Batman’s Anti-Gun Gun Makes Me Laugh

When I was a kid watching westerns on TV, many a good guy shot a gun out of the hand of the bad guy. It stopped the attack and, it seems, stung a bit. Funny stuff! Saying that, yes, it happens. Tunnel vision is a thing. People tend to aim at what they’re looking at and what they look at when their life in on the line is the weapon that may kill them. Not the weapon, obvs, the person holding the weapon. Where was I? Batman . . .

The Caped Crusader began his career wielding a firearm. Robin’s benefactor eventually ditched his gat in the pursuit of political correctness. Not that disarming endeared him to the eventually, now eternally ungrateful people of Gotham City (a theme that bores the bejesus out of me). In his latest incarnation, Batman takes up a gun again: an anti-gun gun. A big one it is, too.

Fans of the comic book character may disagree – as comic book fans are wont to do about the smallest details surrounding their fictional heroes and anti-heroes – but that’s just plain ridiculous. Western fantasy aside (did I just write that?), the best way to stop a gunman is to stop the gunman who controls the gun. With a gun, usually. You know, one that shoots a projectile of some sort.

OK, sure, autonomous and semi-autonomous killer robots, drones and suchlike. As Batman’s about to find out, Superman’s gonna be a bitch to kill with any damn weapon system. (Speaking of which, et tu Supergirl?) In short, the idea of jamming a gun may appeal to technology nerds and hackers – a significant portion of Batman’s audience – but the anti-gun gun’s a bulky weapon with limited utility. Unless you’re anti-gun. Then it’s a hoot!

Then again, what about the possibility of government-controlled jammers taking out mandatory “smart guns”? I wonder if they’d use it on Batman’s anti-gun gun. Nah. He’d jam the jammers. Huh. Why do I feel a sudden desire to see Fury Road?

comments

  1. avatar Jomo says:

    Sadly this is a staple of modern SF as well. I can’t count the number of times the super alien of the week jammed the Stargate SG-1 team’s primitive projectile weapons when there was no electronics involved at all. You’d think that if the could stop the simple oxidation of fuel (gunpowder), they would stop the oxidation of simple sugars in the cells of the hero and kill him stone dead. Wouldn’t that be a hoot–“hmm… This isn’t as nonlethal as we thought…”

    1. avatar Ty King says:

      On the flip side, guns were shown to be more effective and easier to aim than staff weapons the bad guys used. The US military was obviously aware of this fact as well, and it was noted on screen.

      Guns were also useful against the replicators, where energy weapons all the advanced aliens used were useless.

      I’d say your example is more science fail than gun fail.

      1. avatar Jomo says:

        Actually that was kind of my point. The dubious science of those sequences where aliens “jammed” their PS90s were epic writing fails on the part of the script-writers. They got so much right, and yet there was so much fail…

        1. avatar Tomyironmane says:

          I dunno, there’s a LOT of moving parts in a PS90, and I’m usually pretty impressed that they work as often as they do. Increasing the viscosity or surface tension of the lubricant would likely do it, in a precision instrument like that. Of course, there IS a countermeasure…

          Kalashnikov.

        2. avatar swifty says:

          You just lack imagination bro.

          they could have like airborne nanites, that enter the gun and then jam vital component. after leaving the premises the nanites leave the gun

    2. avatar Sian says:

      On more than one occasion they went into a field that jammed high-tech energy weapons, but their primitive but effective slugthrowers kept going without missing a beat.

    3. avatar AllAmerican says:

      That is true, but for the most part, stargate actually did pretty well firearms wise for a show. I was impressed that they often used blanks too instead of computer animation. I watched one of the behind the scenes episodes and they were blasting away with the p90s and it actually looked like the actors were having a lot of fun.

  2. avatar Ralph says:

    Roy Rogers won the West by shooting guns out of the hands of outlaws with his trusty Colt SAA. Gene Wilder did the same thing with his Colt Cavalry in Blazing Saddles. And last year, when discussing self-defense with a friend (of dubious intellectual ability), he suggested that the best way to defend myself would be to shoot the gun out of a BG’s hand.

    What a maroon.

    1. avatar BLAMMO says:

      Sorry. Had to do it. 😀

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        BLAMMO, I’m very familiar with that episode. I consider that shot to be one of the best ever made. The degree of difficulty may not have been extreme, but it probably saved a life. Maybe more than one. And it did so without taking a life in return. Great policeman, great shot, great outcome.

        1. avatar BLAMMO says:

          Yeah, I wasn’t trying to counter your point in any way. I just couldn’t help but think of that incident when reading this article.

      2. avatar borg says:

        I am impressed especially considering that far too many cops kill people to prevent them from killing themselves.

    2. avatar MacBeth 51 says:

      Don’t forget Hugh O’Brien as Wyatt Earp. Always shooting guns out of the bad guys hands

  3. avatar Martin says:

    But wait what if the criminals get an anti- anti-gun gun

  4. avatar brentondadams says:

    Pretty girl in the video. I didn’t understand anything else. Maybe one word out of five. Is she talking about a video game?

    1. avatar Sergei says:

      I understood everything she said, and English isn’t my first language. The British did invent English you know.

      1. avatar brentondadams says:

        Its not the accent, its the jargon.

        I suppose someone cares about any of this. It is gun related I guess.

      2. avatar Dave says:

        “The British did invent English” but that sounds colonial – Aussie

    2. avatar JasonM says:

      Video games are a bigger industry than movies.
      Can we assume you’re using a computer at least? Or do you have a telegraph interface to TTAG?

  5. avatar David says:

    Because melee weapons are so much more civilized. And Batman still uses guns o’ plenty. But I guess it does not count if your guns are mounted.

    1. avatar Sian says:

      The multi-billionaire doesn’t speak a word against the use of guns by his friends (Gordon, Bullock) Protégés (Jason Todd) or allies (Vigilante, Orion). It’s a very personal and his hatred seems to mostly only extend to criminal use.

      Though to be fair the man has a clearly messed-up world view to begin with.

      1. avatar GuyFromV says:

        Totally this, and remember…there’s a reason for this trope. Because when that trope all of a sudden is out the window…it’s a sign that *%$&* just got real.

        http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BatmanGrabsAGun

        This is the mother of many tropes.

      2. avatar Lurker_of_lurkiness says:

        Yeah don’t forget good old Alfred, ex-brittish spec forces, wields a mean scattergun

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GW_WvtRSgVA

        Batman in general just has a mental ban on killing, he just doesn’t want to make more orphans. He does make exceptions however.

  6. Anti gun gun, isn’t that an oxymoron?

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      Nah. We have anti-missile missiles, too. It’s just hypocritical…

  7. avatar William B. says:

    “Nah. He’d jam the jammers.” Or…would the government come up with a jammer to jam his jammer of their jammers, thus allowing the government to come and take his gun jammer without due process, by force of non-science-fiction, jackbooted thug use of a plain…ol’…GUN?

  8. avatar Anon says:

    Batman is anti-gun, he’s been that way for a long time and he’s closed the gap by using high tech armor, fear and super secret ninja skills, the Dark Knight rises addresses this and let’s face it, the world of batman is one in which space aliens, super roided luchadors, lizard men and genius gorillas call their home. and in light of that, whining about the Dark Knight’s anti gun gun, just seems silly in comparison

    1. avatar Tommycat says:

      No, batman is not anti-gun. He’s opposed to using them himself. He’s fine with others using guns for protection, and has them a plenty on his vehicles.

    2. avatar Raul Ybarra says:

      And it’s less of being anti-gun and more of not wanting to kill. For him that is the line that separates him from the bad guys.

    3. avatar BlueBronco says:

      He got his ass kicked the whole movie the last time out.

  9. avatar JasonM says:

    What’s with all the “Batman can’t possibly beat Superman” bias?

    Batman has beaten Superman in multiple encounters. Wayne Enterprises buys every piece of Kryptonite that shows up on the market, and Batman always carries some in his utility belt. He has contingency plans for defeating every member of the Justice League if necessary. Batman is the ultimate Prepper.

  10. avatar Bradn says:

    I actually worked on Batman: Arkham City while it was still in development. When I had the chance to test out the disruptor for the first time I thought it was one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever seen. Unless every firearm in Gotham has some sort of “smart gun” technology in it, it’s dumb.

    1. avatar Sian says:

      I think they explained in-game that they actually do. All the guns in the game are from a particular military arms shipment with a high-tech user-ID lockout feature that had been hacked for the criminal market.

    2. avatar Grindstone says:

      At least it wasn’t Arkham Origins.

  11. avatar Ralph says:

    What do you think Batman really does with The Boy Wonder after Alfred turns in?

    1. avatar John G. says:

      The same thing you would do with him?

      1. avatar Mikial says:

        Zing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  12. avatar Lucas D. says:

    Batman may not use guns out of political correctness these days, but it was originally because of that pesky Comics Code Authority they had to work around, meaning most of Batman’s dark grittiness had to be scrubbed out and replaced with goofy Silver-Age nonsense.

    After that was no longer a concern, they still held onto the “no guns, no killing” rule because of intellectual laziness; it was much easier than having to come up with new villains every time Batman simply whipped out a pistol and plugged one of his rouges gallery right between the eyes. Sure, the Joker has murdered countless people and endangered Gotham many times over, but God forbid Batman just nip the problem in the bud, because then the writers would need to invent a new psycho for him to fight.

    And that’s why I love The Punisher, because he rarely has to deal with the same bad guys twice. In fact, he almost killed off the Joker in one crossover story, but he was stopped by… *sigh* …Batman.

  13. avatar Rog Uinta says:

    So…Batman is anti-gun.

    So are a lot of guys who dress up in tights and go out into the night to mix it up with street trash.

  14. avatar Deuce says:

    What the hell are you talking about? Could you ramble less and explain more?

  15. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    If you want pro-gun stick with Captain America. Goofy DC universe…

  16. avatar Drew says:

    I need to upgrade my system for Witcher 3.

  17. avatar DisThunder says:

    Overthinking. Just a little. This gadget was in the last game as well- it’s a kinda lazy workaround for players who can’t get the stealth thing down. Any other game where you fight a buncha guys armed and outnumbering you, you shoot them. Batman can’t get away with that, the fandom would have kittens.
    And by getting ruffled by the “jammer” gun, you miss the ridiculously awesome chaingun and launcher set up on the game’s Batmobile.

  18. avatar LL says:

    WTF is this a Big Bang Theory episode or a gun blog? All man cards have been revoked for at least two weeks! And obviously Superman would wipe the floor with The Bat Man. 😉

    1. avatar JJ48 says:

      If having a “man card” means I have to fit into a clichéd stereotype and assume that all others do the same, I’ll make do without one, thanks.

      Also, Batman all the way!

  19. avatar Peter says:

    I view Batman as a commentary on the duality of man.
    He detests the violence of a gun, instead opting for the much more satisfying (perhaps sexual?) crunch of muscle and bone under his fists.
    A man who abhors killing but loves violence.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email