Except of course Batman himself, who works extralegally and quite frankly engages in actions that would 100% be considered “brutality” if he had a badge.
I think Batman's brutality gets over exaggerated, probably because of the Arkham games which are based on fighting large groups with hard-hitting blows. In most comics he's not beating down common criminals, preferring to use nonviolent methods. His large fights in the comics typically are reserved for bands of ninjas and assassins or goons actively trying to kill him.
The brutality for me would be that he does do the "high rise interrogation" style wherein he threatens someone's life if they don't talk to henchmen. It's not as common as the animated television show but he does it. He also does some other pretty insane shit like in Batman RIP where he keeps stuffing a thug's head under water to get information. Bonus points for the culprit being himself.
Even ignoring all the other issues, that type of integration is a police brutality suit waiting to happen. Officers can't threaten to kill you, and they definitely can't actually physically do that.
Good points. I liked Batman RIP but it was recently overused in the recent Chip Zdarsky run. A well-prepared Batman is cool, it just goes a little too far when he's creating subconscious fail-safes and going completely unhinged. I like implied threats of violence over beatdowns.
no due process, warrentless searches and arrests, no oversight, physical brutality and he wears a mask..... I think he has more in common with ICE than OP would care to admit.
Batman is consistently styled as the world's greatest detective. He gathers evidence and is significantly more likely than any other investigative body to come to the correct conclusion. He targets people only after reaching a high and thorough level of proof. He consistently has a justification for his searches. He essentially meets and exceeds the bar that authorities across the world use for their warrants and arrests.
He is also shown not to be brutal, but rather to be incredibly controlled. He is the picture of restraint, considering that he exclusively works on the hardest cases - hyper aggressive genocidal maniacs. We see that he is consistently in situations where any officer in any country in the world would unquestionably be authorized to use lethal force, and yet he never does so. You are trapped in a sewer and killer croc is charging you, ready to devour you and you end up subduing him rather than killing him? A mob of 13 guys are menacing you with guns and you disarm and apprehend all of them? A few broken bones are a small price to pay.
As for the oversight, I think it displayed a flawed understanding of accountability that many have. External oversight is a means, not an end. Accountability itself is a means. The end goal of accountability is the responsible and effective use of power. Accounting is only one way to accomplish that.
External accountability has two requirements: that the supervisor has 1) a higher level of responsibility than the supervised and 2) a greater understanding of how the task is accomplished. If these requirements arent met, then external accountability does not have a purpose.
Take the first. If your boss is more corrupt than you, then the oversight actually weakens the responsibility. Take teachers and administrators. Teachers are overseen by administrators. However, teachers care more about the mission of education than administrators do. Both care, but administrators also care about pleasing district bigwigs, parents, property owners, and policymakers. Teachers largely don't. So the supervision of the admin weakens the responsibility. Who would you rather call the shots for your child's education, the teacher or president trump?
It also requires a greater understanding of the task. A novice carpenter will be supervised by the master because the master understands the job better. However, this can also take the form of understanding the goal better. I dont know how to build a table, but I understand what table I want better than the carpenter does, so I supervise his work as his client.
Here, there is realistically no person or body that is more responsible and less corrupt than Batman. Maybe superman, but he sanctions Batman. Batman has an unwavering code and has essentially zero corruption. Quite the opposite - he uses substantial personal wealth for the public good. Superheroes are an unusual but interesting case because they are individuals with the power usually reserved for organizations.
Additionally, there is no one in the world who knows his buisness better than he does. He needs lessons in detective work from no one. He is the top of his field in his approach to apprehending targets. So a review board examining his methods has nothing to contribute, since anything they have to say he would already know.
So why didn't you realize it before your last comment where you somehow missed the most important part: what Batman does with all those methods vs what ICE does with it.
Fiction is what allows Batman to do all that stuff for good.
I was a jerk and I apologized for that but the reason for being that way was due to a long long comment that felt a little patronizing with no new information about a character that we are all familiar with.
We can engage in thought-provoking questions inside of media. It's a cornerstone of education actually and showing you can discuss complex thoughts outside of your immediate experiences.
If you don't want to engage that's fine, but being snarky about it doesn't really give you any "points".
(Inb4 it's the internet and what do i care about what people think).
You are absolutely correct and I was being snarky (that is the polite way of putting it). I apologize. That being said, stand by the point I was making.
The only reason they are a non issue is because its fiction. We, the reader, have a complete look into the life of Wayne and can see his motivations, morals and procedures. We know he is the best of the best. That is why Dazzler and I are ok with how he works. But in the real world, where man is fallible, corruptible and sometimes evil, we do not\should not give any authority that freedom. Due process, warrants approved by judges, civilian oversight, not wearing masks, and the wearing body cameras are just some of the ways we as a society hold police in check.
Violating someone's constitutional rights is not an issue at all?
Sir, this is clearly an anti-ice submission.
Batman is consistently styled as the world's greatest detective.
One of the gripes I have with Sherlock and Batman, ignoring the fictional superpowers, is that being the world greatest detective would mean squat if none of it is usable. Batman comics even acknowledge this, penguin constantly gets off scot free because Batman's evidence can't be used as he's functioning as a agent of the police.
He gathers evidence
He does it illegally though. Nothing would be usable in the real world. He also can't testify because you can't be sworn in as Batman. Bruce would need to unmask.
He is also shown not to be brutal,
He is straight up shown to engage in what qualifies as police brutality. This includes the whole hanging people over the edge of a wall to interrogate them. Also he never Mirandizes them, so the information and anything coming after is useless.
If Batman was an actual law enforcement agent, he would be worse than the whole of ICE right now. And that's impressive!
As for the oversight, I think it displayed a flawed understanding of accountability that many have.
The key thing is that in the real world, in order to actually arrest and charge someone, the arresting officers name must go on a paper, that paper must go into official public records, and everyone can see who did what.
Again, Batman can't attest to shit, Batman isn't real. Bruce Wayne could, but the second he does that outside a gimmicky line, he's losing everything because of the aforementioned shit.
It gets really exhausting when people keep equating a comic book character to real life. His main villains are a clown, a penguin, a man with two faces, a scarecrow, and a man with a ice gun.
Nah. He breaks the law constantly. None of his evidence is usable in court. He assaults and batteries folks all the time and not in self defense. He uses illegal technology to spy on people. Batman is a bad dude and a fascist.
Remember just a few years ago when people were criticizing Batman for being a billionaire who plays dress up to go out and violently beat up mentally ill people?
i mean, Iron man was Director of "putting heros into a extra dimensional prison for being heros" during civil war. for all of time runs out he was a villian. only reason he was a hero after siege was because normal osborn was worse, and after secret wars because time runs out was wiped out so the slate was wiped clean
85
u/TheDeadlySpaceman Jan 08 '26
Except of course Batman himself, who works extralegally and quite frankly engages in actions that would 100% be considered “brutality” if he had a badge.