|
Post by The Night Phantom on Mar 29, 2007 11:54:46 GMT -5
It would indeed be irony Balok if she ended up killed because a hero was such a moron he cared more about selfish ends than what being a hero is all about, just as her son was! That IS what you meant in that scenario, right? I don’t speak for Balok, but what I got out of that scenario was that a person who’d trade the freedom of others for her own security ended up with neither freedom nor security for herself—or anyone else, really.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 29, 2007 12:21:08 GMT -5
I was joking with a much more accurate scenario but the scenario Balok puts forth is flawed, Phantom: if the super human is unwilling to put their personal concerns aside for the good of others, they aren't worthy of being a hero anyway. And you speak as though she's being selfish- she's willing to trade a limited amount of the "freedoms" of a phenomenally dangerous group of people- and only those who are willing- in return for the security of 99.9995% of the population. Doesn't sound like a bad trade-off to me.
|
|
Tone-Loc
Reservist Avenger
R.I.P. (... for now)
Posts: 200
|
Post by Tone-Loc on Mar 29, 2007 12:47:04 GMT -5
So a true and worthy hero is someone that puts their personal concerns or beliefs aside for others. That's no hero to me.
My heroes stand up for what they believe in, whether others like it or not.
Yes, self-sacrifice is a hallmark of the classic hero, but not in terms of beliefs... typically that is only seen in terms of sacrificing their dreams, or their time, money, blood, sweat, etc... but certainly not their beliefs.
How's that go... "The price of liberty is eternal vigilence?"
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 29, 2007 13:40:35 GMT -5
I don’t speak for Balok, but what I got out of that scenario was that a person who’d trade the freedom of others for her own security ended up with neither freedom nor security for herself—or anyone else, really. In this case, you do speak for me, for that is exactly what I meant.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 29, 2007 13:45:04 GMT -5
I was joking with a much more accurate scenario but the scenario Balok puts forth is flawed, Phantom: if the super human is unwilling to put their personal concerns aside for the good of others, they aren't worthy of being a hero anyway. And you speak as though she's being selfish- she's willing to trade a limited amount of the "freedoms" of a phenomenally dangerous group of people- and only those who are willing- in return for the security of 99.9995% of the population. Doesn't sound like a bad trade-off to me. I said "superhuman" not "superhero." Go back and look, I'll wait. I chose that word very carefully. I didn't say or imply that the superhuman in such a situation would be acting heroically. But I could understand why they might act that way. The point is, the SHRA actively discourages people who are afraid of the government having their names on file. Just look at the recent example of Valerie Plame, a spy whom the Bush administration possibly outed in a petty act of political revenge and you'll have an excellent reason why people might not wish to trust the government. It does nothing to discourage villains, because they're no worse off if they get arrested than they were before its passage. These trade-offs never sound like bad ideas when it's someone else's freedom being traded for your security.
|
|
|
Post by imperiusrex on Mar 29, 2007 13:50:43 GMT -5
Well Imperius, Miriam was really just a plot device, and an effective one at that. Not a character with an arc- because really, the only possible "arc" would be to have her turn in some way anti which contradicts the point of the story and runs against the whole purpose of her character. To be fair, compare Miriam Sharpe to Layla Miller as a plot device and Miriam wins by a factor of ten I don't agree. She's not an effective plot device because we don't care. What was her family like before, how does she honor her son, what is she now? Any and all of that was barely referenced. More defined she would've had an impact. Why should we care about the everyman in the MU when their spokesperson was so forgettable? A mouthpiece isn't a good plot device, it's a talking head spouting the rhetoric and that's just not good writing. I'll put it this way, if Miriam were written better she might have influenced more readers and writers to be sympathetic to her cause. Yet even with a woman who lost her child, most Marvel writers who participated in Civil war ancillary stories were still anti-reg. If she were well written that would've been a lot harder. And if you're using House of M for comparisons, well, that's a dog that just won't hunt. However Layla Miller has become moderately interesting under Peter David's pen in x-factor, so when a good writer fleshes out a character it makes the story better.
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on Mar 29, 2007 16:11:31 GMT -5
Balok, Great plot suggestion! I hereby exalt thee. Another possibility might be that an unregistered hero tries to save Miriam's life but is pounced on by SHIELD agents who focus so much on the unregistered hero that they fail to see the real threat and Miriam is killed. The superpowered being still acted as a hero, but failed because of the laws she helped put into place.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 29, 2007 16:32:55 GMT -5
But in ALL cases, you are twisting the Registration laws wildly to fit your own views, both Balok and waspy! Neither of those are remotely plausible given what we know!
In your scenario wasp, they would never stop the super human. And in yours, Balok, the super human, if they had any intelligence, would save the person's life and THEN register. If they're not at all heroic, then they wouldn't save her SHRA or no, and if they were then whether it was legal wouldn't matter to them.
You're both, as I say, twisting things to try and prove your own flawed viewpoint.
|
|
|
Post by The Night Phantom on Mar 29, 2007 16:44:59 GMT -5
In this case, you do speak for me WOO-HOO!! I am an oversized, garishly lit puppet with swirly effects!!! ;D BWA HA HA HA HA!!!Ahem. Sorry—that must have been the tranya speaking. I was joking with a much more accurate scenario I don’t understand the language here. If you’re indicating that your claim was itself not a joke, then please explain the accuracy of your contention that a person with superpowers and without legal authorization to use them who obeys the law by failing to save Miriam Sharpe’s life under the aforementioned circumstances has low intelligence. If you’re stuck for ideas on how to go about this, you might consider drawing a real-life analogy purporting that all persons who are not legally authorized police officers, paramedics, firefighters, etc. also have dismally poor intellectual capabilities. You speak as though Miriam Sharpe weren’t selfish! Every human being—every being with a “self”—has some degree of selfishness! It’s not necessarily a bad thing. Even someone who voluntarily risks his life for the good of others is doing so because something inside him wants to. That’s selfishness—perhaps the most noble kind, but let’s not deceive ourselves. Classically, to be “unselfish” (as much as my description of selfishness allows), one must choose to sacrifice one’s own interests for the good of others. What has Sharpe chosen to sacrifice? (She lost her son, but that wasn’t out of choice, and it wasn’t a result of her drive for registration.) In any case, so what if the superpowered person in question doesn’t want to be a career hero? Long before she joined the X-Men, the Dazzler had a comic in which she was not a willing superhero. She was an aspiring singer who happened to have superpowers. As it turned out, she sometimes encountered situations where her powers could help other people (and sometimes herself, of course). And she helped people out because she was a good person who didn’t want to be a career superhero. Maybe her attitude is nonheroic, but in my opinion it doesn’t make her unworthy of saving somebody’s life! (Possibly interesting story fodder: the choice between violating the SHRA and violating a Good Samaritan law.) Uhh, no. The restrictions of the SHRA apply to people whether they are willing to be restricted by it or not. Laws tend to be that way. Please demonstrate that 99.9995% of the American population in the Marvel Universe are now secure.
|
|
|
Post by The Night Phantom on Mar 29, 2007 16:50:01 GMT -5
But in ALL cases, you are twisting the Registration laws wildly to fit your own views, both Balok and waspy! Neither of those are remotely plausible given what we know! In your scenario wasp, they would never stop the super human. How do you know? People misunderstand things rather frequently in real life, and even more in Marvel life! Even an intelligent person might get arrested on the way to registration. Physician, heal thyself.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 29, 2007 16:51:59 GMT -5
[I don?t understand the language here. If you?re indicating that your claim was itself not a joke, then please explain the accuracy of your contention that a person with superpowers and without legal authorization to use them who obeys the law by failing to save Miriam Sharpe?s life under the aforementioned circumstances has low intelligence. If you?re stuck for ideas on how to go about this, you might consider drawing a real-life analogy purporting that all persons who are not legally authorized police officers, paramedics, firefighters, etc. also have dismally poor intellectual capabilities. If a person is aware that they possess super-human abilities but do not use them because they are not registered and do not wish to have to, that person is not a hero. The comparison doesn't gel in this case. Calling them stupid is a bit much, but it's simple, as I said above. If they save them, then they are heroic and I'd say they would have done so with or without a SHRA. If someone says "Hah! Not saving them, I might get arrested!" Then they're clearly not heroic, very selfish and would thus would not have samed them anyway even without an SHRA. True enough, but in this case she wasn't motivated by purely selfish desire. [quote[In any case, so what if the superpowered person in question doesn?t want to be a career hero? Long before she joined the X-Men, the Dazzler had a comic in which she was not a willing superhero. She was an aspiring singer who happened to have superpowers. As it turned out, she sometimes encountered situations where her powers could help other people (and sometimes herself, of course). And she helped people out because she was a good person who didn?t want to be a career superhero. Maybe her attitude is nonheroic, but in my opinion it doesn?t make her unworthy of saving somebody?s life![/quote] Absolutely! No problem with that! Which is why the SHRA allows you to register and then quietly settle down to a normal life if you so choose. I don't think Iron Man would say he has any less freedom than before. Or any registered non-Initiative hero. And registered Initiative heroes CHOOSE to do that. It's a personal sacrifice. Please demonstrate that 99.9995% of the American population in the Marvel Universe are now secure.[/quote] You got me there, I should have said FURTHER security. And yes, I would say that most definitely the 99.9995% (probably more) of the population are not powered and are, after the SHRA< safer than they ever were before it since the advent of super-humans.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Mar 29, 2007 17:14:04 GMT -5
Well, maybe IM thinks so & maybe that allows him to sleep better at night (then again, perhaps not...), but, regardless, it is still a highly debatable proposition...
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on Mar 29, 2007 17:23:15 GMT -5
Doom,
Register and then settle down to a normal life?
Remember CW issue 1?
SHIELD didn't go after Cap UNTIL he told them he would not be going after other heroes. He didn't say he'd fight the law. He didn't say he'd lead a subversive organization, he simply said he would not go after his past friends. So they weren't prepared to let him lead a normal life. It doesn't matter that he PROBABLY wouldn't have settled down. It only matters that he wasn't given that opportunity.
As far as the facts being twisted on the given examples. It is very easy to see example of over-eager SHIELD capekillers just seeing an un-registered super and jumping his butt, not paying attention at all to the situation he was trying to help out with. I think that makes a storyline where some hero is prevented from saving a civilian like Miriam. As far as plausability goes, its a whole lot more plausible than some other things we have seen happen.
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on Mar 29, 2007 17:56:19 GMT -5
But in ALL cases, you are twisting the Registration laws wildly to fit your own views, both Balok and waspy! Neither of those are remotely plausible given what we know! In your scenario wasp, they would never stop the super human. And in yours, Balok, the super human, if they had any intelligence, would save the person's life and THEN register. If they're not at all heroic, then they wouldn't save her SHRA or no, and if they were then whether it was legal wouldn't matter to them. You're both, as I say, twisting things to try and prove your own flawed viewpoint. Wow Doom! This is why you are impossible to argue with. You are so caught up in your own little world of always being right, you can't even play a game of "What if?" So, there is no way that an unregistered hero (And yes, I say hero because even a person who doesn't follow the letter of the law - Rosa Parks, for example- can still be a hero) could see a threat that SHIELD agents do not. SHIELD agents have suddenly become so perfect that they couldn't even hypothetically make a mistake. AND in your world, anyone who takes a stand against a law they don't believe in isn't even intellegent. Talk about flawed viewpoints.
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on Mar 29, 2007 18:00:56 GMT -5
Oh, and as usual Doomsie, yet another thread that starts off interesting turns into nothing more than a series of having to argue with you. This is what I was saying before about how you are making the boards boring. Balak started off with an interesting scenario and it instantly became all about you. You certainly chose your name well based on your ability to take over.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 29, 2007 19:49:46 GMT -5
But in ALL cases, you are twisting the Registration laws wildly to fit your own views, both Balok and waspy! ... And in yours, Balok, the super human, if they had any intelligence, would save the person's life and THEN register. You've missed the point. They don't want to register, because they don't trust SHIELD, or the CSA, or the government, or some combination of those. Given that, they know that they can't use their powers, or else they're liable to end up permanently disabled, one bed over from Jack Flag, because that's what kind of "heroes" the CSA sends after folks. And, according to Tony in the BDR, they're who's going to be running the Initiative as soon as they've got the infrastructure in place. Think about that. To be a Marvel hero, you report to an organization that employs the psychotic and murderous Green Goblin, the psychotic Moonstone, and the murdererous Bullseye. I know *I* would never trust the CSA. And that's what leaves me with no choice but to watch the piece of rubble the Hulk inadvertently knocked from a building crush Miriam Sharpe, instead of jumping in with my enhanced strength to save her. I'll be unhappy about it - but I'll be free and walking, too. You're both, as I say, twisting things to try and prove your own flawed viewpoint. I'll leave it as an exercise for the interested student as to exactly who is setting up strawmen.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 29, 2007 19:57:23 GMT -5
If a person is aware that they possess super-human abilities but do not use them because they are not registered and do not wish to have to, that person is not a hero. The comparison doesn't gel in this case. Calling them stupid is a bit much, but it's simple, as I said above. If they save them, then they are heroic and I'd say they would have done so with or without a SHRA. If someone says "Hah! Not saving them, I might get arrested!" Then they're clearly not heroic, very selfish and would thus would not have samed them anyway even without an SHRA. You cannot say this for certain, because you're omitting a large class of individuals, like Spider-Man, who wish to be heroes on *their* terms, without government interference. These are people who like and want to help their fellow man, but do not wish to entangle themselves with the government. Now, you may say that there's no room for such individuals in society, as Marvel has said by establishing the SHRA, but you cannot rationally deny that they exist. And therefore, that the scenario I propose could happen.
|
|
|
Post by The Night Phantom on Mar 29, 2007 20:40:22 GMT -5
If a person is aware that they possess super-human abilities but do not use them because they are not registered and do not wish to have to, that person is not a hero. How about a person who is registered but is not legally authorized to act as a superhero? Perhaps I’ve misunderstood, but haven’t you been telling us for months that legally registered superbeings are not legally compelled to be superheroes? Don’t registrants have to essentially be authorized beyond registration requirements (they have to have certain training, have to be available for contact by government authorities, etc.) in order to legally be superheroes? I don’t recall hearing this, but I’m presuming the government can turn down a superpowered person from active superhero status. A superbeing may have been told by the government, one way or another, that they are currently not to engage in any superhero activities. If I understand you correctly, you’re saying that the SHRA is utterly useless in modifying superbeings’ behavior. OK, how about this scenario. Miriam’s superpowered neighbor illegally saves her from some peril. The next day, the peril returns or a new one arrives, and Miriam dies. Her neighbor would have saved her life that second day, but he couldn’t because the cops threw him in jail. SHRA to the rescue!! And then get thrown into jail should you happen to save someone during an emergency. Well, if a demagogue doesn’t say it (or if you think a demagogue wouldn’t say it), it must not be true!! Those persons may have chosen to do things and not do other things, but what I was responding to was your claim that Sharpe is “willing to trade a limited amount of the "freedoms" of a phenomenally dangerous group of people- and only those who are willing”. No, the SHRA also applies to people who are not willing to be subjected to its restrictions. (Haven’t you noticed?? There was a civil war about it! The Avengers split into two factions over it!!)Please demonstrate, particularly in view of the SHRA’s uselessness in modifying superbeings’ behavior.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 30, 2007 8:46:43 GMT -5
Here's another scenario:
I have superstrength and durability, as well as the ability to project blasts of energy - a pretty mundane power set as these things go. I don't know I have these powers because I've lived an uneventful life.
For whatever reason, a gang of young punks decides I make a good victim, and the stress brings out my powers. I overwhelm them. I really don't want to register, but I'd like being paralyzed even less, so to avoid the Bullseye deterrent, I register. It's unclear how the figure out what powers an individual has, so let's presume for the moment that they use some combination of what the person tells them and what others report. It's presently illegal in this country to require medical therapy, including examinations, except in certain very limited circumstances (such as epidemics, when individuals can be compelled to accept quarantine). Later I discover that I can absorb energy as well as emit it. Do I get in trouble for not reporting this?
Still later, the army realizes that a superhuman with a particular power set could help them reduce a particular stronghold in some nation - let's call it Qari - that they have invaded for reasons still unclear to many. They make their request and the CSA checks and out pops my name. But I only registered, I never joined the Initiative.
Now the friendly neighborhood CSA rep is at my door with a nice offer: join the Initiative and get trained and deployed, or spend the rest of your life under FBI scrutiny as a "person of interest." Fight off tax audit after tax audit. Have trouble getting licenses renewed, or building permits. Somehow my boss finds out I've got these abilities and, afraid, fires me. Strange things happen to my once high credit rating and I can't get loans. And so on. Now, you may say that the CSA wouldn't do this sort of thing, but these are the people who hired the Green Goblin, Bullseye, and Moonstone. Of course they would do this sort of thing - it's small potatoes compared to what they've already done in the pages of Thunderbolts.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Mar 30, 2007 13:11:59 GMT -5
Excellent point, Balok...
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on Mar 30, 2007 13:19:57 GMT -5
but at this point, haven't they stated that superheroes that ARE being used are only to be used stateside? and we know that the government would never use people against their will, nor would it go back on its word to keep heroes located stateside.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Mar 30, 2007 14:38:52 GMT -5
That also brings on a good point, nutcase65: traditionally, in the MU, most of the world's countries authorities have been very lenient towards american superheroes activities on their soils, sometimes to the point of actively seeking their asistance... I wonder if this attitude will remain unchanged now that them, for the most part, are definitely under the control of the american government... If they do, that wouldn't mesh well with this whole NEW, "real world" vibe Marvel seems so intent on achieving these days...
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on Mar 30, 2007 16:15:55 GMT -5
I think we will see Latveria leading a push to be harder on American superheroes running wild across international borders. I see an almost certain alliance with Atlantis against the United State's superhero mobilization. Possibly we will even see Wakanda getting involved standing against the US. There are some interesting possibilities.
Here is a plausible storyline. Some third-world country comes out with a powerful superbeing. The U.S. feels its interests threatened in some way and sends in a super police unit. The world then reacts to the U.S acting as super police to the world. Doom spearheading the argument against in a gambit to gain power and influence.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Mar 30, 2007 17:26:03 GMT -5
Yeah... I can see it: a being twice as powerful as the Sentry & almost as boring is born in the balkanic republic of Cakalakia...
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on Mar 30, 2007 19:09:30 GMT -5
We are never bored in South Cakalaki, that's north Cakalaki you're thinking of. Common mistake. We have plenty of ninjas to keep us intertained down here. Of course they're inbred so they're not too much to handle.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 30, 2007 23:14:11 GMT -5
Here is a government agency that handed over supposedly confidential information to another agency, which then misused it. When one government agency has a piece of information, best assume they all do. So it's not such a stretch to assume that superhumans forced to share their identities are effectively publishing them to any interested party - sooner or later, they'll be everywhere in government, and among all those insiders are certain to be a venal few who will sell that data to interested villains. Played out according to the real world rules Marvel is currently fond of, the SHRA will result in the deaths of superhumans and/or their families.
|
|
|
Post by imperiusrex on Mar 31, 2007 0:29:56 GMT -5
just so we're clear, there's no such thing as a private citizen with super powers, right? under any reasonable circumstances, the SHRA would have very broad powers. any superhuman with a paranormal ability is an extreme danger. even someone whose power would be he could make plant life grow faster could kill millions if enough thought is put behind it. plus who's to say when a power has reached its full potential? anyone ever read the Damage series over at DC? or watched NBC's Heroes? there's an explosion waiting to happen. if you exhibit force blasts there's every reason to consider they might grow in strength and beyond your control. accident waiting to happen. even if you're trained it's still like having a loaded tank at your disposal. where do the most gun accidents happen? in the homes of registered users. you would have to have something along the lines of a house arrest capability, where people with powers would be monitored and if they have an ability that needs a mental trigger their brainwaves would be scanned, if its a phsyical ability like being able to run, their velocity would be constantly measured. but there's absolutely no way you could have a power, register and then be done with it saying "I'm not a hero." whether or not you play the game you're in the game... and if your ability was ever needed, you would be called into service. that just makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 31, 2007 4:20:07 GMT -5
Wow. Much more misinformation and fact twisting to sift through. Don't worry, I have stamina.
Right. And of course, it's foolish to think that if "cleaning up SHIELD" is on the list of priorities, "Cleaning up the CSA" is, right? Oh yeah, he'll almost definitely do so, but the average citizen doesn't kinow that. Well they also don't seem to know it will be turned over to the CSA. So, yet AGAIN I repeat, they need to decide if they are heroic or not. If they are, then they'll save Miriam and damned with the conseqeunces, or save her and suck in their pride and register. If they're not heroic, they won't- and they wouldn't have done so anyway.
The Marvel heroes don't know they employ Bullseye, and they technically don't deploy the Goblin- plus Moonstone has been missing and when last seen she was almost a hero.
Then you're a very selfish person who probably wouldn't have saved her even without a SHRA!
Are you suggesting for a second Spider-Man and these people WOULDN'T save her? of course they would, SHRA or not.
Ah but there's no problem there. If they've registered, then they are 100% allowed to use them in emergencies and whatnot. So in this case, someone could see the super-human but not licscenced hero save Miriam, report it, then the records would be checked and it would be established that this person is registered and used their powers because it was an emergency. No problem, end of story.
It's useless in modiying the behaviour of stubborn reckless unregistered heroes. Until they get arrested before they can endanger more lives of course.
Well then I'd say her remaining neighbours should complain to their local FSI team for not foreseeing it. If there's been a metahuman crime in an area, you really don't think they'd look at it an OUNCE more closely?
How's about this for a scenario; a villain or group- say the Wrecking Crew, decide to hide out west. They then massacre a bunch of towns, and Hell even part of a city! Unfortunately, because there's no FSI, no-one can stop them until it's WAY too late. How tragic.
Nope, not if you're registered.
Because we all know war veterans never lie.
Yeah, but it's still their choice. The Avengers could have all spontaneously announced their retirements and they don't get deprived of any "freedoms" at all. And I'm still not entirely sure it's a colossal sacrifice we're talking about here- and being a hero requires you make sacrifices. Always.
Quote: I would say that most definitely the 99.9995% (probably more) of the population are not powered and are, after the SHRA< safer than they ever were before it since the advent of super-humans.
No, you simply do so now.
Except no, that's not true. Firstly, you're assuming Tony Stark has turned over full control of the FSI to a still-corrupt CSA. Which is lunacy, because whatever you may think of Tony he's not a moron. It's also foolish to suggest there aren't dozens if not more of Initiative heroes with the same powers as you. Oh, and of course there is absolutely NO evidence whatsoever that super-humans could be deployed in other nations, they WON'T be as far as we know, and Iron Man, the... waht's the term... DIRECTOR OF SHIELD would oppose it with all his might, which is extremely considerable.
SHIELD is not the American Government. The Heroes are under the command of SHIELD mostly, it's the FSI that is being turned over to US control. (As far as I understand it.) And by the way there is no NEW real world vibe. Remember waaaay back when heroes were in NEW YORK in the 60s while the DCers ran around Metropolis and GOtham? Yeah. Thus far, the Canadians certainly seem to be seeking US hero help.
Well God knows they MUST be right if they agree with LATVERIA! I mean I'm sure LATVERIA hasn't perpetrated crimes worse than he Thunderbolts, Punisher, CSI and Hell even the American Government which hired Dell Rusk all put together!
And right here it stops being plausible.
It's an extreme stretch given that the ONLY person who knows is Iron Man.
They can just quietly register and go back to a normal life and never see the government again. Or they can retire without registering and do the same, but they better never use their powers!
And how do most gun crimes occur? From the guns of UNregistered gun owners. Besides, unlike the SHRA, registered gun owners don't get training.
But considering the sheer number of superheroes, even post Decimation it's very doubtful there'll be a registered private citizen with totally unique abilities which are also very useful.
|
|
|
Post by imperiusrex on Mar 31, 2007 11:34:38 GMT -5
well if you commit a crime, you're a lawbreaker and likely have illegal intent. gun crime isn't comparable to gun accidents. most guns are bought legally and then sold to criminals so really the gun crime is related to the weakness of legal gun laws in the first place, so how far are we going to take this? it's an extremely flawed analogy that doesn't apply to my statement. and I don't believe the gov't wants any unregistered telepaths walking around, period. after all it would pretty much suck if i could read the minds of the joint chiefs of staff and know where the military is going with their middle east campaign. makes it pretty easy for ambush...nevermind just accdentally getting the nuclear launch codes from the president's brain. whoops! and someone as strong as the Hulk would always be of value, as would be someone with transmutative abilities (for example changing lead into gold would be a power you couldn't let be unchecked. in one day that person could completely destabilize the US economy). if you're Iron man and are concerned about another Connecticut incident, I could easily wreak ten times as much havoc with three or four relatively innocuous abilities and then just go underground. if you're concerned about safety, the SHRA would have to steal some civil liberties. you could not just let molecule man just live his life. he has one bad day and the world could end.
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Mar 31, 2007 12:24:56 GMT -5
This is the problem with getting "too real". If you want to postulate that the Marvel US government is essentially the same as our real world US government, then the logical conclusion is that we would find superhumans very tightly controlled by the government. Rex brings up a lot of good points - you don't have to be a Sentry level powerhouse to cause a lot of damage to society. Telepaths are an excellent example. These people would be far too dangerous to be allowed to run around unwatched. Unfortunately, the only scenario that makes sense if we proceed with the real world analogy is that all of these people would be registered and rounded up, to become essentially state-controlled resources.
Which would make for a very unpleasant comic reading experience, IMHO.
|
|