if youre gunna have him kill him dont make it an accident how lame...im wondering..does the new 52 include damian? not read it yet..

Should Batman have killed the Joker ? Well, not in the comic book world but in the real world I would.

It's a great question. In my opinion YES Batman should have killed The Joker for the simple fact that the way the whole arc was built up they did such a good job of making it seem like this was finally going to be the time The Joker went to far and then we end it like that? I was disappointed because even with this end we all know Joker is alive and at some point will come back again, but I really thought that killing the Joker would have been the perfect exclamation point to end this incredible arc.

People seem to think batman holds himself above the law. He believes in justice and the legal system. His goal is to bring criminals to justice, not exact his version of penalties like the Punisher. He is the best swat team/police detective in the world not juror/lawyer/judge. The traditional vigilante is one who takes justice into their own hands and punishes criminals without regard to the laws chosen by the people. Batman may use extreme measures to prevent the deaths the police couldn’t prevent but stops once the criminal is in the hands of the people. Basically, he’s a bounty hunter who wants to prevent deaths not collect money.

Also, the jokers kills are on the people of gotham’s heads not Batman’s. Arkham isn’t a prison he owns and runs, it’s the city’s. Batman knows he doesn’t have the right to tell gotham what to do with incapacitated criminals. To use a sentiment from the dark knight movie/long Halloween he BELIEVES in Gotham. He believes the people have a right to decide the fate of the criminals threatening them. If the citizens voted to allow capital punishment for the insane he wouldn’t break into the prison and save joker. It would be what Gotham wanted and so justice would be served.

I hated the ending of Batman 17, and then today to read the Red Hood 'Aftermath' I hate it even more. Alfred doesn't even have a scar from being BEATEN IN THE FACE WITH A WRENCH BY A PSYCHOPATH! The whole 'Death of the Family' arc turned out to be worse than 'it was all a dream' ending. I don't want Batman to kill the Joker, beat the bejesus outta him SURE but if a story-arc says Death, I'm expecting death and not a metaphorical wedge between heroes (which according to @G-Man opinion is death...sorry dude, you WRONG!)

Could I have written better? Sure why not, I'll step up and give it a crack...but DC hired Scott Snyder not me. I would at least have someone DIE or correctly label my story arcs. I have told Scott Snyder via twitter most of this, he is yet to respond...and probably won't because he's busy and in no way, shape or form has to answer to me. He wrote HIS story, he liked it, DC liked it enough to print it.

I hated it!

I really don't care if the Joker is dead or not. I've seen too much of him and I don't care anymore. I like the AA/AC and BTAS Hamil Joker, that I care for because of the preformance. Sure, if Batman killed him, his honourable code is broken. However, the death rule does not apply to every villain after Joker. Riddler, does'nt kill, nor Condiment King, Killer Moth ,hardly anyone dies a result of Bat villains except Jokesy, Penguin, the serial killers(zszaz, ventriloquist, dollmaker) but their appearances are too few. Batman is no Punisher, Azrael or "corporate" assassin, I'd bet he'd let Joker go as his only kill as its necessary, he is the root of all misery and woe in gotham , the eteral butcher who nobody questions. Lots of noble characters have killed off their arch nemesises, Cap did it , Wolverine, Daredevil, Superman( he killed Doomsday did'nt he?). Oh, and Wonder Woman killed Max Lord(none of these guys killed ever since, just apply that to Batman as well and it would turn out peachy). What Happend to these guys? Oh yeah, they pulled themselves out the gutter and they became greater symbols/ charaters. Batman needs this, he's a dinosaur in the way that he's been unshakable, a descent man for an indescent time, all the time and it does'nt work. I'd say the Joker's death is forgivable, understanable and damned right essential if Batman is to achieve higher class of characterisation. So far though, he's been put through his pacies, weathering through event to event, lets hope the next one surprises us.

No he shouldn't he is like Moriarty to his Sherlock and this thing has been done and tried before.As well kind of disappointed to the end of death of the family wanted something to happen to the bat friends

Yes.

I shouldn't read this cause I haven't read batman 17 yet

@Mia26 said:

Should Batman have killed the Joker ? Well, not in the comic book world but in the real world I would.

This.

He should be finished off, killed, deleted, terminated... it just gets boring with Joker, and he pisses me off :D he kills and kills and kills and laughs and kills and no one sets any end to it. And then what, in a few months he will come back with a similar psychotic storyline *yawn* Just finish it and bring something new!

I could write a whole blog about this.......

@Stronger said:

I could write a whole blog about this.......

Please do, look forward to reading what you've got to say

Batman once said that if he started killing he wouldn't be able to stop

@Stronger: Honestly, I think one could write a Master's thesis on this.

There's a lot to be dug out of that one little question...

@nikh98 said:

Batman once said that if he started killing he wouldn't be able to stop

When? Where? Really?

Batman: Under the Hood in 2005 when Jason holds Joker hostage and Batman explains how he thinks about torturing the Joker but if he did he wouldn't be able to stop.

@Vitaeleous said:

@Stronger: Honestly, I think one could write a Master's thesis on this.

There's a lot to be dug out of that one little question...

Correct.

We share the same opinion.

Batman is a bigger villain than the Joker for not killing him.

It's funny...in Batman Begins he let Ra's die, meaning he didn't go out of his way to save him (not to mention Bruce burned down Ra's' house likely killing some of his ninja buddies). But in Batman #17 he goes out of his way and saves the Joker -- the worst psychotic around -- from falling off a cliff in which he stumbled off of? Just weird.

NO.

Also if you just want to see Batman get rid of the joker for good go read The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller.

I found the reason the Joker cannot die/keeps returning!

Can we please get a Joker skin face Halloween mask this year?

yes x1000

I have to agree with Scott here. You can tell throughout this arc, reaching a climax in Batman #17, that Bruce is weighing his principles against killing Joker. In the end he decides he can't betray his principles or give Joker the satisfaction of being his one exception, saving him from going over the cliffs.

Yet he knows Joker is a lost cause. This relationship will not result in a reformed Joker. This arc showed that Joker could only ever get more violent. He would go ever bigger in his attempts to get Bruce to break that one rule. So Bruce had make Joker quit. He had to spoil the fun. Giving the Joker an identity, a reality, a history, would have destroyed him. Rather than letting the Bat redefine him, Joker upended the metaphorical table and quit the game.

So Bruce was able to bluff, stare down the Joker and make the Joker blink. This is the way the arc had to end. Batman can never surrender to the forces of chaos. It would be better for everything he loved to be mutilated beyond recognition than to allow the Joker to redefine his core identity. Joker was mistaken to think that Bats loved him. What he thought was the Bat's love of the Joker was actually Bruce's love of the Batman and everything it stands for.

The Batman is the invincible, incorruptible symbol that Bruce created in response to the madness that destroyed his life. His trials will cause him to question his principles, but to fail them would be a personal tragedy surpassing the death of his parents. Bruce survived the chance encounter that led to the death of his parents. He could never survive willfully submitting to that kind of madness himself.

@nikh98 said:

Batman once said that if he started killing he wouldn't be able to stop

This is the reoccurring comment I don't understand; when was that said? I believe you, I'm just curious. I haven't read EVERY page of this thread but I feel like the only person who really liked the way it was done AND would have still liked it if he HAD killed the Joker, because either way I think Snyder would have been able to pull it off. My whole thing is, IF he had killed the Joker...this is Batman we're talking about, he has more self control than anybody, if he finally said "Ok, killing him won't undo anything that's been done, but it WILL put an end to any more that will happen later, so this is it," he wouldn't just go all kill-happy with everybody else because nobody else is as crazy and has caused as many deaths as the Joker. I feel it's well within his logic to say, "just once, i feel it's necessary." But like I said I was prepared to enjoy either scenario and I'm happy the way it turned out.

Even if we ssume that Gotham is a magically sentient city that will somehow "punish" Batman for killing Joker(why the hell Magic Sentient Gotham never punishes Joker for mass-slaughtering thousands of it's other inhabitants we'll never know), that is comicbook logic. Batman is not Deadpool, and thus remains blissfully ignorant of the chance that comicbook writers may give him an even worse villain in direct response to his killing of Joker. Or just flippantly bring Joker back from the dead laer.

So we come back to silly notion that Batman is allowing Joker's ongoing atrocities against the citizens of Gotham City for no other reason than to deny Joker a symbolic victory.

I'm sure the widows and orphans Joker creates on a nightly basis will take great comfort in knowing that though their loved ones may be gone from their arms forever, but at least Joker didn't win symbollicaly. That knowledge will surely be of equally great comfort to whoever he tortures, maims, and kills tomorrow. Take heart, hapless victim. Your torture, terror, pain, and grisly demise are a small price to pay for the satisfaction of denying Joker his afterlife bragging rights.

This, more than anything else, is the reason I can't enjoy Batman comics anymore. Batman is every bit as responsible for Joker's victims as Joker himself is at this point.

What I hated about this issue is that your left wondering...

WHY DID JOKER LET HIS FACE CUT OFF?!?!?!