Batman's Dilemma

Batman seems on the surface to be exceedingly foolish, perpetually incarcerating homicidal maniacs who invariably go free and proceed to wreak havoc on yet more innocents. Yet, there is the claim that were he to simply kill them, he would be no better for in willingly taking their lives he simply becomes a murdere: very much like one of them.

The utilitarian argument of killing one to serve the needs of many does seem to provide a solution, albeit one that is somewhat disturbing in its implications. Genocide comes to mind. Despite this, there is a niggling doubt about Batman's actions, since his solution does not seem terribly good either.

This may be explained by his motivations, which are actually rather selfish. It does appear to be a case of wanting to push the guilt of killing over to the maniacs, whom he in turn repeatedly punishes. He clearly decided that indirectly killing others through inaction is not criminal in any way, even though he already knew from past experience that incarcerating them would only lead to the deaths of more innocents.

In Batman's case, it would actually be a clear cut case of people not worth saving. It is a case of possibly saving 1 person in exchange for the assured death of 100. It is no longer about saving 1 person, but sacrificing 100 to possibly save 1. In real life, such decisions are of course considerably harder to make, seeing as how the average person is generally not quite as predictable.