Comments by "King Orange" (@kingorange7739) on "Flashback FM" channel.

  1. 0:09 is so funny to me. Ra's is probably thinking in his mind, This guy just does not know when to quit.
    12
  2.  @ThoughtGaze  No it really isn't, saying they are equivalent is a matter of opinion, it is pointless to hold against him. Batman had a no kill rule and still followed it. No yes you could maybe say he cheated the rule a little bit but never down right broke it. Gordon and Ras himself put him in that position, Batman holding him down beforehand did not make a difference. It is not just as evil to refuse to save someone who was trying to commit genocide. That is like saying letting someone commit suicide is murder, no it isn't. Whether u consider it just as bad is irrelevant. Batman has no rule that says he has to save criminals when they put themselves in position of death.
    9
  3.  @ThoughtGaze  "what do you not understand? The rule is pointless if he is willing to do something just as evil." - except he did not, what part of this do u not get? Batman is under no obligation to got out of his way to save villains out of their own fault. That is not equal to murder. "Is that too complicated for you? That is not opinion that is sound logic." - No it isn't, it is literally by definition an opinion that they are equal actions. Which they aren't. Sure I think both are wrong but they are nowhere near equivalent to each other. ""Batman holding him down beforehand did not make a difference." And that's horse shit. He held him down for at least 13 seconds." - And? Ras no matter what was not going to be able to escape the train on his own regardless of how much time he had. So this is not relevant.
    9
  4.  @ThoughtGaze  "So you're judging that ras's life is not worth minimal effort because of the bad he's done. that's the whole point of the no kill rule. to not judge someone's life as unworthy just because of the bad they did. you really have not thought this through." - If you actually think that, then you fundamentally do not understand the no kill rule that multiple sources cover, Batman never made the no kill rule for others, he did it for himself for 2 reasons, the first was philosophy. He believed that if he actually killed someone it would make himself the same kind of person as the man that killed his parents. The second reason was fear, Batman feared that if he started the path of killing that it would corrupt him and make him go down the path of being an actual criminal. That it would not separate him from the men he was fighting. Batman through multiple sources even admits to the prospect of wanting to kill someone, such as when he confessed to Jason in Red Hood. Jason: "what, your moral code just won't allow for that? It's too hard to cross that line?" Batman: "No! God almighty, no. It would be too damn easy. All I ever wanted to do is kill him, a day doesn't go by where I don't think about subjecting him to every horrendous torture he has dealt on to others and then, end him. But if I do that. If I allow myself to go down that place, I'll never come back."
    9
  5.  @ThoughtGaze  That is a matter of opinion, but realistically you cannot be legally held for not saving someone. U don't have to save anyone, is it cold? Yes, but u cannot be arrested or held legally responsible. Whether you agree with it or not, it doesn't contradict Batman's rule. The first time in the trilogy it is actually broken is the death of Harvey which was part of the point for that movie. Ra's put himself in that situation, Gordon destroyed the bridge, at that point no action by Batman lead to Ra's death.
    8
  6. Phil Langlois not really
    3
  7. How did he commit manslaughter?
    3
  8. 4:18
    3
  9. 4:17
    3
  10. What? 😂
    2
  11. No he didn't
    2
  12. No it really isn’t
    2
  13. Arlind Mehmeti Them?
    2
  14. Every Villain Is Lemons arrghhhhhh
    2
  15. ?
    2
  16. No he didn't
    2
  17. No it isn't. Also criminal negligence is not killing or murder. Also Batman was not doing criminal negligence.
    2
  18. Not it isn't. Look up definitions. Since when is it equivalent? Should someone get the death penalty for not saving someone?
    2
  19. Batman in TDK only saved the Joker because he was the one who threw the Joker out of the building.
    2
  20. Batman in TDK only saved the Joker once at the end after throwing off a building himself.
    2
  21. No it really does not, Batman is not obligated to save the villains, he only saves Joker in TDK because he threw Joker off a building meaning he would of killed him
    2
  22.  @leafyishereisdumbnameakath4259  Except he didn't kill him.
    1
  23. Why does that sound familiar?
    1
  24.  @jacksanity7508  bs
    1