Even if people hate bandit for killing a child, she’s been ostracized for doing something to help people. It’s how she got the name Bandit. I imagine she’ll deal. She’s killed people before, so the act of the kill itself isn’t something I imagine she will have trouble with. Killing a kid maybe, but I don’t see it considering the context.
Mass murderer. Killed his own family (which she knows). Shot her. Will definitely kill more if left to his own devices. Plenty of reasons not to feel bad.
Exactly. The kid is a bloody psychopath. That alone isn’t enough to warrant death, but given how far he’s gone, he has to die for, well, the greater good. It’s a bitter pill to swallow but sometimes evil people have to die. Not everyone can be redeemed.
Yeah. Taro’s been proclaiming that he’s an adult with all the intellgence (and none of the maturity) of a grown man. Big Man Taro can enjoy the adult-sized concequences of being a genocidal psychopath.
Even if she does not kill him somebody else will. It is also somewhat possible that if he lives his loyalists (if he has any left) will whisk him away to safety during the aftermath of all this.
His death would ensure relative peace, but if he were to be allowed to live a lot depends on who would rule next, and how they would attempt to communicate Joff- I mean Taro’s poor rule/crimes.
Uh oh. Something tells me that Sundar will be the rational voice of mercy here, which would seem a bit out of character for him.
Just look away for 5 seconds, Big S. This guy needs a life/body.separation.
Seriously. I have deep problems with taking life in a manner like this, never mind his age and that it’s fiction, but he’s a power-mad sociopath, and letting him live will likely mean more deaths and be generally more trouble for everyone. I wouldn’t trust any human court to put an end to him, either.
I hope that it plays out with Bandit wavering, perhaps even staying her hand and taking the time to explain why she is taking the high road. Explain why he will be made to stand trial before hanging from the gallows as she binds his hands and searches him for hidden weapons. How he will be the first of many to be tried and convicted fairly, as a message to all peoples that the new alliance of the peace keepers and the savage races can be trusted to do what is right by all nations and races.
Then Sundar walks up and calmly puts his sword through the little ratfink’s neck before walking away with nary a word.
I do think Taro has beyond proven himself a danger to all, a remorseless and Machiavellian killer. Etc., etc., etc.
Yet, I’m strangely torn about Bandit finishing him here, even if he deserves it, even if to allow him to live is to allow the threat that he is to continue.
I can’t help but wonder if Bandit should instead let him die (but surely die) some other way- such as by locking him in the tank and letting it blow up.
What we have here is a dramatic contrast with the previous scenes of Byron killing the party in his rage, and of Bandit herself killing Byron when fighting the cult so his rage wouldn’t kill them all.
Killing byron then might have been justified, but killing Taro now would only be giving in to her anger, and that’s exactly what she killed Byron for.
Also, the fact we get a cliffhanger now rather than after the killing means it is the most dramatic moment, so there will be now stabbing.
There are three of them, one potentially mortally wounded, behind enemy lines, and he is a high value prisoner that his people would likely devote considerable resources to freeing. He is also the enemy leader and one of the forces keeping the war going. Killing him would be perfectly justifiable as the odds of them being able to keep him as a prisoner are not exactly great and the consequences of him escaping are likely disastrous (for both sides, but the leadership of Taro’s side probably doesn’t really know that yet.)
You’d BETTER stab the absolute crap out of him, dammit! We already know he’s not the endboss here and that devourer of worlds is en route so if Sundar starts pleading with her, I might be a little salty.
Just do it. pleeease?
I am so SICK and TIRED of the stupid “oh no i cant do it or i will be on the same lvl as you” or “i don’t kill” or “Death would be a mercy on you,you will be triald by justice” Cliches that are really in most movie,book,Comic etc . it might be moraly right but damn does it get boring after seeing it a 100 times.
As much as I can see why she, or anyone, SHOULD be reluctant to kill a child, evil or not, I can also see why it’s easier for we as the readers to be more keen on seeing him die because we have seen all of his evilness and not just a few instances like most of the characters have. It adds up. :(
Even as a reader. I honestly don’t think Taro is that dangerous. If a whole bunch of power hungry adult politicians hadn’t allowed him to run rampant because they thought they could use his chaos to further their own ends, it wouldn’t have gotten this far. The kid is stupid and has no conscience but he’d be as powerless as any other child if the adults in power weren’t also stupid (and greedy). They are the more dangerous ones. They still have the power to raise idiots like him. And- oh wait, that all just seems incredibly topical now.
No, I wasn’t really taking into account or talking about if or how dangerous Taro is, which, for the record, I agree he doesn’t really seem to be all that dangerous; he just has a loud mouth and an impatient streak so long that it’s making all his newfound power kinda backfire on him.
I was only stating that, dangerous or not, I’m offering up a reason/excuse for why everyone in the comments seems so keen on him getting killed.
I have a foot on both sides, to be honest. I hate him for how much of a conniving little slug he is and I do think he deserves QUITE the beating, but I also find myself wanting him to live if only to keep driving the story because he’s a very fun character and every instance we get to see of him in the entire story is nothing short of entertaining every single time. :)
Sometimes it’s not about what they deserve, but about what effect it can have on your own psyche.
It’s entirely possible that the real reason not to kill Taro has nothing to do with whether or not he deserves it, but whether it’s mentally healthy for Bandit herself. She’s already stabbed one of her close friends to death and effectively lost most of her social connections because of it. Is killing a child really a burden she needs, psychologically?
That is a very valid point. Being judge, jury and executioner sounds great in theory, but you still have to deal with the psychological consequences of your actions, whether or not they are justified. The only people who (apparently) don’t suffer after killing another human being are those who are already dangerously mentally damaged (psychopaths and some sociopaths). There is also a big difference between killing and murdering, which, odd as it might seem, would be what Bandit did if she killed Taro now. Once he’s been incapacitated he should be incarcerated and held for trial as a war criminal by whatever law rules after this war is over. Anything less would be considered ‘savage’.
I agree that the little turd has done enough to deserve death, I just wouldn’t want to be the one who had to carry out the execution.
That’s a good point; I would hope that because this is different from stabbing a friend that it’d be slightly less traumatic, but it IS a child, and friend or not, I’m sure it brings up ALL the bad memories in a flood of emotion at a very crucial time.
hm, I see what he was getting at. Historians that value their lives would cultivate them and would likely contemplate. They’d be mature enough to realize that there’s no reason to rank various heads of house on some sort of scale. They’d just record the acts of each, within the context in which they were performed. If it turns out that one spent his entire life scheming and murdering and backstabbing for his kink and a lust for personal power, and students of history end up saying “I’m pretty sure he was the worst,” then so be it.
Can’t help but notice that the general consensus on the current situation is easily the same reaction everyone had when Joffrey was poisoned in GoT. Suffice it to say, I am satisfied.
The more I look at it, the more I think Sundar’s gonna say something and talk her out of it; she already looks unsure to begin with.
HOWEVER… this just means I’d put money on that Taro’s ultimate fate will be a death by corruptor-beast! And THAT seems pretty satisfying to me.
Certain things are a public service. Doesn’t matter if Taro is a child, he’s an evil little monster and ridding the world of something like him only makes the world a better place.
I really love this comic. I love the art, the characters, the plot, the lore. It’s really amazing.
I hate it when the hero has some kind of opportunity to execute the helpless baddie in the middle of battle. It simplifies the ‘kill or no kill’ morality in a way that negates it. Fighting is messy. Rarely do you get the chance to choose if you will deliver the final blow. You’re just fighting to survive and someone dies because they were fighting for you not to survive. The morality of killing an opponent in combat is an entirely different question than the morality of killing a helpless opponent.
I would have said the opposite. Having an opportunity like this is the only way that you get any real insight into the character’s morality precisely because a death in combat has very little to do with choice.
Honestly?
I WOULDN’T kill him…………..
No, that’s too easy………
Take the dagger, cut out his eyes and tongue, slice off his nose and ears, break his arms and legs with a war hammer, THEN BREAK HIS BACK…………..
Satan shouldn’t get to have ALL the fun………….
Mean little fucks like him NEED TO SUFFER……..
King Slayer?
Nah, King FLAYER Keynes sounds MUCH better…..
Just a head’s up, gang, all of today’s proceeds from our Gumroad store will be donated towards Hurricane Maria relief efforts. If you’ve been looking for an excuse, now’s the time!
You have created enough drama to pull me from my usual lurking to comment. Likely this is already written, drawn, and ready to post, but on the off chance you have both story lines ready to go…
Kill him.
It doesn’t have to be the incredibly drawn out and suffering filled affair that he truly deserves, but he needs to be removed from the world permanently.
Like Batman with the Joker, NOT killing him would be the wrong thing to do. He is a MASSIVELY multiple-murderer, who casually killed his own family (including his sister, also a child), and has, at the current time, complete legal power over all criminal matters. You are DEEP behind enemy lines with a major abdominal wound. The ONLY thing that makes any sense at the moment is to kill him.
The reason Batman doesn’t kill the Joker or anyone else, at least in most continuities, is because he is sure that if he starts, he’ll likely never stop. He believes that if he lets himself give in to the desire for vengeance, he’ll become the kind of monster he fights against.
Now, Bandit has already murdered Byron, over something he absolutely did not deserve to die for. How much further can she go before making excuses to kill makes her just another monster?
“The reason Batman doesn’t kill the Joker or anyone else, at least in most continuities, is because he is sure that if he starts, he’ll likely never stop.”
Fair enough, but what’s everyone else’s excuse?
Seriously, out here in the real world, where the “extras” the bad guy kills all have names and families, someone half as bad as the Joker would have developed a really bad case of lead poisoning while “trying to escape”, and (since he actually has escaped numerous times) 99.9% of people would give the guy who did it a high-five, a slap on the back, an attaboy, and a medal.
When the legal system can’t give justice, eventually the mob gives it a go. The police don’t exist to protect the people from criminals, they exist to prevent mob justice (which works better than nothing, but has lots of collateral damage and hurts a lot of innocent bystanders).
Heck, even Spielberg could understand this point. Of all the bad plot points in the “prequel” movies, he at least got the idea that there was no form of justice available for Palpatine other than summary execution – “He controls the courts!”
For all the danger he is he’s still physically a kid, it’d be easy (especially at this point) to incapacitate/restrain him and put him on trial. Even if it’s a mob trial or a trial in a savage race’s court it’s more justice than just killing him.
Wow. This kid is such a sociopath he’s threatening the lives of FUTURE historians over his posthumous legacy.
As for the killing issue, my take is as follows:
He is an uncaring killer, with access to a gun, probably a knife, and the equivalent of a tank that repeatedly fires thermonuclear shells. He is a very significant, very immediate threat, to bandit and to every living sapient in the area. He has shown he has no regard even for the lives of those who serve him faithfully, running over his own engineers and firing on his own soldiers. He needs to be neutralized without even the slightest delay. Barring some supernatural means none of the combatants present can be expected to have at their disposal, the only method for neutralizing him effectively is killing him without delay.
This is not revenge. This is not comeuppance. This is not justice. This is not heroics. This is eliminating an immediate threat to your own life, and the lives of countless others. That is justified. The rest can be tabulated after the fact.
She legitimately killed Berserker Byron because he was a major, immediate threat to life, and killing him was the only way to save those lives. Taro here is in fact a far greater threat to life. QED. What else needs to be said? That he happens to be a child is not relevant. He is a real and present threat, and that is all that matters.
Actually, Bandit killed Byron because she was pissed at him. It was personal. And he absolutely did not deserve that. It didn’t even accomplish anything. The damage was already done, and she was just venting her personal anger.
And the little psycho isn’t a threat now. He’s out of the tank, his weapons are gone, and he’s either unconscious or close to it. There’s nothing stopping them from just dragging him away and handing him over to the rebellion for some sort of actual trial.
Now, it’s reasonable to debate whether killing him is the best way to go forward. But when all is said and done, I will never agree that Bandit is the right person to play executioner. She can’t be trusted with that much power, as what she did to Byron proves. She’s far too angry and apt to make it personal.
I think I can come up with one good reason not to kill Taro and that is all that arcane magick right below them. His soul attaching to a doomsday weapon is a good enough excuse to show restraint for the time being.
Oops, stopped to think about it. No heat-of-the-moment or matter-of-survival justification anymore. Time to decide if you are an end-justifies-the-means type of fictional gal.
Is her hand to be the one to take a royal life? What nightmares will haunt her for killing one so young?
None, it’s a public service.
King-Killer Keynes
Old Stoneface Keynes.
“It (isn’t) even execution. You execute a human being. You slaughter an animal”
GNU Terry Pratchett
Those are some…
*dons ye sunglasses*
Keynesian economics, right there.
I see what you did there.
“Perfect assassination is the highest form of public service.”
~Chuin, Master of Sinanju
+1 for movie reference sir. And I didnt even have to google it :)
Even if people hate bandit for killing a child, she’s been ostracized for doing something to help people. It’s how she got the name Bandit. I imagine she’ll deal. She’s killed people before, so the act of the kill itself isn’t something I imagine she will have trouble with. Killing a kid maybe, but I don’t see it considering the context.
Mass murderer. Killed his own family (which she knows). Shot her. Will definitely kill more if left to his own devices. Plenty of reasons not to feel bad.
Exactly. The kid is a bloody psychopath. That alone isn’t enough to warrant death, but given how far he’s gone, he has to die for, well, the greater good. It’s a bitter pill to swallow but sometimes evil people have to die. Not everyone can be redeemed.
I’m sure she’ll spare him.
I’m guessing she’ll faint from loss of blood.
Taro already killed a child. His sister.
At this point he’s also more of a mini adult… just look at all the skeletons!
Yeah. Taro’s been proclaiming that he’s an adult with all the intellgence (and none of the maturity) of a grown man. Big Man Taro can enjoy the adult-sized concequences of being a genocidal psychopath.
This.
In her case, I would sleep just fine.
I like that “final” in the alt-text.
Yes, but that could mean as “king” which means he’ll have plenty more to say as “deposed king.”
Don’t stab him Bandit, he probably has acid blood.
Drop the dagger, Keynes. Stabbings too good for him, just keep punching.
Yeah, stabbing’s too good fer ‘im.
Man, you are knocking them out of the park with the movie references! Know this one too :)
Even if she does not kill him somebody else will. It is also somewhat possible that if he lives his loyalists (if he has any left) will whisk him away to safety during the aftermath of all this.
His death would ensure relative peace, but if he were to be allowed to live a lot depends on who would rule next, and how they would attempt to communicate Joff- I mean Taro’s poor rule/crimes.
Technically, she is picking on someone her own size, after all. Whatever she does is fair game.
Plus, considering he used a gun and shot her (in addition to stabbing her), that falls under self defence.
Uh oh. Something tells me that Sundar will be the rational voice of mercy here, which would seem a bit out of character for him.
Just look away for 5 seconds, Big S. This guy needs a life/body.separation.
Seriously. I have deep problems with taking life in a manner like this, never mind his age and that it’s fiction, but he’s a power-mad sociopath, and letting him live will likely mean more deaths and be generally more trouble for everyone. I wouldn’t trust any human court to put an end to him, either.
I hope that it plays out with Bandit wavering, perhaps even staying her hand and taking the time to explain why she is taking the high road. Explain why he will be made to stand trial before hanging from the gallows as she binds his hands and searches him for hidden weapons. How he will be the first of many to be tried and convicted fairly, as a message to all peoples that the new alliance of the peace keepers and the savage races can be trusted to do what is right by all nations and races.
Then Sundar walks up and calmly puts his sword through the little ratfink’s neck before walking away with nary a word.
He is Sundar the Sunderer, after all.
Perfect end to Sundar’s character arc.
And then Rendar’s like “Good thing I made him such a shitty pistol that wouldn’t kill even a gnome.”
Considering the size of the gun, Taro would need better aim to kill anything.
Just cut the fingers off. And maybe the tongue. He’ll have a hard time being a threat after, should he escape.
“To the life” like in Princess Bride?
“to the pain”.
I do think Taro has beyond proven himself a danger to all, a remorseless and Machiavellian killer. Etc., etc., etc.
Yet, I’m strangely torn about Bandit finishing him here, even if he deserves it, even if to allow him to live is to allow the threat that he is to continue.
I can’t help but wonder if Bandit should instead let him die (but surely die) some other way- such as by locking him in the tank and letting it blow up.
Stab him. Just do it. Stab the little shit and be done with him. There is nothing but good to be gained from such an act.
He’s not a child. He’s a despot, to be dethroned, despoiled and decapitated.
DEW EET!
She even has the high ground.
It’s over, Taro!
Do the Dew?
FINISH HIM!
Six to five and pick ’em whether or not she does it.
What we have here is a dramatic contrast with the previous scenes of Byron killing the party in his rage, and of Bandit herself killing Byron when fighting the cult so his rage wouldn’t kill them all.
Killing byron then might have been justified, but killing Taro now would only be giving in to her anger, and that’s exactly what she killed Byron for.
Also, the fact we get a cliffhanger now rather than after the killing means it is the most dramatic moment, so there will be now stabbing.
There are three of them, one potentially mortally wounded, behind enemy lines, and he is a high value prisoner that his people would likely devote considerable resources to freeing. He is also the enemy leader and one of the forces keeping the war going. Killing him would be perfectly justifiable as the odds of them being able to keep him as a prisoner are not exactly great and the consequences of him escaping are likely disastrous (for both sides, but the leadership of Taro’s side probably doesn’t really know that yet.)
so, do we shank the bastard now or do we leave his subjects to deal with his rude ass for bombing them later?
You’d BETTER stab the absolute crap out of him, dammit! We already know he’s not the endboss here and that devourer of worlds is en route so if Sundar starts pleading with her, I might be a little salty.
She needs to kill him to get the XP and level increases she’ll need in the final battle.
New gnomename: King Slayer Keynes
Bandit, why have ou stopped punching him? Right now, Bandit should he punching him until S’rynj gets tired.
Just do it. pleeease?
I am so SICK and TIRED of the stupid “oh no i cant do it or i will be on the same lvl as you” or “i don’t kill” or “Death would be a mercy on you,you will be triald by justice” Cliches that are really in most movie,book,Comic etc . it might be moraly right but damn does it get boring after seeing it a 100 times.
It’s not about being on the same level as them, it’s about whether you got it in yourself to kill a child. Which he is, evil or not.
I don’t know about you, but the older I get, the more I find the notion disturbing. As would be expected.
As much as I can see why she, or anyone, SHOULD be reluctant to kill a child, evil or not, I can also see why it’s easier for we as the readers to be more keen on seeing him die because we have seen all of his evilness and not just a few instances like most of the characters have. It adds up. :(
Even as a reader. I honestly don’t think Taro is that dangerous. If a whole bunch of power hungry adult politicians hadn’t allowed him to run rampant because they thought they could use his chaos to further their own ends, it wouldn’t have gotten this far. The kid is stupid and has no conscience but he’d be as powerless as any other child if the adults in power weren’t also stupid (and greedy). They are the more dangerous ones. They still have the power to raise idiots like him. And- oh wait, that all just seems incredibly topical now.
Well said!
No, I wasn’t really taking into account or talking about if or how dangerous Taro is, which, for the record, I agree he doesn’t really seem to be all that dangerous; he just has a loud mouth and an impatient streak so long that it’s making all his newfound power kinda backfire on him.
I was only stating that, dangerous or not, I’m offering up a reason/excuse for why everyone in the comments seems so keen on him getting killed.
I have a foot on both sides, to be honest. I hate him for how much of a conniving little slug he is and I do think he deserves QUITE the beating, but I also find myself wanting him to live if only to keep driving the story because he’s a very fun character and every instance we get to see of him in the entire story is nothing short of entertaining every single time. :)
Sometimes it’s not about what they deserve, but about what effect it can have on your own psyche.
It’s entirely possible that the real reason not to kill Taro has nothing to do with whether or not he deserves it, but whether it’s mentally healthy for Bandit herself. She’s already stabbed one of her close friends to death and effectively lost most of her social connections because of it. Is killing a child really a burden she needs, psychologically?
That is a very valid point. Being judge, jury and executioner sounds great in theory, but you still have to deal with the psychological consequences of your actions, whether or not they are justified. The only people who (apparently) don’t suffer after killing another human being are those who are already dangerously mentally damaged (psychopaths and some sociopaths). There is also a big difference between killing and murdering, which, odd as it might seem, would be what Bandit did if she killed Taro now. Once he’s been incapacitated he should be incarcerated and held for trial as a war criminal by whatever law rules after this war is over. Anything less would be considered ‘savage’.
I agree that the little turd has done enough to deserve death, I just wouldn’t want to be the one who had to carry out the execution.
That’s a good point; I would hope that because this is different from stabbing a friend that it’d be slightly less traumatic, but it IS a child, and friend or not, I’m sure it brings up ALL the bad memories in a flood of emotion at a very crucial time.
hm, I see what he was getting at. Historians that value their lives would cultivate them and would likely contemplate. They’d be mature enough to realize that there’s no reason to rank various heads of house on some sort of scale. They’d just record the acts of each, within the context in which they were performed. If it turns out that one spent his entire life scheming and murdering and backstabbing for his kink and a lust for personal power, and students of history end up saying “I’m pretty sure he was the worst,” then so be it.
Sic Semper Tyrannis!
Aaaaaaand sepia time!
Can’t help but notice that the general consensus on the current situation is easily the same reaction everyone had when Joffrey was poisoned in GoT. Suffice it to say, I am satisfied.
The more I look at it, the more I think Sundar’s gonna say something and talk her out of it; she already looks unsure to begin with.
HOWEVER… this just means I’d put money on that Taro’s ultimate fate will be a death by corruptor-beast! And THAT seems pretty satisfying to me.
I don’t understand how she could kill Byron and not Taro, makes no sense to me.
Certain things are a public service. Doesn’t matter if Taro is a child, he’s an evil little monster and ridding the world of something like him only makes the world a better place.
I really love this comic. I love the art, the characters, the plot, the lore. It’s really amazing.
I hate it when the hero has some kind of opportunity to execute the helpless baddie in the middle of battle. It simplifies the ‘kill or no kill’ morality in a way that negates it. Fighting is messy. Rarely do you get the chance to choose if you will deliver the final blow. You’re just fighting to survive and someone dies because they were fighting for you not to survive. The morality of killing an opponent in combat is an entirely different question than the morality of killing a helpless opponent.
I would have said the opposite. Having an opportunity like this is the only way that you get any real insight into the character’s morality precisely because a death in combat has very little to do with choice.
I’m just glad the little weasel looks like he will be dying a virgin.
Apologies to all virgin weasels for that analogy.
Honestly?
I WOULDN’T kill him…………..
No, that’s too easy………
Take the dagger, cut out his eyes and tongue, slice off his nose and ears, break his arms and legs with a war hammer, THEN BREAK HIS BACK…………..
Satan shouldn’t get to have ALL the fun………….
Mean little fucks like him NEED TO SUFFER……..
King Slayer?
Nah, King FLAYER Keynes sounds MUCH better…..
Just a head’s up, gang, all of today’s proceeds from our Gumroad store will be donated towards Hurricane Maria relief efforts. If you’ve been looking for an excuse, now’s the time!
https://gumroad.com/guildedage
This boy is a Joffrey, I hope he suffers more than it looks like he’s about to.
You have created enough drama to pull me from my usual lurking to comment. Likely this is already written, drawn, and ready to post, but on the off chance you have both story lines ready to go…
Kill him.
It doesn’t have to be the incredibly drawn out and suffering filled affair that he truly deserves, but he needs to be removed from the world permanently.
I’m just gonna point out that the pommel is missing at the top of Bandit’s fist in panel 6.
She’s still punching him at that particular moment. It’s only between panel 6 and 7 that she picked up the dagger.
(Mortal Kombat theme in background)
FINISH HIM!
Like Batman with the Joker, NOT killing him would be the wrong thing to do. He is a MASSIVELY multiple-murderer, who casually killed his own family (including his sister, also a child), and has, at the current time, complete legal power over all criminal matters. You are DEEP behind enemy lines with a major abdominal wound. The ONLY thing that makes any sense at the moment is to kill him.
The reason Batman doesn’t kill the Joker or anyone else, at least in most continuities, is because he is sure that if he starts, he’ll likely never stop. He believes that if he lets himself give in to the desire for vengeance, he’ll become the kind of monster he fights against.
Now, Bandit has already murdered Byron, over something he absolutely did not deserve to die for. How much further can she go before making excuses to kill makes her just another monster?
“The reason Batman doesn’t kill the Joker or anyone else, at least in most continuities, is because he is sure that if he starts, he’ll likely never stop.”
Fair enough, but what’s everyone else’s excuse?
Seriously, out here in the real world, where the “extras” the bad guy kills all have names and families, someone half as bad as the Joker would have developed a really bad case of lead poisoning while “trying to escape”, and (since he actually has escaped numerous times) 99.9% of people would give the guy who did it a high-five, a slap on the back, an attaboy, and a medal.
When the legal system can’t give justice, eventually the mob gives it a go. The police don’t exist to protect the people from criminals, they exist to prevent mob justice (which works better than nothing, but has lots of collateral damage and hurts a lot of innocent bystanders).
Heck, even Spielberg could understand this point. Of all the bad plot points in the “prequel” movies, he at least got the idea that there was no form of justice available for Palpatine other than summary execution – “He controls the courts!”
The kid is smart enough to make adult decisions, now he must reap the consequences. Ice him Bandit.
It doesn’t feel good to be the king.
For all the danger he is he’s still physically a kid, it’d be easy (especially at this point) to incapacitate/restrain him and put him on trial. Even if it’s a mob trial or a trial in a savage race’s court it’s more justice than just killing him.
He confessed to war crimes, murder in the first degree, genocide, and just now attempted to kill her. What exactly will a jury add at this point?
Accountability.
Wow. This kid is such a sociopath he’s threatening the lives of FUTURE historians over his posthumous legacy.
As for the killing issue, my take is as follows:
He is an uncaring killer, with access to a gun, probably a knife, and the equivalent of a tank that repeatedly fires thermonuclear shells. He is a very significant, very immediate threat, to bandit and to every living sapient in the area. He has shown he has no regard even for the lives of those who serve him faithfully, running over his own engineers and firing on his own soldiers. He needs to be neutralized without even the slightest delay. Barring some supernatural means none of the combatants present can be expected to have at their disposal, the only method for neutralizing him effectively is killing him without delay.
This is not revenge. This is not comeuppance. This is not justice. This is not heroics. This is eliminating an immediate threat to your own life, and the lives of countless others. That is justified. The rest can be tabulated after the fact.
She legitimately killed Berserker Byron because he was a major, immediate threat to life, and killing him was the only way to save those lives. Taro here is in fact a far greater threat to life. QED. What else needs to be said? That he happens to be a child is not relevant. He is a real and present threat, and that is all that matters.
Actually, Bandit killed Byron because she was pissed at him. It was personal. And he absolutely did not deserve that. It didn’t even accomplish anything. The damage was already done, and she was just venting her personal anger.
And the little psycho isn’t a threat now. He’s out of the tank, his weapons are gone, and he’s either unconscious or close to it. There’s nothing stopping them from just dragging him away and handing him over to the rebellion for some sort of actual trial.
Now, it’s reasonable to debate whether killing him is the best way to go forward. But when all is said and done, I will never agree that Bandit is the right person to play executioner. She can’t be trusted with that much power, as what she did to Byron proves. She’s far too angry and apt to make it personal.
For the love of god KILL HIM! If you don’t you know he’ll be back.
State custody. (Preferably a different state.)
I think I can come up with one good reason not to kill Taro and that is all that arcane magick right below them. His soul attaching to a doomsday weapon is a good enough excuse to show restraint for the time being.
Oh crap. Didn’t think of that. That’s terrifying!
And as evil as Taro is he’s still a virgin so there’s bound to be some bad mojo there.
Hmm…’kingslayer’ sounds much better than ‘kingclobberer’…decisions, decisions…
Oops, stopped to think about it. No heat-of-the-moment or matter-of-survival justification anymore. Time to decide if you are an end-justifies-the-means type of fictional gal.
Oh, I got the feeling that this will be a setup for a “There are four or five moments….” scene.
Come on Keynes, channel your inner Deadpool!