Frank and Bruce: Morality Issues

The world as we know it is corrupt. I just recently read a vews paper article with 7 guys attacking two guys with a machete. That's 7 on 2. Now Frank Castle and Bruce are herein the real world. The still have their comic book physique, they still evade the cops, but they are set loose on the "real world". Who is better suited to handle our problems with crime? The get the same jobber aura, the same backing, skills etc. Real world laws of physics dont apply to them. However they are in the real world. Who would you rather it be?

I say screw both those losers and call in Judge Dredd.

Is Bruce retaining his wealth or does he not have it? Just wanted to check before I made a decision.

Batman. He has a larger area and range of influence. He might primarily do his business in Gotham, but he also gets involved regularly in international and interplanetary affairs. Frank, despite only being behind Apocalypse and Sinestro in my favorite characters list, pretty much only shoots people in the boroughs.

Originally posted by MF DELPH
Batman. He has a larger area and range of influence. He might primarily do his business in Gotham, but he also gets involved regularly in international and interplanetary affairs. Frank, despite only being behind Apocalypse and Sinestro in my favorite characters list, pretty much only shoots people in the boroughs.

This. Frank is small time, relative to Batman.

Yes, he has more permanent solutions to the problem, but its not as if he's cleaned NYC up.

I was going to say Punisher for the permanent solution but then thought about it.
The world is corrupted but it's not corrupted the way it's shown in comics. I doubt you'll find many warehouses full of armed mobsters who are plotting to take over the city for Frank to bust in and plug them full of holes. Batman is better suited to solve real cases, find serial killers etc and those are the bigger problem than organized crime.

Frank would just be gunning down people in the street so it would be the Ferguson mess only a thousand times as worse

Batman. Besides everything that has already been said in deference to him (which I agree with), there's also the impact on the general populace. Punisher's methods would basically label him as a domestic terrorist immediately. Batman has the potential to inspire.

Originally posted by One_Angry_Scot
Is Bruce retaining his wealth or does he not have it? Just wanted to check before I made a decision.

He retains everything and neither can get caught. They are essentially comic characters irl without rl applications. So bullet dodging, damage soak, law evasion remains the same

Originally posted by Sin I AM
He retains everything and neither can get caught. They are essentially comic characters irl without rl applications. So bullet dodging, damage soak, law evasion remains the same

With Bruce retaining everything I think he wins here overall, he has access to some crazy gadgets. Not combined with his wealth which he could use to hire PMC's to carry out his plans and nobody would be the wiser.

Bruce could pull the strings behind the scenes and cause so much chaos.

I think he takes this one.

Also, assuming he still has his business acumen, Bruce could become a rl multi billionaire in a relatively short span of time and then become President. He'd be like Batman and Frank Underwood rolled up into one.

Originally posted by MF DELPH
Also, assuming he still has his business acumen, Bruce could become a rl multi billionaire in a relatively short span of time and then become President. He'd be like Batman and Frank Underwood rolled up into one.

But he'd be perpetuating the cycle. I had this argument earlier on fb with a friend. I personally think Frank would solve more "problems" like repeat offenders and guys who seriously really just deserve to die. Bruce can beat em up, he can strike fear. But these guys will rebound they'd kill again. They'd rob again. Frank would end it. Judge, jury, executioner.

Originally posted by Sin I AM
But he'd be perpetuating the cycle. I had this argument earlier on fb with a friend. I personally think Frank would solve more "problems" like repeat offenders and guys who seriously really just deserve to die. Bruce can beat em up, he can strike fear. But these guys will rebound they'd kill again. They'd rob again. Frank would end it. Judge, jury, executioner.

Problem is Frank is more likely to get jailed quickly vigilantes in our world on his extreme level would be apprehended almost straight away.

Whereas Bruce could sit back and watch the world burn.

Originally posted by One_Angry_Scot
Problem is Frank is more likely to get jailed quickly vigilantes in our world on his extreme level would be apprehended almost straight away.

Whereas Bruce could sit back and watch the world burn.

Yea but that's the stip. Neither are impeded by the law. They both have free reign. Nor does age, injuries, hold them back. They are essentially comic characters pulled straight out of the page and in the real world.

Originally posted by Sin I AM
Yea but that's the stip. Neither are impeded by the law. They both have free reign. Nor does age, injuries, hold them back. They are essentially comic characters pulled straight out of the page and in the real world.

Ah okay fairplay. Hmm this is a tough one you know.

I think it's more of a Punisher can and will straight away cause more trouble but Bruce will cause more over a longer period of time.

Good thread idea, quite tough options to pick.

Originally posted by Sin I AM
But he'd be perpetuating the cycle. I had this argument earlier on fb with a friend. I personally think Frank would solve more "problems" like repeat offenders and guys who seriously really just deserve to die. Bruce can beat em up, he can strike fear. But these guys will rebound they'd kill again. They'd rob again. Frank would end it. Judge, jury, executioner.

This is actually why I'd choose Batman. Frank's methods would never make significant change. There's always going to be another body. Batman's methods (generally) are more compassionate. They speak more to the part of us that wants to do right than they do to the part of us that wants to punish wrong.

Neither character is blessed with any kind of objective high-ground that they can justify their actions with. Batman (generally) is the only one of the two that seems to realize this.

Originally posted by SamZED
I was going to say Punisher for the permanent solution but then thought about it.
The world is corrupted but it's not corrupted the way it's shown in comics. I doubt you'll find many warehouses full of armed mobsters who are plotting to take over the city for Frank to bust in and plug them full of holes. Batman is better suited to solve real cases, find serial killers etc and those are the bigger problem than organized crime.

Batmans better for tackling organized crime, too. If only it was as simple as a shootout in some warehouse, with an easily identifiable kingpin at the top to beat down/assassinate to bring it all crashing down

Excellent thread Sin! 👆

Large scale impact...Batman.

Small scale, local, impact...Frank.

Batman's sphere of influence is just so much greater being a multibillionaire and a potentially extremely powerful political figure...

But like you said, Franks solution to problems would be permanent, but he simply cant reach out as far as Bruce can...

I'm picking Batman...

Originally posted by GroggyGrunt
This is actually why I'd choose Batman. Frank's methods would never make significant change. There's always going to be another body. Batman's methods (generally) are more compassionate. They speak more to the part of us that wants to do right than they do to the part of us that wants to punish wrong.

Neither character is blessed with any kind of objective high-ground that they can justify their actions with. Batman (generally) is the only one of the two that seems to realize this.

Maybe im a little bit more conservative with my views in relation to the law. The justice system is a revolving door. You can literally get away with murder od you have the right lawyer on your side. Batman can't prevent this. I dont even think in a real world scenario he'd even be able to inflict much damage.

Originally posted by MF DELPH
Batman. He has a larger area and range of influence. He might primarily do his business in Gotham, but he also gets involved regularly in international and interplanetary affairs. Frank, despite only being behind Apocalypse and Sinestro in my favorite characters list, pretty much only shoots people in the boroughs.

I think that's really an oversimplification. In fact I correct myself that's not eve true.

EDIT: Actually what do you mean exactly? He only kills thugs or just people in NYC? Either one and it's still an oversimplification, not sure if I'd say it's untrue depending on what you mean.