Batman has long been hailed as one of the greatest superheroes in comic book history, revered for his strict moral code and refusal to cross certain lines. At the core of this ethical stance is his famous 'No Kill Rule': a self-imposed restriction that prevents him from taking the life of even the most dangerous criminals in Gotham. However, the more I look into the reasons behind this rule, the more I believe that not only it’s completely unrealistic, but it’s logically inconsistent. It’s a thought so completely removed from good pragmatic sense that the villains seem to be the only ones intelligent enough to see through it. And it's so blindingly obvious that this is the writer's attempt to condemn the idea, that it's infuriating to see every single time.

And as a writer, I just want to shout it from the rooftops. This fucking rule is dumb as shit, I’m sick of seeing it, I’m sick of people defending it, I’m sick of new media not having the balls to call it out, and it’s time we shelve this idea as an idea that is no longer relevant.

Batman started his comic career as a direct rip-off of The Shadow! A character who had no qualms about eliminating villains permanently. In those early years, Batman would routinely use lethal force, dispatching criminals with brutal efficiency. However, the iconic character was rebranded to take advantage of the ‘child sidekick’ fad of the 40’s, and the use of guns had to go, hence the infamous ‘rule’. How convenient that the writers decided to come up with this literary rule 80 years ago, and they’re still compelled to follow it because there’s a mountain of merchandise aimed at children to protect. So already to me at least this rule is not a genuinely profound expression of morality, but more of a relic from a different era but hey we got to keep the character marketable to protect corporate interest.

But let's assume it wasn't… we carry on.

There have been numerous attempts to explain the rule, and one of the more recent retcons (Batman #124) retcons the rule into the one we know today; Batman, having witnessed the murders of his parents, had been traumatised and does not want to become like the man who cost him everything. This is apparently the real reason Batman insists even villains like the Joker will not die at his hands.

But here’s where I have a problem with the internal logic of Batman’s world. He is the product of a broken society where the law is ineffective. Gotham’s super-criminals are born from the same inadequate justice system that failed his parents. So if Batman operates above the law to deliver his version of justice, why isn’t he challenging the very foundation of Gotham’s legal system? The prison system in Gotham is a revolving door for criminals, a point that’s almost satirical at this stage. It has to be because, otherwise, how would we keep getting new stories? But if the justice system is so irreparably broken, why isn’t the focus of Batman's mission to reform the obviously corrupt and overwhelmed police force? Since this is happening in some fictional place in America, why hasn't the National Guard stepped in to enforce martial law?

I know the counterargument that will get brought up: Yes, Bruce Wayne uses his money “responsibly” by donating money to public infrastructure, but there are some problems money can't fix. In the same way that treating psychotic, unrepentant villains as similarly deserving victims has - never - worked. There’s no reward saying there’s a pot of gold or cure for cancer for not killing off the cringy clown. So what’s the point of adhering to this 'No Kill Rule' when the end result is invariably more innocent people dying, some of which happen to be amongst his own family? It’s like watching a house burn down, going out and buying some watering cans and a hose, but refusing to use the water because the fire might have a tragic backstory.

Maybe this idiocy is easy for me to see because there's definitely parallels from this work of fiction and the real world. The justice system especially the UK is seen as effete, anaemic and wimpy; a far cry from what it used to be, ridiculed for how irredeemably shit it is. Treating career criminals with kid gloves and prioritising rehabilitation programs over long-term punishment is something that should belong in a comic, yet it doesn’t. If this adherence to this farcical ideology is prolonging the suffering of the people in my country, then it’s only natural to expect the same of the fictional people of Gotham. Outside of pounding skulls in, Batman’s moral stance is essentially the same as the hyper-morally driven police in the western world: prioritising the rights of criminals and their ‘potential’ over the safety of everyone else.

All you're left with is a hollow, self-righteous stance, the kind you’d expect from libertarian idiots who believe that somehow not taking ultimate responsibility will magically fix everything.

And it’s because this ideology is so unstable that it makes the rest of the problems impossible to ignore. How many times have we seen a cringy “MY PARENTS ARE DEAD” moment in the comics, the movies, the games and so on. It’s so emasculating for a trained, musclebound and fearsome creature of the night to break down into a blubbering mess every time he’s confronted with that trauma. Why is the batmobile portrayed as a hybrid between a nuclear-powered supercar and an APC, and why is it firing non-lethal rockets and non-lethally running over thugs and breaking their skulls on the non-lethal pavement? Why do some stories involve a mentally deranged psychopath like Red Hood pointing out the flaws of the no-kill rule to the other mentally deranged psychopath? Why is the counter-argument always “nuh-uh, there’s always a way to not kill”, while conveniently ignoring the umpteen gorillion deaths that have already been indirectly caused by him? Why is the character flanderized to the point where he can’t even SEE the dead bodies and not take responsibility, or even empathise with the victim possibly leaving behind a small defenceless child like him. Is it nobility or cowardice that keeps Batman from doing what must be done? And even after the bodies are cold, why does he not think it’s time for introspection and re-evaluation of his entire belief system?

It’s this kind of backwards logic that inspired me to create the Fallen Swords universe in the first place. Now more than ever, the world needs more heroes like The Shadow, and less heroes like Batman who are beyond culturally irrelevant. Heroic characters that are less rooted in stringent moralist nonsense and bound by a strong ethical code that allows adaptive freedom. I want to make characters who aren't afraid to dish out brutal justice to those that need a stiff kick up the arse, good or bad. Someone who tells it like it is, who isn’t afraid to show his face, who doesn’t care about the consequences.

Heroes that don’t mind showing you their big dick energy, instead of their stupid tiny balls.

*Phew* rant over. I seriously needed that off my chest.