He’s got well thought out and rational reasons. I doubt this will be as good as the Punisher vs Daredevil conversation about ethics from the Netflix, but I like this.
They were not talking about the concept of talking about ethics. But rather about the performance. And if they mention the performance, they should mention the specific version. Which in this situation was Netflix. Nowhere in their post did they say that was better or worse than it was in the comic.
yeah sure, who doesnt like cold blood murderer vigilante executing people withotu trial? Oh wait every civilized person hate that kind of punisher bullshit
Ya no, f these guys.
these ain’t some harmless kids selling a gram of weed, they already casually attempted to murder Ethan without batting a eye. They are a menace to society and should be put down.
civilized countries abolished death penalty long ago. Yeah, for some americans, it’s weird to think that murders and guns cant solve everything, but this is true.
Oh cool a new supervillain concept. “Mr Civil” he’ll gaslight the hell out of you and call you uncivilised savages if you try to resist the brainwashing.
Also he’s super xenophobic about other countries, for some reason.
And this guy DOESN’T KNOW THAT. He just says “Crime = Death Penalty.” His justification for why they need to die is “They have criminal records and some active warrants.” If that was grounds IRL for executions, you wouldn’t cheer.
Well that raises an ethically relevant question: since Ethan respawns and experiences the full continuity one expects from being the same individual, is he in the instant before respawning technically “dead” or “alive”? If we assume he is the same person all the time to preserve the continuity of the individual having the same life, it’s at worst attempted murder. If we conclude that he is dead, it is murder, but then we’d also have to consider we’re not looking at the same person after every respawn. In the latter case, these guys have committed multiple homicides and we’d have… Read more »
Gonfrask
2 years ago
Well, we have seen they have no doubts at the time to kill someone that just “find their hideouts”, you Ethan are lucky to be “respawnable” but about Lucas? Or if would have been another “low grade” hero?
If they have never been found guilty of murdering they should be very good hiding bodies…
Still, a court is what should be.
Of course, I had my time where I found the Punisher way of action the right one, or even the Judges (at least these one are judge, jury and executioners, so legally all is fine ?).
This also arises another ethical question: does it count as murder if you kill someone who can respawn? Does it make a difference whether you know they can respawn or not? Does it count as attempted murder?
I would argue that it IS murder, at least the first time. MPC (Model Penal Code) homicide is unlawfully causing the death of another human being, and it’s murder if done purposefully or knowingly. The fact that he did not stay dead is a happy coincidence, since they didn’t know he wouldn’t stay dead.
Not a lawyer, but I seriously doubt it. Corpse disposal must happen all the time because it’s a smart way to clean up your crime scene, but if somebody witnessed the kill, you could still get got*.
*This scenario discounts the possibility of absolute bullshit court proceedings.
If he respawned, you’d have a reasonable ability to argue that you *knew* he couldn’t die (at least, if you had an even average lawyer).
Therefore, you’d be more likely to be charged with the regional equivalent of aggravated assault (likely to cause injury or death), or GBH, because those are the charges that CAN be proved by the prosecution “beyond reasonable doubt”, and therefore, result in a conviction.
Severity of crime is about intent. Lots of people don’t understand that, they think the law is like a videogame where you can go up to lines and not cross them.
Don’t think it’d work like that. Let’s say someone revives after being declared dead, which does happen occasionally. That wouldn’t allow the perp to be convicted of murder, because the victim is still alive.
I would say successful murder. Several times in fact. Respawning doesn’t make a difference in court. Ethan *dies* before he respawns. They didn’t know about his respawning ability, which adds an intent to kill. Though not premeditated they definitely killed him with intention.
That raises the real-life possibility of “clinically dead” people being “killed” multiple times. Seems to me like this should count as one extended attempted murder (and conspiracy to commit murder) with “the victim got better” being a mostly irrelevant mitigating factor.
It basically hinges on establishing the degree of mens rea, ill intent. If the victim is, as far as you know, a regular person whom you could absolutely kill, then yes, it would absolutely count as murder since all three elements are met: intent to kill, the deed itself and the intended consequence (death, albeit temporary). If you are aware that the intended victim is capable of resurrection BUT it can be established that you acted in the hope of somehow preventing that from occurring (vorpal blade, silver bullets and whatnot) then it would be murder (if you succeed) or… Read more »
It shouldn’t. You still kill them. Ethan still suffers the pain of dying. And on a practical point, there is no law about resurrection, so if the man dies, you killed him, period. But legally you cannot killed a person twice, so every person killing Ethan could only be condemned for a killing.
Maybe not murder but multiple accounts of assault and battery, commission of a crime with a firearm, attempted murder, drug trafficking, racketeering, and a dozen more things, could be charged, but they will not be because Ethan isn’t going to file a report and the city isn’t going to find out about it otherwise.
GUNnibal
2 years ago
I find it particularly curious that Deathblood gets to meet Analog of all people. It seems that he prefers to solve all problems with violence, and yet Ethan might just be the problem where this approach actually doesn’t work. I wonder if this encounter could change the big guy’s perspective a little. Not sure which direction, though…
That, or the other way around. ? Also, why do I have the feeling that Deathblood is going to simply break Ethan’s limbs and tossing him aside, mitigating his powers entirely? I don’t think Ethan could even make him budge based on his build and bulk. That, or Ethan realizes that self-preservation is the best form of honor and actually steps aside instead of making an enemy of a very scary hero. Or, plot twist? Could we be getting set up for Zeke to come back into the fold, jumping in to help Ethan? Would be interesting to see a… Read more »
Ethan in this version of the comic seems to hold a very strong moral code, almost ideologically naïve. Remember he taught Zeke beginning ethics, straight from his gut.
I doubt he’s going to step aside for someone to murder someone else extra judicially. Even if they would get the death penalty after being tried in court. Ethan believes in a system, in civilization, not in superheroes being ubermen and ruling over the people. Which is what deathblood’s ideology devolves into.
If I were in Ethan’s place I would have something like the “suicide-pill-in-the-tooth” in play, just for such scenarios where you could end up trapped by your power or incapacitated without triggering the respawn. If prior respawn rules apply (where clothes and other things all reset as well), then the suicide pill should also cleanly revert. It could even be used to fake “Instant regeneration” or “teleportation” as a way to throw opponents off the scent of the true nature of his power.
His point is absolutely valid. The system is more interested in putting people away for most of their lives over recreational drug use, and protecting police who murder innocent black men, than it is about actual justice.
1st of all we know nothing about police, law and judges in this universe apart from what that Punisher-alike said.
2nd of all – why you feel the need to add a racial background to issue presented? Normally if someone has a corrupted morale I bet they don’t discriminate as much as you think, every obstacle is trash to them.
What? His point is that they have had a criminal record before and now they’re reoffending. Not that the system is focusing on “other things”
His “point” is that they didn’t lock them away for eternity for whatever crime they committed earlier. And now he thinks the apt punishment is the death penalty.
Who knows what Deathblood’s views are about racial injustice, but with this track record i wouldn’t be surprised if he murdered recreational drug users for funding criminals.
How is it a valid point? They have a criminal record, but that is all we know. The city might still look for them. This is the perfect opportunity to put them away for a long time. You can then also spent time on preventing it from happening in the future with these guys. Deathblood can also kill false positives this way, or people pressured to do things they don’t want to do. Simply killing people you don’t like ‘because they are bad people’ is how you get tyrants killing millions. Because where do you draw the line? Not to… Read more »
Deathbloods point is that the city apparently did already have them under arrest (at least) once already (they have a criminal record, not just wanted). And yet they got out (possibly simply after serving their sentence) again, and then went back to doing more crimes. Some perhaps not noticed (yet), others actually known (like Thomas being actively wanted again), and yet these guys are still out here, doing crimes with nobody stopping them. You can argue that simply murdering criminals isn’t a good solution either (and you’d probably be right), but Deathblood definitely has a point about the actual justice… Read more »
I understand that if people are repeat offenders you can change to a severe punishment. Just as you say, killing them without trial is an immediate extreme. I would argue that you need to try again. Not give up and grab a gun immediately after it fails the first time.
I think that if the justice system is broken that the way Deathblood is handling it is actually ineffective. He’s targeting a relative small amount within the city. If he really wants to fix the justice system he should go into politics. It is there he can make a change. There are a ton of real life examples and research studies that show how you can reduce people committing a crime again. Many justice systems just lock up as a punishment, after which they have little to no social life, less chance on a decent income and are probably quick… Read more »
Swordust
2 years ago
I was expecting a chaotic neutral type super, but I’m happy to be wrong.
Merida
2 years ago
Is it too cliche if the new guy is Scott in an exoskeleton?
I’m going to say yes, it would be. It would also be rather weird. -Deathblood isn’t new, he’s been around for ages. (See comments two comics back for links to his previous mentions). For Scott to have been him all along doesn’t make much sense, both for him to be Deathblood while simultaneously being tech guy for Analog/D-Pad, or for Deathblood to work with two amateurs, even in disguise, -Bloody Gun Berserker doesn’t really seem Scott’s style. Even if he went exo-suit vigilante I’d expect something more, I don’t know, sophisticated? -Scott probably would’ve shown some recognition upon finding Ethan..… Read more »
Geeky Meerkat
2 years ago
For all the people saying the Murder Hobo has a point, I would like to point out that he’s saying “The system is incapable of solving the problem. I’m not” while being very clear that he sees the solution to the problem being “murder them”. He has not made a point because “murder them” isn’t what the system regards as the solution. What the system has failed at is rehabilitation, but just because it has failed, this doesn’t mean that murdering them is the solution. He has yet to make any sort of argument on why further attempts at rehabilitation… Read more »
Because their solution to someone stumbling over their operation was to well guess we had better just murder them. How many others have that been their solution for? Why do they deserve better than they felt like dishing out?
What they “deserve” isn’t justice, that’s vengeance (and vengeance leads to escalation, not public safety). Yet you’re right that they appear to be serial murderers, and that indicates that the proper justice system isn’t working (particularly since Mr Blood seems to be saying that they were incarcerated and set free). If so there may be no good solution. Deathblood is a murderer, and he doesn’t know that these targets are murderers. A society where it’s acceptable to murder someone because they have a warrant for assault, will collapse with or without superpowers. But if these guys keep getting away with… Read more »
Why do they deserve better than they felt like dishing out?
That is not the point Ethan is arguing, he is arguing for due process, a trial where that question WILL be answered by the force of the law, attorneys, a judge, and citizen jurists.
there are cases who cant be rehabilated, no matter how you wish, these gang members do show signs of that (absolutely no repentance, only repetition); as such street will do judgement, not goverment
I look at it more as a trolley problem. On one track you have the crooks who we know are willing to murder to protect their business(just because Ethan doesn’t stay dead doesn’t mean it’s not attempted murder) and have hurt other people. On the other track you have the crooks’ potential future victims. Which track do you send that trolley towards?
It’s not actually that simple though. Allowing vigilante justice against suspected murderers is dangerous to the innocent. We know these are murderers, but Deathblood does not.
The trolley problem has an obvious short-term solution but there are long-term effects too.
It IS a valid point, though. There may not be a human alive who is wise or all knowing enough to give The Right Answer, if one even exists for the question, but the question is valid: “At what point is the possibility of redemption and/or betterment of their character more important than the damage they have already caused intentionally and all future damage they may/will cause along the way as society attempts to rehabilitate them?” Even if you get the best possible solution and they never harm so much as a fly in the future after the one murder,… Read more »
No, it isn’t. “Rehabilitation does not work, therefor murder” is a non sequitur. Note that Deathblood isn’t asking the question, he’s providing the answer as he sees fit. The remainder of your questions all depend on the principal framework of the justice system; the ethics and perspectives on humanity. It’s easy to forget that criminals have human rights just as other humans do and that they do not lose these when they transgress. This is important, because having these rights means that they also cannot arbitrarily be violated by whomever executes justice in the land, and that goes for the… Read more »
havok
2 years ago
I wonder if Ethan has a respawn limit and if there is an easy mode that will be enabled if he hits a certain amount of deaths in a single fight?…….
These criminals are not ‘dicks’ but cold-blooded murderers, and while they might be deserving a trial in a civilized country, I am with death blood on this one…
Austin Mills
2 years ago
Analog vs Deathblood. This’ll be fun.
no thanks nintendo
2 years ago
Stop doing the thing, Ethan. They killed you several times. They aren’t worth it.
well, he maybe doesnt like cold blood murders, even for murderers? like most justice systems in the world?
evilleet
2 years ago
I mean… just forgetting they killed Analog a few times in cold blood… this is rather grand of him to forgive them so quickly. They certainly didnt give it a second thought of cold blooded murder.
But on the other hand, murdering murderes in cold blood. Still makes you a cold blooded murderer yourself…? So how is this Judge Dredd wannabe any better than them?
Any criminal justice system should aim to give due process. But at however you turn it, it needs to be better than the people it judges otherwise, whats the point?
Trying to equivocate “killing innocent people” and “killing people who killed innocent people” is disingenuous. Whether you think these acts are right or wrong, they are clearly not equivalent. Murdering an innocent person demonstrates a strong belief that murder is an acceptable solution to problems, to the point they would spill innocent blood for it, and they therefore have less room to logically argue against someone killing them in response. It could be said they opted into a “murder is okay” system by voluntarily committing murder first, and by choosing to do so they implicitly agreed to being killed by… Read more »
The difference with Judge Dredd is he’s lawfully authorised to judge and, only if necessary kill people in strict accordance with the law, has decades of legal training and, like any other Judge, can be investigated and sentenced to spend 20 years in a hellish penal colony if he breaks the (draconian) penal code and laws he’s sworn to uphold
Deathblood isn’t a lawful agent of his society’s system. In fact, by killing people without due process, he’s a spree killer working against the system
He’s not forgiving them. He’s defending their right to a fair trial under the system, and from a vigilante who wants to murder them for their crimes without said process. Big difference.
Just because he doesn’t want them summarily executed doesn’t mean he’s defending or forgiving their actions.
Marsh
2 years ago
I wonder if DeathBlood makes a cool big brother?
Dodgy
2 years ago
You tell him, Matty!
(But he ain’t gonna listen.)
Foxhood
2 years ago
To be fair. They did kill Ethan 5 times within the span of like a couple minutes. So i would argue they are a bit worse than “kinda dicks”.
Still not green light to go murder-crazy, mind you! but yeah they aren’t a sympathetic bunch.
Yup. And that’s the entire reason we endeavor to have a fair legal system. It shouldn’t matter how much someone else likes you, the legal system should try to be as impartial as possible.
So when it does dish out punishment you can be sure they deserve it, and its not just one person vendettaing out their frustration on someone.
Ben
2 years ago
One thing I’ve always loved about Punisher is the escapist fantasy of having a simple, straightforward solution (violence) actually function as a one-size-fits-all solution. We live in a world where problems are complex and don’t have easy solutions. Where even the most well-intentioned and carefully-considered attempts to fix the big problems often backfire because there are just *that* many moving parts to every system. The idea of a world where you actually can just simplify things down to “shoot the bad guys in the face” is appealing to me. Obviously that approach will do exponentially more harm than good, as… Read more »
It’s part and parcel for superhero comics. As an example, Joker, whose career is measured in genocide streaks, would have been put in the ground a long time but he isn’t so Batman comics can still happen. Gotham PD is absolutely incompetent so Batman comics can still happen. In the real world, Marvel’s Superhero/Mutant Registration Act would have happened a long time and Forge’s Neutralizer would be standard kit for every SWAT team in the nation but, if that happened, Marvel comics couldn’t happen. And so on. As it stands, this encounter is a fairly standard one for comics. Unambiguously… Read more »
ThatMageGuy
2 years ago
Deathblood sounds like the kind of guy that respects what Analog wants to accomplish but finds it to be naive.
Deathblood will likely just punch Analog into unconsciousness. No respawn, just nappy time.
Then bang bang time.
Ceomyr
2 years ago
Deathblood has a point, but we should not agree with it completely, YET. Yes, people do terrible things and walk free or are let out early. Yes, it’s arguably fair and just to execute a murderer. Deathblood has a point and he MAY be 100% right (in as far as their guilt and some occasional systemic flaws). First off, the system isn’t always going to be wrong and fail. Justice can happen. I’m guessing that he thinks the system should give them the death penalty but it doesn’t in that state. Secondly, we don’t see the proof of many of… Read more »
you dont murders murderers. It just makes you a murderer too.
Kaitensatsuma
2 years ago
I don’t want to be that guy, but having a warrant for assault doesn’t mean you’re guilty of assault and assault is a very broad thing as far as the law goes.
Slapping someone is assault, getting gunned down for that isn’t quite justice.
This guy just happens also to be a drug trafficker who wants to also shoot people.
Last edited 2 years ago by Kaitensatsuma
Mr_Meng
2 years ago
Ah the classic debate of ‘trust the system even when it lets violent offenders out to hurt more people’ vs ‘stop them from hurting anyone else ever again even if it means crossing a moral/ethical line’.
Fartsy
2 years ago
OPPORTUNITY ROLL !
one of the bandits might take advantage of the situation and land a bullet into Deathblood’s skull.
Spoony Bard
2 years ago
To be honest, I’m kind of on Team Deathblood for this one. We’ve already seen these people kill Ethan multiple times tonight without remorse, let alone the campaign they’ve had across the streets before. The fact that they’ve been brought in & let them walk free at least shows a bit of a likelihood that it’ll happen again, even with the evidence all around them. Deathblood’s solution is perhaps too much for the crimes they’ve committed, but if the options are truly that or put them in a spot where they’ll get away again…at least his solution is guaranteed effective… Read more »
foducool
2 years ago
I’ve always sympathized with the punisher types lol
(as long as I don’t get in their line of fire, but I don’t see how that’d happen anyway)
Junjie Xie
2 years ago
I wonder if there have been studies on “punisher-style vigilante ‘justice'” public approval percentages
since ppl are total morons (just look at elections) it probably is growing up. Doesnt mean it’s good.
Tim
2 years ago
“Or what? Stab me? Shoot me? Toss me through plate glass? Break my neck? That’s an ordinary Thursday for me. They’ll run out of ammo and so will you. Get the cops, they’ll have this open-and-shut, and then you can get back to shooting the next dipshit who thinks he can take you and I’ll get back to searching for my friend”
Halosty
2 years ago
We all know Ethan won’t just step aside here. I just hope these thugs take his sacrifice of pain and uncertainty of finite lives to heart (not that they necessarily know any of that right now).
Crestlinger
2 years ago
I do not bring mercy. I bring forgiveness. *Shoots them once each with gun named the same.
Bloomple
2 years ago
Apparently Ethan wasn’t joking when he said being shot in the back was “kind of” a dick move. It was point blank even, like how do you even determine that as “kind of”?
Kevin Greenbaum
2 years ago
Looks like someone else is about to learn the hard way that Ethen doesn’t go away after catching some bullets.
Also can we just accept that some people aren’t fit for the justice thing and move on instead of bringing all this other stuff into it? I know there’s issues in the real world that this may or may not relate to, but this is just a story for us to enjoy.
Last edited 2 years ago by Kevin Greenbaum
PhobosRising
2 years ago
I second the Kool-aid Man, he makes a strong lead-endorsed argument.
Rolando
2 years ago
It’s a classic dilemma in real life. Fictions have been addressing it for a VERY long time. In comic books, for 50+ years I thinl. The Punisher first showed up in 1974, right?
It remains an interesting and dramatic point, one that brings people to debate (or just get triggered and rant irrationally).
Both sides have a point, when they don’t go off in biased tangents.
I look forward to seeing how Tim resolves this classic.
N-Wolfe
2 years ago
I read the dudes voice entirely in that same vein of hearing Frank Castle in my head. Methodical, almost terminator like Punisher vibes. What throws me off is how you have his eyes drawn. Like he’s tired or somber about the whole thing. Resigned to going through the Anti-Hero motions or maybe just tired of dealing with yet another optimistic young hero whose likely to get himself hurt defending this lot. Like there’s obvious sad brows/eyes.
Jon
2 years ago
theres a warrant out on him for assault?
Assault isn’t as bad a crime as murder. The system has failed us. Your still on the streets.
Doom
2 years ago
Isn’t Deathblood just a serial killer deciding whether people live or die based on his own personal biases?
It’s not that simple. There’s objectivity behind going for criminals who keep being criminals, and hurt/kill many, even after the system’s got them. That’s not personal bias.
His executions are quite illegal, of course. SPECIALLY if there’s no death penalty for the involved crimes in that city/state/etc.
You could go for the “Dark Knight” Dent argument, too. Who appointed Deathblood? The people did, by letting crime get to that point. I think it’s safe to assume, you don’t get a guy like Deathblood unless crime is through the roof.
Richard II Weatherfield
2 years ago
Deathblood is making the classic vigilante mistake of not realizing that the system, while not perfect, is still better than no system at all. If everyone resorted to street justice like he does, we’d have nothing but chaos on our hands.
You can’t prove an idea wrong, by claiming that an extreme version of that idea is wrong. That’s fallacious. Because that’s not what happens. It’s not even the same thing. Not even CLOSE. And it’s not what Deathblood proposes, even. No one’s even remotely considering your extreme “everyone resorted to street justice” idea. Deathblood just thinks SOME people should do what he does. So, he does it. Also, “no system at all.” Plain wrong. Deathblood clearly has a system. Get the people that he can be objectively sure, are guilty of big deals that hurt/kill many. The people the official… Read more »
We have to consider the results of allowing Deathblood, with his personal system, to operate. Such vigilantism isn’t compatible with a typical modern society, but it’s not even compatible with a proper anarchic society where justice comes from the community. Vigilantism of any sort is a symptom of a failed system such as this. Deathblood’s system is monstrous, though. He does not *know* he’s killing killers. He didn’t see Ethan die. All he seems to know for sure is that there’s a warrant for assault. He’s *convinced* that these people are responsible for many… wait, he doesn’t even claim that… Read more »
You seem to be assuming that I’m defending Deathblood’s position, and thus explain obvious stuff to me.
I was just pointing out basic flaws in Richard’s analysis. NOT the same as condoning Deathblood in any way.
I can understand why you arrive to that assumption. Way too many people, only ever know how to find flaws in something they oppose, and virtues in what they condone.
Bain
2 years ago
Love eithans face in the last panel. That was well drawn.
PhobosRising
2 years ago
Ah, Tim. You try to bring us entertainment, and instead induce flaming and division. Tip for everyone here: comic book politics or real world politics is unwelcome in any setting outside designated areas of places where people are willing to listen. We wander here for humor, not to hear what you heard on the news, or how many other comics you’ve retained. If we wanted to read those comics, we would be there, but we are here, appreciating Tim’s work. This is the nicest a complete stranger will tell you to calm down.
Rolando
2 years ago
If Deathblood actually has a solid code, as it seems… I highly doubt he’ll just treat Ethan like another criminal (or an obstacle) and gun him down, as so many of you are assuming.
If he cannot convince him to step aside, he’ll try incapacitate him. But I don’t think he’d ever intentionally kill an innocent person. Even if Ethan does try to stop him by force.
That is, since Deathblood clearly doesn’t know Ethan cannot stay dead.
random_npc
2 years ago
I am surprised someone named Deathblood has a well reasoned argument for his position. He’s taken the position that the system in place has in effect, already failed, so can not be relied upon to handle criminals. While that is indeed a thing that can happen, I don’t think that’s the case here. If he’d led cops to the hideout, they would one way or another be off the street for the rest of their lives, unless they had a bigger fish to turn on. There are a lot of things deeply wrong with the American justice system, but being… Read more »
Bethany
2 years ago
So here’s my question. Are we finding out that this is a Gotham type situation, where the whole system is basically in league with the criminal underground? Or is this closer to the kind of system failure we’re familiar with in real life, a mix of incompetence, cops high on their own power, bureaucratic labyrinths, and too many laws unevenly applied?
24
uh-oh…
I like this new guy.
He’s got well thought out and rational reasons. I doubt this will be as good as the Punisher vs Daredevil conversation about ethics from the Netflix, but I like this.
you know that was done in the comics before Netflix did it, right?
You know that not everyone discovers things at the same time, and new people should be welcomed instead of belittled?
They were not talking about the concept of talking about ethics. But rather about the performance. And if they mention the performance, they should mention the specific version. Which in this situation was Netflix. Nowhere in their post did they say that was better or worse than it was in the comic.
As we all know, any concept may only ever be done once and NEVER AGAIN.
yeah sure, who doesnt like cold blood murderer vigilante executing people withotu trial? Oh wait every civilized person hate that kind of punisher bullshit
People love the thought of a corrupt system being worked around and defeated. It’s a fun fantasy; but would absolutely suck in real life.
well, problem is: when system goes corrupt enough, street justice will take over …want it or not
Because street justice is always fair, right, and never harms innocent people.
Yeah, sure, ppl loves it bc it’s fiction, right? Nothing to do with real cops in real life with punisher shirts and stuff.
i mean, they killed ethan 3 times in this incident alone…
is that why you make snide remarks about the suspect getting sexually assaulted in prison every time there is a report about their arrest?
you say that yet no one has an issue with MURICANS having guns for “self defence”… you don’t stun people with fire arms.
most ppl with a brain have a problem with americans gun fetish tho
most americans have a problem with americans gun fetish.
Ya no, f these guys.
these ain’t some harmless kids selling a gram of weed, they already casually attempted to murder Ethan without batting a eye. They are a menace to society and should be put down.
civilized countries abolished death penalty long ago. Yeah, for some americans, it’s weird to think that murders and guns cant solve everything, but this is true.
Oh cool a new supervillain concept. “Mr Civil” he’ll gaslight the hell out of you and call you uncivilised savages if you try to resist the brainwashing.
Also he’s super xenophobic about other countries, for some reason.
ok troll
That’s pretty rich coming from the most abusive man in the thread.
And this guy DOESN’T KNOW THAT. He just says “Crime = Death Penalty.” His justification for why they need to die is “They have criminal records and some active warrants.” If that was grounds IRL for executions, you wouldn’t cheer.
Actually they straight killed him a bunch of times. Just because he spawns back I don’t think it’s to be considered “attempted” murder. 😉
Cheers
Well that raises an ethically relevant question: since Ethan respawns and experiences the full continuity one expects from being the same individual, is he in the instant before respawning technically “dead” or “alive”? If we assume he is the same person all the time to preserve the continuity of the individual having the same life, it’s at worst attempted murder. If we conclude that he is dead, it is murder, but then we’d also have to consider we’re not looking at the same person after every respawn. In the latter case, these guys have committed multiple homicides and we’d have… Read more »
Well, we have seen they have no doubts at the time to kill someone that just “find their hideouts”, you Ethan are lucky to be “respawnable” but about Lucas? Or if would have been another “low grade” hero?
If they have never been found guilty of murdering they should be very good hiding bodies…
Still, a court is what should be.
Of course, I had my time where I found the Punisher way of action the right one, or even the Judges (at least these one are judge, jury and executioners, so legally all is fine ?).
Anyway…capes fight!!
This also arises another ethical question: does it count as murder if you kill someone who can respawn? Does it make a difference whether you know they can respawn or not? Does it count as attempted murder?
It definitely makes a difference. Attempted murder sounds right in this case.
Well … it does gives new meaning to the term “serial killer”.
More like “analogue killer”, in this case.
I would argue that it IS murder, at least the first time. MPC (Model Penal Code) homicide is unlawfully causing the death of another human being, and it’s murder if done purposefully or knowingly. The fact that he did not stay dead is a happy coincidence, since they didn’t know he wouldn’t stay dead.
Don’t you need a body/corpse to charge someone with murder? Ethan doesn’t leave one behind.
Not a lawyer, but I seriously doubt it. Corpse disposal must happen all the time because it’s a smart way to clean up your crime scene, but if somebody witnessed the kill, you could still get got*.
*This scenario discounts the possibility of absolute bullshit court proceedings.
If he respawned, you’d have a reasonable ability to argue that you *knew* he couldn’t die (at least, if you had an even average lawyer).
Therefore, you’d be more likely to be charged with the regional equivalent of aggravated assault (likely to cause injury or death), or GBH, because those are the charges that CAN be proved by the prosecution “beyond reasonable doubt”, and therefore, result in a conviction.
Bingo.
Severity of crime is about intent. Lots of people don’t understand that, they think the law is like a videogame where you can go up to lines and not cross them.
That’s white collar crime!
Don’t think it’d work like that. Let’s say someone revives after being declared dead, which does happen occasionally. That wouldn’t allow the perp to be convicted of murder, because the victim is still alive.
I would say successful murder. Several times in fact. Respawning doesn’t make a difference in court. Ethan *dies* before he respawns. They didn’t know about his respawning ability, which adds an intent to kill. Though not premeditated they definitely killed him with intention.
That raises the real-life possibility of “clinically dead” people being “killed” multiple times. Seems to me like this should count as one extended attempted murder (and conspiracy to commit murder) with “the victim got better” being a mostly irrelevant mitigating factor.
I could see some confusion in the courtroom if the defendant was charged with three counts of murder on the same victim.
It basically hinges on establishing the degree of mens rea, ill intent. If the victim is, as far as you know, a regular person whom you could absolutely kill, then yes, it would absolutely count as murder since all three elements are met: intent to kill, the deed itself and the intended consequence (death, albeit temporary). If you are aware that the intended victim is capable of resurrection BUT it can be established that you acted in the hope of somehow preventing that from occurring (vorpal blade, silver bullets and whatnot) then it would be murder (if you succeed) or… Read more »
It shouldn’t. You still kill them. Ethan still suffers the pain of dying. And on a practical point, there is no law about resurrection, so if the man dies, you killed him, period. But legally you cannot killed a person twice, so every person killing Ethan could only be condemned for a killing.
Maybe not murder but multiple accounts of assault and battery, commission of a crime with a firearm, attempted murder, drug trafficking, racketeering, and a dozen more things, could be charged, but they will not be because Ethan isn’t going to file a report and the city isn’t going to find out about it otherwise.
I find it particularly curious that Deathblood gets to meet Analog of all people. It seems that he prefers to solve all problems with violence, and yet Ethan might just be the problem where this approach actually doesn’t work. I wonder if this encounter could change the big guy’s perspective a little. Not sure which direction, though…
That, or the other way around. ? Also, why do I have the feeling that Deathblood is going to simply break Ethan’s limbs and tossing him aside, mitigating his powers entirely? I don’t think Ethan could even make him budge based on his build and bulk. That, or Ethan realizes that self-preservation is the best form of honor and actually steps aside instead of making an enemy of a very scary hero. Or, plot twist? Could we be getting set up for Zeke to come back into the fold, jumping in to help Ethan? Would be interesting to see a… Read more »
Ethan in this version of the comic seems to hold a very strong moral code, almost ideologically naïve. Remember he taught Zeke beginning ethics, straight from his gut.
I doubt he’s going to step aside for someone to murder someone else extra judicially. Even if they would get the death penalty after being tried in court. Ethan believes in a system, in civilization, not in superheroes being ubermen and ruling over the people. Which is what deathblood’s ideology devolves into.
If I were in Ethan’s place I would have something like the “suicide-pill-in-the-tooth” in play, just for such scenarios where you could end up trapped by your power or incapacitated without triggering the respawn. If prior respawn rules apply (where clothes and other things all reset as well), then the suicide pill should also cleanly revert. It could even be used to fake “Instant regeneration” or “teleportation” as a way to throw opponents off the scent of the true nature of his power.
I hate when the bad guy makes a valid point.
good thing his point is absolutely not valid. Death penalty allready is stupid with a trial, but without it’s just murder.
His point is absolutely valid. The system is more interested in putting people away for most of their lives over recreational drug use, and protecting police who murder innocent black men, than it is about actual justice.
1st of all we know nothing about police, law and judges in this universe apart from what that Punisher-alike said.
2nd of all – why you feel the need to add a racial background to issue presented? Normally if someone has a corrupted morale I bet they don’t discriminate as much as you think, every obstacle is trash to them.
Just keep your eyes closed Soag, it’ll all be okay.
A good ol’ non-argument that only serves to insult, lovely.
I’m all for bringing dirty cops to justice, no matter what their victims look like.
and those cops love the punisher, so…
What? His point is that they have had a criminal record before and now they’re reoffending. Not that the system is focusing on “other things”
His “point” is that they didn’t lock them away for eternity for whatever crime they committed earlier. And now he thinks the apt punishment is the death penalty.
Who knows what Deathblood’s views are about racial injustice, but with this track record i wouldn’t be surprised if he murdered recreational drug users for funding criminals.
Most drug users are white, FYI. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2377408/
Reminder that the bad guys are the members of the gang who kidnapped Ethan and then killed him multiple times.
reminder that justice isnt about murdering ppl, even the bad guys. Unless you’re american, but let’s talk about civilized countries instead.
How is it a valid point? They have a criminal record, but that is all we know. The city might still look for them. This is the perfect opportunity to put them away for a long time. You can then also spent time on preventing it from happening in the future with these guys. Deathblood can also kill false positives this way, or people pressured to do things they don’t want to do. Simply killing people you don’t like ‘because they are bad people’ is how you get tyrants killing millions. Because where do you draw the line? Not to… Read more »
Deathbloods point is that the city apparently did already have them under arrest (at least) once already (they have a criminal record, not just wanted). And yet they got out (possibly simply after serving their sentence) again, and then went back to doing more crimes. Some perhaps not noticed (yet), others actually known (like Thomas being actively wanted again), and yet these guys are still out here, doing crimes with nobody stopping them. You can argue that simply murdering criminals isn’t a good solution either (and you’d probably be right), but Deathblood definitely has a point about the actual justice… Read more »
I understand that if people are repeat offenders you can change to a severe punishment. Just as you say, killing them without trial is an immediate extreme. I would argue that you need to try again. Not give up and grab a gun immediately after it fails the first time.
Oh, definitely. I’m not trying to argue Deathblood is actually right, just that he has a valid point regardless.
I think that if the justice system is broken that the way Deathblood is handling it is actually ineffective. He’s targeting a relative small amount within the city. If he really wants to fix the justice system he should go into politics. It is there he can make a change. There are a ton of real life examples and research studies that show how you can reduce people committing a crime again. Many justice systems just lock up as a punishment, after which they have little to no social life, less chance on a decent income and are probably quick… Read more »
I was expecting a chaotic neutral type super, but I’m happy to be wrong.
Is it too cliche if the new guy is Scott in an exoskeleton?
Interesting take.
I don’t think so, tho. This looks more like a character development moment than a whole new arc.
I’m going to say yes, it would be. It would also be rather weird. -Deathblood isn’t new, he’s been around for ages. (See comments two comics back for links to his previous mentions). For Scott to have been him all along doesn’t make much sense, both for him to be Deathblood while simultaneously being tech guy for Analog/D-Pad, or for Deathblood to work with two amateurs, even in disguise, -Bloody Gun Berserker doesn’t really seem Scott’s style. Even if he went exo-suit vigilante I’d expect something more, I don’t know, sophisticated? -Scott probably would’ve shown some recognition upon finding Ethan..… Read more »
For all the people saying the Murder Hobo has a point, I would like to point out that he’s saying “The system is incapable of solving the problem. I’m not” while being very clear that he sees the solution to the problem being “murder them”. He has not made a point because “murder them” isn’t what the system regards as the solution. What the system has failed at is rehabilitation, but just because it has failed, this doesn’t mean that murdering them is the solution. He has yet to make any sort of argument on why further attempts at rehabilitation… Read more »
Because their solution to someone stumbling over their operation was to well guess we had better just murder them. How many others have that been their solution for? Why do they deserve better than they felt like dishing out?
What they “deserve” isn’t justice, that’s vengeance (and vengeance leads to escalation, not public safety). Yet you’re right that they appear to be serial murderers, and that indicates that the proper justice system isn’t working (particularly since Mr Blood seems to be saying that they were incarcerated and set free). If so there may be no good solution. Deathblood is a murderer, and he doesn’t know that these targets are murderers. A society where it’s acceptable to murder someone because they have a warrant for assault, will collapse with or without superpowers. But if these guys keep getting away with… Read more »
That is not the point Ethan is arguing, he is arguing for due process, a trial where that question WILL be answered by the force of the law, attorneys, a judge, and citizen jurists.
Because society is better than them. Just because there is one evil person in the world doesn’t mean we should all be evil.
there are cases who cant be rehabilated, no matter how you wish, these gang members do show signs of that (absolutely no repentance, only repetition); as such street will do judgement, not goverment
I look at it more as a trolley problem. On one track you have the crooks who we know are willing to murder to protect their business(just because Ethan doesn’t stay dead doesn’t mean it’s not attempted murder) and have hurt other people. On the other track you have the crooks’ potential future victims. Which track do you send that trolley towards?
It’s not actually that simple though. Allowing vigilante justice against suspected murderers is dangerous to the innocent. We know these are murderers, but Deathblood does not.
The trolley problem has an obvious short-term solution but there are long-term effects too.
It IS a valid point, though. There may not be a human alive who is wise or all knowing enough to give The Right Answer, if one even exists for the question, but the question is valid: “At what point is the possibility of redemption and/or betterment of their character more important than the damage they have already caused intentionally and all future damage they may/will cause along the way as society attempts to rehabilitate them?” Even if you get the best possible solution and they never harm so much as a fly in the future after the one murder,… Read more »
No, it isn’t. “Rehabilitation does not work, therefor murder” is a non sequitur. Note that Deathblood isn’t asking the question, he’s providing the answer as he sees fit. The remainder of your questions all depend on the principal framework of the justice system; the ethics and perspectives on humanity. It’s easy to forget that criminals have human rights just as other humans do and that they do not lose these when they transgress. This is important, because having these rights means that they also cannot arbitrarily be violated by whomever executes justice in the land, and that goes for the… Read more »
I wonder if Ethan has a respawn limit and if there is an easy mode that will be enabled if he hits a certain amount of deaths in a single fight?…….
We may be about to find out.
We just might 😀
These criminals are not ‘dicks’ but cold-blooded murderers, and while they might be deserving a trial in a civilized country, I am with death blood on this one…
Analog vs Deathblood. This’ll be fun.
Stop doing the thing, Ethan. They killed you several times. They aren’t worth it.
well, he maybe doesnt like cold blood murders, even for murderers? like most justice systems in the world?
I mean… just forgetting they killed Analog a few times in cold blood… this is rather grand of him to forgive them so quickly. They certainly didnt give it a second thought of cold blooded murder.
But on the other hand, murdering murderes in cold blood. Still makes you a cold blooded murderer yourself…? So how is this Judge Dredd wannabe any better than them?
Any criminal justice system should aim to give due process. But at however you turn it, it needs to be better than the people it judges otherwise, whats the point?
As long as a murderer kills more than one murderer the number of murderers in the city still decreased!
Trying to equivocate “killing innocent people” and “killing people who killed innocent people” is disingenuous. Whether you think these acts are right or wrong, they are clearly not equivalent. Murdering an innocent person demonstrates a strong belief that murder is an acceptable solution to problems, to the point they would spill innocent blood for it, and they therefore have less room to logically argue against someone killing them in response. It could be said they opted into a “murder is okay” system by voluntarily committing murder first, and by choosing to do so they implicitly agreed to being killed by… Read more »
The difference with Judge Dredd is he’s lawfully authorised to judge and, only if necessary kill people in strict accordance with the law, has decades of legal training and, like any other Judge, can be investigated and sentenced to spend 20 years in a hellish penal colony if he breaks the (draconian) penal code and laws he’s sworn to uphold
Deathblood isn’t a lawful agent of his society’s system. In fact, by killing people without due process, he’s a spree killer working against the system
He’s not forgiving them. He’s defending their right to a fair trial under the system, and from a vigilante who wants to murder them for their crimes without said process. Big difference.
Just because he doesn’t want them summarily executed doesn’t mean he’s defending or forgiving their actions.
I wonder if DeathBlood makes a cool big brother?
You tell him, Matty!
(But he ain’t gonna listen.)
To be fair. They did kill Ethan 5 times within the span of like a couple minutes. So i would argue they are a bit worse than “kinda dicks”.
Still not green light to go murder-crazy, mind you! but yeah they aren’t a sympathetic bunch.
Yup. And that’s the entire reason we endeavor to have a fair legal system. It shouldn’t matter how much someone else likes you, the legal system should try to be as impartial as possible.
So when it does dish out punishment you can be sure they deserve it, and its not just one person vendettaing out their frustration on someone.
One thing I’ve always loved about Punisher is the escapist fantasy of having a simple, straightforward solution (violence) actually function as a one-size-fits-all solution. We live in a world where problems are complex and don’t have easy solutions. Where even the most well-intentioned and carefully-considered attempts to fix the big problems often backfire because there are just *that* many moving parts to every system. The idea of a world where you actually can just simplify things down to “shoot the bad guys in the face” is appealing to me. Obviously that approach will do exponentially more harm than good, as… Read more »
It’s part and parcel for superhero comics. As an example, Joker, whose career is measured in genocide streaks, would have been put in the ground a long time but he isn’t so Batman comics can still happen. Gotham PD is absolutely incompetent so Batman comics can still happen. In the real world, Marvel’s Superhero/Mutant Registration Act would have happened a long time and Forge’s Neutralizer would be standard kit for every SWAT team in the nation but, if that happened, Marvel comics couldn’t happen. And so on. As it stands, this encounter is a fairly standard one for comics. Unambiguously… Read more »
Deathblood sounds like the kind of guy that respects what Analog wants to accomplish but finds it to be naive.
Deathblood will likely just punch Analog into unconsciousness. No respawn, just nappy time.
Then bang bang time.
Deathblood has a point, but we should not agree with it completely, YET. Yes, people do terrible things and walk free or are let out early. Yes, it’s arguably fair and just to execute a murderer. Deathblood has a point and he MAY be 100% right (in as far as their guilt and some occasional systemic flaws). First off, the system isn’t always going to be wrong and fail. Justice can happen. I’m guessing that he thinks the system should give them the death penalty but it doesn’t in that state. Secondly, we don’t see the proof of many of… Read more »
I disagree completely with him. Why the fuck “yet”? no way vigilante justice and murder every be a good thing.
Meanwhile attempted murder how many times on analog?
Obviously they have no problem trying to kill people. To the sword I say.
you dont murders murderers. It just makes you a murderer too.
I don’t want to be that guy, but having a warrant for assault doesn’t mean you’re guilty of assault and assault is a very broad thing as far as the law goes.
Slapping someone is assault, getting gunned down for that isn’t quite justice.
This guy just happens also to be a drug trafficker who wants to also shoot people.
Ah the classic debate of ‘trust the system even when it lets violent offenders out to hurt more people’ vs ‘stop them from hurting anyone else ever again even if it means crossing a moral/ethical line’.
OPPORTUNITY ROLL !
one of the bandits might take advantage of the situation and land a bullet into Deathblood’s skull.
To be honest, I’m kind of on Team Deathblood for this one. We’ve already seen these people kill Ethan multiple times tonight without remorse, let alone the campaign they’ve had across the streets before. The fact that they’ve been brought in & let them walk free at least shows a bit of a likelihood that it’ll happen again, even with the evidence all around them. Deathblood’s solution is perhaps too much for the crimes they’ve committed, but if the options are truly that or put them in a spot where they’ll get away again…at least his solution is guaranteed effective… Read more »
I’ve always sympathized with the punisher types lol
(as long as I don’t get in their line of fire, but I don’t see how that’d happen anyway)
I wonder if there have been studies on “punisher-style vigilante ‘justice'” public approval percentages
I wonder if the % is trending up or down
since ppl are total morons (just look at elections) it probably is growing up. Doesnt mean it’s good.
“Or what? Stab me? Shoot me? Toss me through plate glass? Break my neck? That’s an ordinary Thursday for me. They’ll run out of ammo and so will you. Get the cops, they’ll have this open-and-shut, and then you can get back to shooting the next dipshit who thinks he can take you and I’ll get back to searching for my friend”
We all know Ethan won’t just step aside here. I just hope these thugs take his sacrifice of pain and uncertainty of finite lives to heart (not that they necessarily know any of that right now).
I do not bring mercy. I bring forgiveness. *Shoots them once each with gun named the same.
Apparently Ethan wasn’t joking when he said being shot in the back was “kind of” a dick move. It was point blank even, like how do you even determine that as “kind of”?
Looks like someone else is about to learn the hard way that Ethen doesn’t go away after catching some bullets.
Also can we just accept that some people aren’t fit for the justice thing and move on instead of bringing all this other stuff into it? I know there’s issues in the real world that this may or may not relate to, but this is just a story for us to enjoy.
I second the Kool-aid Man, he makes a strong lead-endorsed argument.
It’s a classic dilemma in real life. Fictions have been addressing it for a VERY long time. In comic books, for 50+ years I thinl. The Punisher first showed up in 1974, right?
It remains an interesting and dramatic point, one that brings people to debate (or just get triggered and rant irrationally).
Both sides have a point, when they don’t go off in biased tangents.
I look forward to seeing how Tim resolves this classic.
I read the dudes voice entirely in that same vein of hearing Frank Castle in my head. Methodical, almost terminator like Punisher vibes. What throws me off is how you have his eyes drawn. Like he’s tired or somber about the whole thing. Resigned to going through the Anti-Hero motions or maybe just tired of dealing with yet another optimistic young hero whose likely to get himself hurt defending this lot. Like there’s obvious sad brows/eyes.
theres a warrant out on him for assault?
Assault isn’t as bad a crime as murder. The system has failed us. Your still on the streets.
Isn’t Deathblood just a serial killer deciding whether people live or die based on his own personal biases?
It’s not that simple. There’s objectivity behind going for criminals who keep being criminals, and hurt/kill many, even after the system’s got them. That’s not personal bias.
His executions are quite illegal, of course. SPECIALLY if there’s no death penalty for the involved crimes in that city/state/etc.
You could go for the “Dark Knight” Dent argument, too. Who appointed Deathblood? The people did, by letting crime get to that point. I think it’s safe to assume, you don’t get a guy like Deathblood unless crime is through the roof.
Deathblood is making the classic vigilante mistake of not realizing that the system, while not perfect, is still better than no system at all. If everyone resorted to street justice like he does, we’d have nothing but chaos on our hands.
You can’t prove an idea wrong, by claiming that an extreme version of that idea is wrong. That’s fallacious. Because that’s not what happens. It’s not even the same thing. Not even CLOSE. And it’s not what Deathblood proposes, even. No one’s even remotely considering your extreme “everyone resorted to street justice” idea. Deathblood just thinks SOME people should do what he does. So, he does it. Also, “no system at all.” Plain wrong. Deathblood clearly has a system. Get the people that he can be objectively sure, are guilty of big deals that hurt/kill many. The people the official… Read more »
We have to consider the results of allowing Deathblood, with his personal system, to operate. Such vigilantism isn’t compatible with a typical modern society, but it’s not even compatible with a proper anarchic society where justice comes from the community. Vigilantism of any sort is a symptom of a failed system such as this. Deathblood’s system is monstrous, though. He does not *know* he’s killing killers. He didn’t see Ethan die. All he seems to know for sure is that there’s a warrant for assault. He’s *convinced* that these people are responsible for many… wait, he doesn’t even claim that… Read more »
You seem to be assuming that I’m defending Deathblood’s position, and thus explain obvious stuff to me.
I was just pointing out basic flaws in Richard’s analysis. NOT the same as condoning Deathblood in any way.
I can understand why you arrive to that assumption. Way too many people, only ever know how to find flaws in something they oppose, and virtues in what they condone.
Love eithans face in the last panel. That was well drawn.
Ah, Tim. You try to bring us entertainment, and instead induce flaming and division. Tip for everyone here: comic book politics or real world politics is unwelcome in any setting outside designated areas of places where people are willing to listen. We wander here for humor, not to hear what you heard on the news, or how many other comics you’ve retained. If we wanted to read those comics, we would be there, but we are here, appreciating Tim’s work. This is the nicest a complete stranger will tell you to calm down.
If Deathblood actually has a solid code, as it seems… I highly doubt he’ll just treat Ethan like another criminal (or an obstacle) and gun him down, as so many of you are assuming.
If he cannot convince him to step aside, he’ll try incapacitate him. But I don’t think he’d ever intentionally kill an innocent person. Even if Ethan does try to stop him by force.
That is, since Deathblood clearly doesn’t know Ethan cannot stay dead.
I am surprised someone named Deathblood has a well reasoned argument for his position. He’s taken the position that the system in place has in effect, already failed, so can not be relied upon to handle criminals. While that is indeed a thing that can happen, I don’t think that’s the case here. If he’d led cops to the hideout, they would one way or another be off the street for the rest of their lives, unless they had a bigger fish to turn on. There are a lot of things deeply wrong with the American justice system, but being… Read more »
So here’s my question. Are we finding out that this is a Gotham type situation, where the whole system is basically in league with the criminal underground? Or is this closer to the kind of system failure we’re familiar with in real life, a mix of incompetence, cops high on their own power, bureaucratic labyrinths, and too many laws unevenly applied?
Yeah I’m on team Deathblood here.