Batman and Joker have had a long ongoing history of violence and destruction. There has been a debate on whether or not Batman should kill the Joker. If the Joker dies so many innocent lives would be saved. However, this goes against Batman’s no killing policy. Batman should not kill the Joker, however the government should find a way to stop criminals. Commissioner Gordon should have the Joker executed.
The Joker kills numerous amounts of innocent civilians for no reason, and it is possible for all of the killing to be stopped. One philosophical belief is that of utilitarianism. It believes in thinking about the many lives that would be saved for only the one life lost (White). Innocent lives in the whole city of Gotham would be saved with the death of the Joker, this is why it is important for him to be stopped. If he is not stopped, the Joker will continue to kill “over and over and over again; children and women, heroes and civilians” (Davis). The Joker is capable of killing anyone and can eventually destroy the city if he is not defeated. Therefore, countless of lives would be saved if only the one death of an insane murderer occurred. Batman has an …show more content…
Some may say if the Joker is eliminated there will always be more to take his place. However, not one criminal is as psychotic as the Joker and can be maintained in prison. “The execution of a mass murderer as morally imperative -- or even morally permissible” (Davis). It is important to understand that some people could not be saved because issues with criminals happen today, and killing only one person legally could save many innocent lives. Some criminals just can not leave their state of mind that killing is okay. When this happens the death penalty could come into effect if it saves innocent lives. Killing should be the last result, but sometimes it is