What Earth based villains are so irredeemable that killing them would be justified?
Condiment King. I’ve seen him put ketchup on eggs. That’s just wrong.
I mean, that isn’t really our choice to make. I see the Joker as irredeemable, but am I going to go out and end his life. No. He may be a murderer, but it is not the job of the common man to end the life of a criminal. Now if it means saving another human being, who he is about to kill, then yes you may do so. But it isn’t up to us to decide whether someone deserves death.
I would be justified in killing Mad Hatter if it meant I never had to hear “Jabberwocky” again. LEARN ANOTHER POEM.
Behemoth.Ravenlord, you’re a good person, I’d kill the Joker ten times over, LOL.
Gorilla Boss. We already have Grodd, Monsieur Mallah, Ultra-Humanite, and Titano. We don’t need a fifth evil gorilla.
2005: Max Lord (thank you Diana).
I agree with question, Condiment King. Anyone with that much mustard doesn’t deserve life.
Real answer: Nobody. Killing isn’t the answer.
Why kill them when you can throw a boomerang at them?
I dapple in the occasional scrambled eggs with ketchup! And in the scope of the DCU, I guess it depends on who you’re asking is justified - the common person, and we’re talking the death penalty or one of us just heading out with a gun? Or the heroes? If I’m being truly honest about the latter, if I lived in the DCU, I guarantee I’d be relieved if the heroes off’d any of the characters who repeatedly broke out and attempted the mass murder of a city.
If you kill the villain, we will have to throw you out of the Legion.
I think there’s a predicate question of who’s doing the killing. Are we talking a self-defense killing, a formal execution after a fair trial, a revenge killing, or just a “hero” hunting them down and taking them out on a vigilante basis? I think it does make a difference, and is possibly more significant than how “irredeemable” the victim is.
But assuming we’re ignoring ethical legitimacy and just looking for the villain subject to the strongest moral condemnation, then I’m going with Cheshire.
That is up to the court system to determine. That is why it exists.
I have argued that while Gotham Central is a good book and idea. I’d love to see a Gotham Courts book. How does the Joker always end up in Arkham instead of Supermax? What is the sentence for Poison Ivy? Do elements of her eco-terrorism resonate with a jury or at least some jurors. How do the prosecution and defense approach that case?
If there was going to be one, it would be condiment king. Ketchup is an abomination. Mustard is the only acceptable condiment. Mayo should only be used sparingly and then only as a binder for something like tuna or chicken salad.
My family’s from Pittsburgh; we put ketchup on everything and it’s awesome, I don’t care what the haters think.
Tell it to the judge!
Doomsday. Maybe not kill him, but at least take him to the end of existence and leave him there. The creature lives only to destroy and is beyond capable of intergalactic genocide.
Other than that, the only time murdering a villian is justified is in self defense or direct defense of others or mixing the wrong condiments with the wrong foods. Killing say, the Joker because “he’s just going to do it again” would still be murder. Smashing him in the head with a heavy rock because he’s actively stabbing you would be justified.
BatJamags! Only Heinz ketchup in Da Burgh! You might get killed for using “Hunt’s” Dahntahn. I’m from Uniontown
“Heinz ketchup” is redundant; if it’s not Heinz, it’s not ketchup.