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?

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

47 COMMENTS

  1. 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…”

    • 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.

      • 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…

        • 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.

        • 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

    • 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.

    • 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. 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.

      • 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.

        • 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.

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

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

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

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

      • Its not the accent, its the jargon.

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

    • 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. 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.

    • 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.

  7. “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?

  9. 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

    • 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.

  10. 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.

  11. 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.

    • 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.

  13. 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.

  14. 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.

  18. 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.

  19. 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. 😉

    • 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!

  20. 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.

Comments are closed.