Would Captain America be more interesting if he had a "no-kill" rule like Batman?

It wouldn’t make any sense he’s a soldier

It would make his job 100% more difficult, but it would be an interesting take if they did it in an alternate universe. Kind of like Andrew Garfield in that Gibson movie except with his fists and the shield. I would read it.

I don't remember him killing in EMH

@ganon15: EMH as good as it was, was also at its heart a kids show so they probably didn't want to show Cap killing people.

No.

Nvm he did kill

I can see a case for "more interesting" but to me he'd be needlessly complicated and it would run contrary to his character concept, in that he's a soldier.

@ganon15: Forgot about that.

No.

No, but less-interesting.

No. I've always thought no kill rules were kind of stupid. If I were Batman, I'd have killed most of all my major villains like Joker and Penguin a long time ago. If I were Batman, I would kill any villain who I knew would always be a threat regardless of whether or not they were locked up...which describes almost all of them.

Not really. Captain America will take someone down non lethally if given the chance but he only kills when necessary

He seemed to have a no kill rule in New Avengers. Maybe that was just Bendis writing him out of character, I don't know. I've barely read him.

@mrmonster: i think it’s part of what makes Batman bad ass he’s so good he knows how to take care of villians without killing them (keeping them locked up is another story)

Well really, a lot of the things he does, Bats would be killing many people. But hey...fiction. Woohoo..

No. No. 1000 times no.

I don't mind him having a no kill rule as long as he doesn't need to, but not to the obsessive levels that batman adheres to.

I like when Cap' kills people...

I'm a US soldier but I don't kill I just gave those Naxis in World War 2 a stern talking to

The no killing rule is flawed. By not killing a deranged psychopath, you run the risk of them killing later down the line. Perfect example is the Joker. How many lives do you lose by not killing one bad guy. It's not logical.

It wouldn’t make any sense he’s a soldier

@marvelanddcfan24: lol

Well that's the part that Batman is criticized on. His villains reliably escape and kill more people so he's doing a disservice not killing them because even he knows at this point they're not gonna change.

Batmans rule is very defining but it can't be applied to everyone. Like most people cap doesn't want to kill people but if he really had to he will. Like in war

It would depend on how it was executed, but I think that it makes more sense for him to view killing as an acceptable means, given that he's a soldier and membership in an army implies a certain level of recognition that some necessities outweigh individual lives (unless the soldier is dishonest...which I guess is one route you can take, although Cap has usually been portrayed as honest).

Yeah.

Come to think of that, how many innocent lives could be saved if Batman had dedcided to kill Joker at his first opportunity?

Exactly. I'm not saying Batman should kill every street level drug dealer and every petty criminal, but if he were willing to kill people like Joker, Penguin, and Riddler, he'd be saving hundreds, maybe thousands of lives.

No kill rules are dumb, Batman keeping the Joker alive is dumb

No. He's a soldier.

No.

No. He should kill in self-defense.

And Batman should as well but never murder since that's evil.

No that would be stupid he’s a soldier

If he stopped killing people he wouldn't be called Captain America

He usually only kills if absolutely necessary.

Superman has killed before and hes not evil. But I do agree Cap should kill when he has no options

@kgb725:If Superman killed Doomsday in that original fight, which I think he tried to, and then Cyborg Superman took care of him, Superman was being heroic imo self-sacrificially trying to stop him from murdering others and himself which is good/noble.

I think all heroes should kill in self-defense if no options are available. Red Hood and Punisher are murderers, and even Wolverine but at least his theme is redemption.

But like how Batman killed someone in Son of the Demon to save Ra's al Ghul, if I remember correctly, it was self-defense. He was being heroic.

However, for serialized story-telling, I don't think it's a good direction since it would mess things up with him being friendly with the police and it would cause problems with the Robins and Alfred.

Steve Rogers is first and foremost, a committed and dedicated soldier, so he should be allowed to kill only if absolutely necessary. That is a significant part of what makes Rogers the quintessential Captain America.

He would be even more boring.