serve their full sentences. Like, Peter Parker wouldn't NOT turn Dr Octopus into jail if he knew he'd get the death penalty, it's just the legal system's call
>The situation where the punsher makes sense is if the justice system is so corrupt to be useless.
Well, in that case there'd probably be nothing resembling law and order anyway.
At least use the correct extension here. Punisher is use of lethal force to defend others taken beyond immediate circumstances. Which is the same kind of extension that daredevil has on his citizens arrest.
I know, it's why i barely ever take anything he writes with a superhero in it(besides Frank, i guess?) seriously but he's good otherwise.
>Punisher is use of lethal force to defend others
Even Frank would look at you with Frankest of Franks.
>aren't actively committing a crime when he confronts them
Oh, so as long as they're not selling a child right now, raping this second or already engaged in the act of murder, they should be let free to go and do more evil?
What about people with cops in their pockets?
What about people with diplomatic immunity which, in fiction, is usually complete exemption from the law?
I can't see how anyone can condone possibly hundreds or thousands more lives ruined, families broken, etc, just because they're not doing something bad the exact moment someone capable of stopping them is near, especially when they're comicbook villains, people who rarely, if ever, change.
I think you're far too gone and I hope that you're never in a position where you have the opportunity to save a life because person is going to die, along with many others after it.
Yeah, I felt that was stupid. For a character who claims to prioritize the preservation of human life, his methods are hilariously violent.
Here's how Daredevil's crimefighting style works
>Daredevil stops a crime in progress
>Daredevil discovers it's tied to a bigger criminal enterprise
>Daredevil investigates using non-lethal tactics and cooperating with the authorities as best he can by conducting citizens arrests and handing them evidence.
>Daredevil follows the trail to the top, bringing in the guy who's above the law and ultimately letting the cops have the final say in how he's handled.
Here's how the Punisher fights crime.
>The Punisher conducts an armed raid on known criminals and kills everyone, regardless of what they were doing at the time
>The Punisher lets the evidence from that raid lead him to another, and another, killing everyone he can along the way, eschewing or even wounding the cops and keeping evidence to himself.
>The Punisher follows the trail to the top and kills whoever is in charge, potentially putting a stop to his enterprise but ensuring he dies without ever telling the cops what he knows or seeing his day in court
>If he stumbles upon an innocent during all of this he'll protect them but only as a secondary objective in his murder spree
The Punisher isn't interested in defending anybody with what he does: he doesn't give a shit about people for the most part. It's all about his personal vendetta and punishing the wicked.
>people who don't respect Batman's no kill rule/ideals
That's not true at all. There's a functioning government in Narco territory. It's just run by the narcos.
There's still police, and tax collection, and public services, because the narcos don't want to live in a place where streets are covered in trash, or have dead bodies laying around in the streets, rather than quietly dissolving in acid in some barrels in the middle of nowhere.
The difference is that some people have complete immunity over everything the government can do, and can sometimes command the government to do shit.
The problem is that people really take his capeshit writing seriously.
>If the law can't get to them right now I personally should be allowed to pick up a gun and kill them because I AM THE LAW
With all due respect, my friend, you're a bitter edgelord who's bent out of shape by a delusional view of corruption and crime rooted in personal sentiment and not in any objective logic.
the ones that can lead to death sentence do
Frank isn't running around executing people for jaywalking or shoplifting from a corner store - the people he goes out of his way to kill are the lowest, worst form of human scum - murderers, rapists, slavers, pedophiles, drug pushers, etc.
Frank is a monster, no question about it. But he's the kind of monster who fights worse monsters - a 'Frankzilla', if you will.
>delusional view of corruption and crime
Considering time and time again we've seen how bad people like the Kingpin and others are, I'd say I'm right on the money.
But please, tell me about how letting criminals go on to rape and kill more people is "objective logic".
Bleeding hearts like you can't understand anything about these situations.
The law is not absolute and many can and will take advantage of it.
Take the statute of limitations for example.
They've still done the crime, the evidence is still there, but shit, they've evaded getting caught for long enough.
According to you, we should just let them go and do it all over again, right?
Tell me you don't think that, tell me that you don't believe that's "objective logic" because that's the opposite and I can guarantee you've never known anything remotely similar to what the victims of these people go through.
Protip: not everyone who agrees with the Punisher's methods is an edgelord.
Some of us know what it's like.