Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

FAN: Discuss various fictional worlds that don't qualify for SF.

Moderator: Steve

Post Reply
User avatar
biostem
Jedi Master
Posts: 1488
Joined: 2012-11-15 01:48pm

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by biostem »

Who said anything about amputating anything? In my example, the only initial requirement would be that said individual must register their powers with the government. That's it, full stop.

Now, if we learn about a rash of shootings, but with no actual bullets, casings, powder burns, or other related firearm evidence, we can look to see who has gun-like powers. This person turns up, and we include them in the investigation. We don't stop all over investigations - they carry on as normal, but given the nature of this person's powers, they become a suspect.

Now, let's say that we gather sufficient evidence to convict this person of the crime - in a normal court of law, and with due process. Because this person essentially has a built-in firearm, they are required to wear some sort of brace or glove that prevents them from activating their powers, and they are given supervised periods where said gloves are taken off, (these people supervising them will wear armor or other equipment sufficient to protect them from this person's attacks). During these visits, the person can groom themselves, get in some exercise, and so on. Perhaps, they'll outfit a cell with bulletproof walls, so they don't need the gloves all the time.

My point is, don't jump to some slippery-slope fallacy, here.
User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Formless »

Why would you expect him to register such a power voluntarily? What legal sanctions are you willing to place against those who are caught unregistered? And what are you going to do if no such magic bracelets or gloves exist, thus leaving amputation the only realistic option (in that example)? Its not a slippery slope argument, its an observation that you have put forth a false analogy. When its guns and cars, we can answer these questions quite simply because they are possessions. Superhuman abilities are more comparable to skills and knowledge. You can take a bomb away from a bomb maker, but you can't take away his knowledge of how to assemble a bomb.
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.
User avatar
biostem
Jedi Master
Posts: 1488
Joined: 2012-11-15 01:48pm

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by biostem »

So what's your answer, then? Do nothing? Let someone who has the perfectly concealable weapon go around completely unchecked? Oops! You and your family just received a lethal dose of radiation because a metahuman wanted to get Italian... sucks to be you.

No one is saying that these are bad people, but a system to prevent injury or death to the public at large would be necessary. A system of granting amnesty to anyone who voluntarily registers would be the first step. The second step would be the founding of a research group to develop ways of helping such empowered people to control & contain their powers, provide housing for those that couldn't, and also job placement, (with generous benefits), for those whose powers would be very useful.

If this setting has superhumans, I see no reason to argue that some method of safely containing/channeling their powers couldn't similarly be discovered.
Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 30165
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Simon_Jester »

Hence my choice of the words "on a residential street."

What strikes me as deeply problematic, more so than the occasional anonymous super-criminal in many ways, is the prospect of careless or reckless damage caused by the use of metahuman powers.

Part of the danger comes from outright battles; you can't do much about the villains' willingness to inflict collateral damage, but you want to mitigate the damage caused by 'heroes.' That is going to require some ability to train and organize well-meaning metahumans so that they know how to act and fight while protecting civilians and not accidentally knocking down any more buildings than reasonably required to get the job done. It also requires having some kind of policy by which nominally well meaning but in practice disruptive and dangerous teams of 'heroes' are encouraged to wind down their activities, rather than leaving a trail of wreckage and moral ambiguity in their wake.

Now, you can excuse a lot of random collateral damage that comes from battles, because, well, shit happens during a battle. The other part... not so much.

The other part comes from the side-effects and unintended consequences of people's powers. When it's Nitro-Saliva Woman accidentally gashing open a restaurant dishwasher's hand when he handles her explosive-residue-laced glass. Or Radioactive Man doubling the cancer rate in town by walking around as mild mannered Adam Mann. Or Cyclops tripping and falling and having his glasses come off and suddenly there's a trench burned in the pavement twenty meters long before he manages to shut his eyes.

And I have people here telling me that the correct response to this kind of danger is to do nothing, until such time as you charge people with criminal offenses and sue people for damages. I'm not a big fan of that mindset, for the same reason I'm not a fan of the libertarian insistence that you don't actually need regulations, you just need to use tort law to sue anyone who hurts anyone else.

In general, society runs much more smoothly if we use the law to prevent problems rather than trying to avenge the people the problem happens to after the fact with jail time and lawsuits.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov
User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Formless »

biostem wrote:So what's your answer, then? Do nothing? Let someone who has the perfectly concealable weapon go around completely unchecked? Oops! You and your family just received a lethal dose of radiation because a metahuman wanted to get Italian... sucks to be you.

No one is saying that these are bad people, but a system to prevent injury or death to the public at large would be necessary. A system of granting amnesty to anyone who voluntarily registers would be the first step. The second step would be the founding of a research group to develop ways of helping such empowered people to control & contain their powers, provide housing for those that couldn't, and also job placement, (with generous benefits), for those whose powers would be very useful.

If this setting has superhumans, I see no reason to argue that some method of safely containing/channeling their powers couldn't similarly be discovered.
I don't have an answer to these questions any more than I can tell you how to stop prisoners from making shivs to kill each other with. All I can tell you is that a registry is moot point once you do have an answer to these questions, not to mention (as I and Starglider have both said) that its probably worse than doing nothing. And I wouldn't be adverse to someone doing the scientific research to find ways of nullifying powers, its just that such things are rarely seen in comics except as one off gizmos for Lex Luthor to threaten Superman with every other week. Like I said, a completely voluntary registry that is used only for job placement and education is fine by me. It aligns with what I think is generally the most likely way of preventing someone from turning to crime-- though its never going to be foolproof, of course. No form of social control ever is. I just object to the logic "we have to do something, a registry is something, therefor we must do that."
Simon_Jester wrote:Hence my choice of the words "on a residential street."
Then don't strawman your opposition, because Starglider earlier pointed out the same thing I did. No one claimed it was privacy invasion when the government is watching you do something in public (let alone enforcing laws regarding public conduct), but we call it "private property" for a reason. What you do there is private until it effects other people, hence why you can drive a car or even race on a private racetrack without the same restrictions as a residential road or public highway (provided you either own the place or have the owners permission). The privacy arguments regard intrusions into that and similar domains by the government. Not slugging matches between Superman and The Incredible Hulk. In that case, the only real argument you will get from me is asking "okay, how do you propose to stop them?" That's a rather different question, though one I see few answers to other than "hire your own Kryptonians/X-Men/Sayians/Metahumans and give them a badge."
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.
Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 30165
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Simon_Jester »

Thing is, most of the ways to prevent danger from superpowers with side effects involve in some way curtailing the freedom of people who have powers with side effects.

Scott Summers has to wear funny glasses- of course, he's a decent human being so he does it anyway, but one might also modify it slightly with "and make sure they can't easily fall off your head." Rogue goes around wearing body-covering clothes at all times, because, again, incidental contact with her could hurt or kill you. Nitroglycerine Woman may not be able to go to restaurants without informing them of her condition, and has to warn her friends about how to handle dishes she's used.

These are all basic things that, by and large, responsible characters with powers do or try to do. They take measures to try and, you know, not kill anyone randomly.

And yet somehow... It is my perception that people jump in and cry "privacy violation" as soon as I start talking about the government proposing to become involved in the measures that are being used here. When in virtually every other category I can think of, where private individuals having the potential to cause major accidental harm is involved, we welcome some form of government action to help reduce the risk.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov
User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Formless »

Well, only because of the role the registry plays in your arguments. Speaking as someone with a condition that could potentially put others at risk if I get into a car, such concerns aren't actually theoretical. Yet my condition isn't something I was forced to register anywhere except my medical files, and I'm quite happy that employers basically don't need to know if I don't tell them (among other things). Sure, when going to get the drivers permit I had to mention that I had epilepsy and bring in a doctors form saying I was seizure free for long enough to be legal, but until then the government basically didn't know I had any kind of medical condition. If I had lied to the DMV, then gotten into a crash because of a seizure, I would have been held liable for breaking the law regarding people with my condition and probably charged with negligence regarding damage or bodily harm as soon as they found out that it was in my medical records the whole time (and that wouldn't take long at all). I would have no excuse for not knowing or telling the DMV and no excuse for operating a vehicle unsafely. As it is now though, if I have a seizure while behind the wheel (again, I do have a valid learner's permit) because I am taking appropriate precautions I would not suffer the same consequences because I was honest about my condition and know the risk of breakout seizures. And that is how it should be. The laws on the topic are specific and only apply post hoc to either something disastrous happening or to someone getting caught doing something dangerous. I don't see why this is any different, except in that my condition is literally the opposite of a superpower.
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.
User avatar
biostem
Jedi Master
Posts: 1488
Joined: 2012-11-15 01:48pm

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by biostem »

Would you feel any differently if your condition also included randomly firing out energy blasts each time you had a seizure? Sure, you you may not have had an episode for weeks or months, but there's always the possibility.

If I had such a condition, I would want to make sure I didn't accidentally kill anyone or cause lots of property damage. Now, if the government would be willing to help research a means of either controlling my condition or perhaps constructing a domicile whose walls could stop those energy blasts, then I would absolutely be in favor of it. Even if they couldn't do any of that, I'd have a moral obligation to both make sure those around me were aware of my condition and/or remove myself from any area where I could do harm.
User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Formless »

The answer to your question is I wouldn't feel any differently (car crashes tend to hurt everyone involved), and as for government help I already get that in the form of medicaid, without which I doubt I could afford the medications I take to control the problem.
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.
User avatar
Gaidin
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2646
Joined: 2004-06-19 12:27am
Contact:

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Gaidin »

biostem wrote:Would you feel any differently if your condition also included randomly firing out energy blasts each time you had a seizure? Sure, you you may not have had an episode for weeks or months, but there's always the possibility.

If I had such a condition, I would want to make sure I didn't accidentally kill anyone or cause lots of property damage. Now, if the government would be willing to help research a means of either controlling my condition or perhaps constructing a domicile whose walls could stop those energy blasts, then I would absolutely be in favor of it. Even if they couldn't do any of that, I'd have a moral obligation to both make sure those around me were aware of my condition and/or remove myself from any area where I could do harm.
You're asking about him and yourself. The thread is more about the law and everybody, which in reality legally typically demands reasonableness. Not the dramatic in-your-faceness the comics favor to bring about the story.
Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 30165
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Simon_Jester »

Formless wrote:Well, only because of the role the registry plays in your arguments. Speaking as someone with a condition that could potentially put others at risk if I get into a car, such concerns aren't actually theoretical. Yet my condition isn't something I was forced to register anywhere except my medical files, and I'm quite happy that employers basically don't need to know if I don't tell them (among other things). Sure, when going to get the drivers permit I had to mention that I had epilepsy and bring in a doctors form saying I was seizure free for long enough to be legal, but until then the government basically didn't know I had any kind of medical condition...
So, in other words, your condition became of interest to the government when it became a realistic possibility that your condition would pose a threat to bystanders. And you had to establish it wasn't going to be a problem.

You having a seizure on a sidewalk isn't a threat to bystanders, except by considerable, unforeseeable bad luck. You're not going to pose a threat to life and limb unless you start operating heavy machinery in public.

Certain metahumans pose such a threat just by walking around outside in a populated area. Anything they do is the equivalent of hopping in a car and driving around while epileptic. Or even more dangerous, and even more a reason to need treatment and medication.

Which makes it seem reasonable to me to ask such metahumans to bring this up with the government, and establish that it isn't going to be a problem. That's what you had to do, after all. If they present a similar hazard, they should have to do a similar amount of work to mitigate it and prove they've done so.
If I had lied to the DMV, then gotten into a crash because of a seizure, I would have been held liable for breaking the law regarding people with my condition and probably charged with negligence regarding damage or bodily harm as soon as they found out that it was in my medical records the whole time (and that wouldn't take long at all). I would have no excuse for not knowing or telling the DMV and no excuse for operating a vehicle unsafely. As it is now though, if I have a seizure while behind the wheel (again, I do have a valid learner's permit) because I am taking appropriate precautions I would not suffer the same consequences because I was honest about my condition and know the risk of breakout seizures. And that is how it should be.
Well yes- because you did in fact step up, say to the state "I have a problem, one which touches on your obligation to ensure public safety, but I'm doing my best to keep it under control and it is mostly under control."

I have a different problem that impacts my driving- bad vision. I'm literally not allowed to get behind the wheel without my glasses on- it says so on my license. And before they even gave me a license they tested my vision, precisely because so many people would otherwise pretend there isn't a problem (as a schoolteacher I can tell you that a LOT of 16-year-olds will pretend they can see just fine in order to avoid wearing glasses).

And being a metahuman, honestly, is in most cases at least as dangerous and poses about as many dangers to others as driving. I get that people have rights to privacy and to live their own rights, but the people around them also have a right to not die, and to know they will not die, due to the recklessness of unaccountable anonymous people.
The laws on the topic are specific and only apply post hoc to either something disastrous happening or to someone getting caught doing something dangerous. I don't see why this is any different, except in that my condition is literally the opposite of a superpower.
There are a wide variety of reckless behaviors which are outright banned, though.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov
Crazedwraith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11863
Joined: 2003-04-10 03:45pm
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Crazedwraith »

Okay following your logic. What if Cyclops hadn't been brain damagd as a child and actually didnt need a visor? Or your radiation-man had full control of his powers and irradiated people only as a conscious act?

Because I have a lot more sympathy with 'you are a public hazard and we need to protect people' than 'every metahuman goes on the list to be safe. Full stop'
User avatar
Purple
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5233
Joined: 2010-04-20 08:31am
Location: In a purple cube orbiting this planet. Hijacking satellites for an internet connection.

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Purple »

Crazedwraith wrote:Okay following your logic. What if Cyclops hadn't been brain damagd as a child and actually didnt need a visor? Or your radiation-man had full control of his powers and irradiated people only as a conscious act?

Because I have a lot more sympathy with 'you are a public hazard and we need to protect people' than 'every metahuman goes on the list to be safe. Full stop'
And again I have to ask why you feel being on a list is that bad given that in the whole of the EU, presumably Russia, China etc. and even in your america (social security number anyone) everyone is already on a list.
It has become clear to me in the previous days that any attempts at reconciliation and explanation with the community here has failed. I have tried my best. I really have. I pored my heart out trying. But it was all for nothing.

You win. There, I have said it.

Now there is only one thing left to do. Let us see if I can sum up the strength needed to end things once and for all.
Crazedwraith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11863
Joined: 2003-04-10 03:45pm
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Crazedwraith »

Take a look at my location again, Purple.

It does depend on what is contained on the list and how it's used. If every time ther'es a robbery the police pull out their powered person list and blame whoever doesn't have a solid alibi. That's a bad thing. Obviously.

Census data that they have on everyone is not the same thing as a superpowered equivalent of the sex offender's registry for example.

Anyway I was responding specifically the Simon's argument that we need to do know in case they're a public danger and irradiating people.
User avatar
Purple
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5233
Joined: 2010-04-20 08:31am
Location: In a purple cube orbiting this planet. Hijacking satellites for an internet connection.

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Purple »

Crazedwraith wrote:Take a look at my location again, Purple.

It does depend on what is contained on the list and how it's used. If every time ther'es a robbery the police pull out their powered person list and blame whoever doesn't have a solid alibi. That's a bad thing. Obviously.
Why? Why is it a bad thing for the police to investigate a potentially innocent person? Surely the police follows such leads all the time and discards them when the person proves innocent. Just like they will investigate anyone who fits the general physical description of the robber and was thought to have been nearby. This is only a problem if you have so little thrust in the law that you think they will pursue the investigation dishonestly for the explicit purpose of framing whom ever sort of fits.

Furthermore, one thing you really need to consider is how commonality vs distinctness will effect the assistance of such a list. In particular the value of the list for law enforcement is inversely proportionate to its propensity toward false positives.

If powers are generic and really common (like say 1 in 5 people has super strength) than such a use of the list really does have the potential to inconvenience a lot of people. But at the same time it makes the list useless because it does nothing to meaningfully narrow down the list of suspects either. So it probably would in fact not be bothered with.

If on the other hand powers are uniquely distinct and we only have a handful of people with each than such a list makes sense for law enforcement to have. But it's potential for false positives is also very low because if you know only 3 people on earth can shoot lasers out of their eyes and two of them happened to be in India at the time where as the last one happens to live next door to the grocery store that got lasered it's kind of hard to call that a false positive.
Anyway I was responding specifically the Simon's argument that we need to do know in case they're a public danger and irradiating people.
From this point on we really need to figure out some way to separate each others replies to one another from those to other people beyond just quotes. Any ideas?
It has become clear to me in the previous days that any attempts at reconciliation and explanation with the community here has failed. I have tried my best. I really have. I pored my heart out trying. But it was all for nothing.

You win. There, I have said it.

Now there is only one thing left to do. Let us see if I can sum up the strength needed to end things once and for all.
User avatar
Khaat
Jedi Master
Posts: 1034
Joined: 2008-11-04 11:42am

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Khaat »

Purple wrote:That depends on where you live. Where I am from and indeed in the entirety of the EU as far as I am aware the government issues nation level ID's which contain a photo. And they keep the data they issue on file. So yes, my government knows my hair color at any given time.

Well, congratulations for living in a progressive, forward-thinking community that doesn't have a recent contemporary history inclusive of gross human rights abuses, like the whole world might not! "OP was not about (nationality) but the whole the world."
Purple wrote:Shockingly enough so far the government has yet to use this information to send assassins after me comic book style.
Where in the OP did it say "best case-scenarios only for defense against" when proponents of Forcible Registration have been hauling out "Deadly Radioactive Man" as justification for stripping "TV Remote Guy" (and the other 99.9% of metahumans) of his right to privacy and opening him to discrimination?
My country has a very recent history of not protecting minorities equally under the law: evidence to establish precedent.
Purple wrote:And how is any of that threatened here? We are talking about a government program that keeps tabs on information they can essentially data mine off facebook.
Don't have Facebook, don't give a fuck about it. Do you honestly think Confused Lesbian Particletron Girl is going to be posting about her orientation powers on Facebook, when she's afraid to come out to her family?
Khaat wrote:Patriot Act.
Purple wrote:A rather extreme example, don't you think? Compare that to the entirety of the remainder of the human legislature across the planet.
Where did anyone agree that extreme cases need not apply? Oh, right: never. You asked why I was against, here is a proof. We cannot discount this data just because "it doesn't affect me in the EU LALALA!" It establishes an actual, realized, REAL WORLD scenario I have been against this whole time.
Purple wrote:What exactly is your point here? I genuinely can not figure it out. The best I can tell is that you seem to be taking the worst possible examples of relatively recent human history and using them as a justification to call all human behavior into question. But for the life of me I can not figure out what your intention with this is.
TL/DR: people don't share with rivals. I'm sorry, I really can't make it any more simple.
Purple wrote:Call me when you stop hyperventilating.
Ad hominem. You asked, there's why. Real-world evidence against Forcible Registration.
Purple wrote:1. Not american, don't give a fuck about america, OP was not about america but the whole world.
Not EU, don't give a fuck about EU. I take a position on what I do know: the US and its history and... where's the problem with this? Any such legislation would be national long before it was brought to the UN. Did the US leave "the whole world"?
biostem wrote:would it make sense to devote significant resources toward trying to forcibly register and police such people?
The OP is talking "forcibly register". The first part of that is really, really important for our discussion.
Purple wrote:2. My argument is in no small part, to put it bluntly that you americans have a nation level culture of anarchist paranoia not shared by most of the world.
ad hominem(/nation?) Your opinion is irrelevant regarding the established pattern of abuse not only being possible, but probable somewhere in the world.
Purple wrote:And none of those are so bad that I'd be afraid of the government on a daily basis if I lived there. Well, not my government anyway. The american government is something to be feared if your country is close to america or indeed anywhere where the american empire casts its gaze. But that's a different topic.
So you brought it up here because...? More ad hominem is better?
Rule #1: Believe the autocrat. He means what he says.
Rule #2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule #3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule #4: Be outraged.
Rule #5: Don’t make compromises.
User avatar
Purple
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5233
Joined: 2010-04-20 08:31am
Location: In a purple cube orbiting this planet. Hijacking satellites for an internet connection.

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Purple »

Instead of continuing the back and forth I'll just distill my argument for you down to the bare bones.

As far as I am concerned the measures proposed here are in no way, shape or form morally problematic. They might be practical to enforce in some places (EU) and impractical in others (US) due to the local culture and social structure. But that does not constitute a moral, only a mechanical issue.
It has become clear to me in the previous days that any attempts at reconciliation and explanation with the community here has failed. I have tried my best. I really have. I pored my heart out trying. But it was all for nothing.

You win. There, I have said it.

Now there is only one thing left to do. Let us see if I can sum up the strength needed to end things once and for all.
User avatar
Khaat
Jedi Master
Posts: 1034
Joined: 2008-11-04 11:42am

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Khaat »

Simon_Jester wrote:I'm arguing that he should be examined by professionals who will evaluate the risk he poses and try to construct the least restrictive possible plan for how he can live as much of a normal life as possible without giving anybody cancer.

Stop strawmanning my position.
The OP uses the term "forcibly register". I'm against that, it's inflamatory. The very metahumans you fear have been named "enemy" by this, as have those who are no threat at all.
I'm all for social service and support for metahumans (or anyone else who actually needs help.) What I'm against is the removal of rights and exposing to discrimination a class of people based on an outlier.
Simon_Jester wrote:
Khaat wrote:
Simon_Jester wrote:Put this way. I can't go around handling radioactive materials in public spaces just because I want to, without first certifying it with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Because the thing or the improper use of it is regulated, not you. And actually, you can!* You will merely be punished for that act under existing laws after you have. And your radioactive gunk will be confiscated by the authorities, because it's a controlled thing.
Exactly how does that work when 'it' and 'you' are physically inseparable?

I mean, you seem to be staking out what is to me a rather extreme position, which is that people are permitted to be as reckless as they wish in terms of hazards posed to others by their exotic physiology, so long as "no one actually gets hurt."
Then you and I have missed each other: until they hurt someone else, they have done nothing illegal under existing law. I'm not saying don't prosecute, I'm saying don't presume guilt based on class. Not every metahuman is Radioactive Man.
Simon_Jester wrote:Thing is, that's totally out of line with basically every other precedent regarding recklessness. There are a host of examples of reckless conduct being made explicitly illegal regardless of whether anyone gets hurt (e.g. drag racing, drunk driving, discharging a firearm in certain areas or under certain conditions).
I have no problem with existing recklessness statutes. Use them. I have a problem with forcible registration (from the OP).
Simon_Jester wrote:
Khaat wrote:
Purple wrote:The reason we are using such extreme cases is because those are the only ones that matter. Any law designed to be at all practical and sane is going to define many degrees of being metahuman Jewish/Black/Palestinian/Romani/liberal/Japanese/gay. And those definitions are going to effect most metahumans [the list] to little or no degree. It is in fact only extreme examples like radioactive man that are going to have their lives noticeably effected. Nobody is going to make laws specifically designed to oppress naturally pink haired man.
Fixed it for you.
Actually, Simon's SUPAA would make it criminal to be a metahuman, if you hadn't surrendered your rights to privacy and Registered. Y'know, because vestigial wings are soooo threatening.
I explicitly mentioned having consistent, repeated amnesties to cover that. I don't actually want to criminalize "breathing while super," I want to do whatever helps ensure that metahumans are integrated into government policy in a mutually beneficial way.
We (Purple and I at least) aren't discussing the OP under your select variation*, but in broad strokes.
I do agree with many of your changes: social support, amnesty for emergent metas with dangerous/uncontrolled powers, voluntary training and opportunities to volunteer to "put powers to good", etc., but I can also see the potential for danger: any list can be used by those who find it. Privacy is at significant risk. SUPAA would have to also include similar components to HIPPA, perhaps the Registry is only under a nom de guerre, with little to no link to the "secret ID."
Simon_Jester wrote:Also, vestigial wings or other such 'non-power powers' might well not even qualify you as a metahuman under my working definition, since they do not confer capabilities significantly outside the envelope of human performance.
I don't think the OP addressed what was or wasn't, and if you drew such a line, I missed it.
There is still a concern for discrimination. Are your metas going to become a protected class right away under SUPAA, or will they have to go through a civil rights era?

*I may have over-stepped in attributing the OP forcible registration element ("criminalizing breathing while super") to your variation, Simon. If so, I apologize. I honestly didn't read a revocation of that point.
Rule #1: Believe the autocrat. He means what he says.
Rule #2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule #3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule #4: Be outraged.
Rule #5: Don’t make compromises.
User avatar
Khaat
Jedi Master
Posts: 1034
Joined: 2008-11-04 11:42am

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Khaat »

Sorry, mis-post!
Ok, Purple, understood. I disagree as to the moral issue.
Have a nice day!
Rule #1: Believe the autocrat. He means what he says.
Rule #2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule #3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule #4: Be outraged.
Rule #5: Don’t make compromises.
User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Formless »

Simon_Jester wrote:So, in other words, your condition became of interest to the government when it became a realistic possibility that your condition would pose a threat to bystanders. And you had to establish it wasn't going to be a problem.

You having a seizure on a sidewalk isn't a threat to bystanders, except by considerable, unforeseeable bad luck. You're not going to pose a threat to life and limb unless you start operating heavy machinery in public.

Certain metahumans pose such a threat just by walking around outside in a populated area. Anything they do is the equivalent of hopping in a car and driving around while epileptic. Or even more dangerous, and even more a reason to need treatment and medication.

Which makes it seem reasonable to me to ask such metahumans to bring this up with the government, and establish that it isn't going to be a problem. That's what you had to do, after all. If they present a similar hazard, they should have to do a similar amount of work to mitigate it and prove they've done so.
Yes, but your argument precludes the fact that only a minority of superheroes have, as TVTropes aptly describes it, "power incontinence". Even super strength individuals rarely have difficulty shaking your hand without crushing bones (apparently super-sensitivity just comes with the package). When you appeal to the fact that fights between the X-Men and the Brotherhood tend to produce heavy collateral damage, and then bring up the fact that Rouge can't touch people without hurting them to support registering all of the X-Men, you are getting your wires crossed. One of those things has nothing to do with the other, but the overall argument hinges on them being basically equivalent, hence we must also register Kitty Pride even though her intangibility powers are both harmless and something she can perfectly control. Its a non-sequitor. Sure, Kathrine can bypass almost any lock or enter any vault (although I think there are materials that she can't pass through, but I don't know what they are) but the fact she could be the perfect thief if she wanted to is a separate issue that gets into criminology and questions of enforcement I don't think we have to retread (but at least if there are materials she can't pass through you can actually make a prison she can't escape from). She should only be punished and registered after committing burglary or trespass, and I see nothing wrong with that.

Besides which there is the fact that the government isn't the one that registered my disability-- it was my doctor, and it likely would be the same for anyone like Rogue. In X-Men: Evolution (which is the show that first really exposed me to the franchise), the episode that first introduced Rogue demonstrated that the act of touching people (mutant or otherwise) also transfers their memories to her, and this caused her serious distress and confusion. She was a liability to herself until after the other mutants reached out to her to provide help. I put forth that the first people to know that there is a problem will usually be the metahuman themself and their friends and family. Radiation Man might be an exception, but even then its because he experiences a different "normal" than everyone else. Spitbomb, the hypothetical character whose saliva contains sensitive explosives? Like Rogue, she would likely be the first person hurt by her own power, which is where the discovery that she has a problem will be made. Her "normal" is actually the same as everyone else, but its interrupted by the emergence of an abnormal ability that causes intermittent issues if she is careless. Indeed, I'm not sure you can even call Radiation Man's abilities a "superpower" if he can't control them, except insofar as it implies he could walk right into the heart of Fukushima and not give a damn about the hard rads he is exposing himself to. Its kind of a trade-off that gravitates more towards "disability" than "superpower" in terms of living a normal life.
Well yes- because you did in fact step up, say to the state "I have a problem, one which touches on your obligation to ensure public safety, but I'm doing my best to keep it under control and it is mostly under control."

I have a different problem that impacts my driving- bad vision. I'm literally not allowed to get behind the wheel without my glasses on- it says so on my license. And before they even gave me a license they tested my vision, precisely because so many people would otherwise pretend there isn't a problem (as a schoolteacher I can tell you that a LOT of 16-year-olds will pretend they can see just fine in order to avoid wearing glasses).

And being a metahuman, honestly, is in most cases at least as dangerous and poses about as many dangers to others as driving. I get that people have rights to privacy and to live their own rights, but the people around them also have a right to not die, and to know they will not die, due to the recklessness of unaccountable anonymous people.
Sure, but my point is that they didn't test your vision until you went to get a license. I'm going to make a safe guess that you had a prescription before that, though, because (and I wear glasses too, so I speak from experience) bad eyesight impacts your daily life in myriad ways. Yet, that prescription was unknown to the government until it became relevant to public safety, and not before. Same idea. Radiation Man's powers are almost certainly covered by existing quarantine laws, but Bruce Banner's powers as The Hulk would be covered by an entirely different aspect of the law even though he also presents a threat to public safety when enraged; and Hawkgirl's powers aren't covered at all by existing laws because there are no uncontrolled side effects of her powers. Bruce Banner didn't always have a problem, only after his first transformation, and he can legitimately claim insanity as a defense against whatever damage he caused that first time. Only after that is the onus on him to prevent another incident (at least under my interpretation of he law). And even then, that assumes that he caused damage that the government has reason to care about, as opposed to him wrecking his own property, and of course its the former that is canon to the Marvel universe but that's beside the point I'm making. Its relevant to the government only after it has proven to be an issue, not before, and even when its a known problem that a certain percentage of the population has to live with they still stay out of the affairs of the individual. Likewise, all infectious diseases turn innocent people into a health hazard, but there are stringent rules in place dictating when we can and can't quarantine them.
There are a wide variety of reckless behaviors which are outright banned, though.
Yeah... uh... are you going somewhere with that thought?
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.
User avatar
Gaidin
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2646
Joined: 2004-06-19 12:27am
Contact:

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Gaidin »

Purple wrote: And again I have to ask why you feel being on a list is that bad given that in the whole of the EU, presumably Russia, China etc. and even in your america (social security number anyone) everyone is already on a list.
Uhhhh. When a crime happens the police don't have access to, much less pull out the social security database and start knocking on doors and demanding alibis. And the social security database has a specific god damn purpose. Can you avoid blatant fallacies at least please?
User avatar
biostem
Jedi Master
Posts: 1488
Joined: 2012-11-15 01:48pm

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by biostem »

Sure, but my point is that they didn't test your vision until you went to get a license
Because your poor vision can't possibly hurt others until you get behind a 2+ ton vehicle. Now imagine that a mere misstep could kill someone, bring down a house, etc.
Hawkgirl's powers aren't covered at all by existing laws because there are no uncontrolled side effects of her powers
You probably need to include subsonic flight under something akin to the laws governing ultralight aircraft. At the very least, there's have to be laws against flying above a certain altitude or within a certain distance of airports.
Likewise, all infectious diseases turn innocent people into a health hazard, but there are stringent rules in place dictating when we can and can't quarantine them.
I absolutely agree. However, a normal person, even if infected with the most dangerous disease imaginable, isn't going to also melt down barricades or summon plague monsters. They also, generally, suffer the symptoms of said disease, so it's pretty apparent that they are not well.


I also want to point out that, at least in many of the X-Men cartoons, many of the members of the Brotherhood of Mutants turned against humanity because they were teased and mocked - if their powers were identified earlier, and they were both given training on how best to use them, and the public was aware of and embraced metahumans, they probably would not have turned into villains.
User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Formless »

biostem wrote:
Sure, but my point is that they didn't test your vision until you went to get a license
Because your poor vision can't possibly hurt others until you get behind a 2+ ton vehicle. Now imagine that a mere misstep could kill someone, bring down a house, etc.
Its an imperfect analogy, but all analogies are in some way. I think it remains valid in the places it needs to be valid, especially once we consider the other valid analogies that have been made to cover other aspects of the situation. Again, there is the analogy to infectious diseases and disabilities. We don't register HIV patients under the law despite the risks they pose to their partners. And the law only covers committing specific acts, not the knowledge of how to do them. No one analogy covers everything a superhuman has to put up with, but in sum we can see that the potential danger a superhero with full control over their powers poses doesn't justify discriminating against them in advance of them doing something wrong. And there are plenty of arguments against it that still haven't been addressed.
Hawkgirl's powers aren't covered at all by existing laws because there are no uncontrolled side effects of her powers
You probably need to include subsonic flight under something akin to the laws governing ultralight aircraft. At the very least, there's have to be laws against flying above a certain altitude or within a certain distance of airports.
Maybe, but that's a modification to an existing law (somewhat) comparable to the FAA's decision to have all drone aircraft above a certain weight reclassified as aircraft subject to most of the existing regulations on full size aircraft. Enough people were dicking around with them irresponsibly that a fix was in order. Of course, again there is that "ability VS possession" thing to consider, but at least we're talking about a specific set of behaviors. But its different than registering everyone that might fly around an airfield. It took a lot of violations before the FAA changed its rules regarding drones.
Likewise, all infectious diseases turn innocent people into a health hazard, but there are stringent rules in place dictating when we can and can't quarantine them.
I absolutely agree. However, a normal person, even if infected with the most dangerous disease imaginable, isn't going to also melt down barricades or summon plague monsters. They also, generally, suffer the symptoms of said disease, so it's pretty apparent that they are not well.
Airborn diseases aren't easy to quarantine, so I don't think that argument holds as much weight as you think it does.
I also want to point out that, at least in many of the X-Men cartoons, many of the members of the Brotherhood of Mutants turned against humanity because they were teased and mocked - if their powers were identified earlier, and they were both given training on how best to use them, and the public was aware of and embraced metahumans, they probably would not have turned into villains.
I disagree, in the context of that specific universe, because the X-Men themselves are frequently targets of discrimination, harassment, prejudice and so despite being part of a (non-government) program intended to do exactly what you are talking about. They somehow can't ever seem to achieve good PR despite all of their heroics. Because of course the franchise is supposed to be an allegory for the civil rights movement and the Brotherhood is an allegory for the Black Power movement, and despite both movements being in conflict with one another they both still suffered the same oppression from the white majority. Whatever the in-universe reason is for the discrimination against mutants, it obviously won't go away so easily or else the basic premise of the story would fall apart.
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.
Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 30165
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Simon_Jester »

Khaat wrote:The OP uses the term "forcibly register". I'm against that, it's inflamatory. The very metahumans you fear have been named "enemy" by this, as have those who are no threat at all.
I've been staking out an independent position on the matter long enough that I feel entitled to continue doing so; I appreciate that later down this post you recognized that I am not calling for gunpoint registrations.

I do recommend making some degree of registration/examination/something-like-that mandatory, just like it's mandatory to get certification and a driver's license before you can start driving a car around in public. But bluntly, we accept certain degrees of burden as the price of a driver's license, and getting a license is a near-universal experience in some countries, with almost everyone physically capable of safely operating a motor vehicle having gotten one.

It's not a simple case of "any regulation is a privacy violation and takes people's rights away."
Simon_Jester wrote:Then you and I have missed each other: until they hurt someone else, they have done nothing illegal under existing law. I'm not saying don't prosecute, I'm saying don't presume guilt based on class. Not every metahuman is Radioactive Man.
The flip side is that some metahumans won't even know they're a threat until someone tells them. Glowing Man may not know he is actually Radioactive Man until someone walks past him holding a Geiger counter. Some teenager who gains the ability to spit nitroglycerine may not realize the implications of her ability.

This is why I mentioned to Formless the fact that I was required to get my eyes inspected for my driver's license. It wasn't enough for me to say "oh no, I think I see just fine." My opinion of whether I see well enough without glasses to be a safe driver is irrelevant, because lots of people have the opinion that they are safe or in full control of themselves. Not all of them are correct to think that.

So I really do think that at some point, every metahuman should have to work at least briefly with some group or organization qualified to evaluate their abilities, advise them on potential side effects and ways their power could cause harm, and recommend ways to mitigate the side effects and harm.

Trusting each individual metahuman isn't going to be good enough. It's not just the actively toxic/dangerous ones who are the problem, it's the ones too dumb to know their own strength, or the ones who haven't thought through all the implications of their own powers. Say, the speedster who doesn't realize that trotting through freeway traffic at a hundred miles an hour while weaving between cars may be safe enough for him but is likely to cause other motorists to be startled and swerve and lose control.
Simon_Jester wrote:Also, vestigial wings or other such 'non-power powers' might well not even qualify you as a metahuman under my working definition, since they do not confer capabilities significantly outside the envelope of human performance.
I don't think the OP addressed what was or wasn't, and if you drew such a line, I missed it.
There is still a concern for discrimination. Are your metas going to become a protected class right away under SUPAA, or will they have to go through a civil rights era?
My SUPAA might well include making metahumans a protected class, although there would have to be a lot of caveats. It's not automatically hiring discrimination if you refuse to employ Made Of Glass Man in a workplace where he might shatter, or Randomly Flashing Lights Woman in a place where her causing a distraction at the wrong moment with random flashing light is likely to prove disastrous for others.
Formless wrote:Yes, but your argument precludes the fact that only a minority of superheroes have, as TVTropes aptly describes it, "power incontinence". Even super strength individuals rarely have difficulty shaking your hand without crushing bones (apparently super-sensitivity just comes with the package). When you appeal to the fact that fights between the X-Men and the Brotherhood tend to produce heavy collateral damage, and then bring up the fact that Rouge can't touch people without hurting them to support registering all of the X-Men, you are getting your wires crossed. One of those things has nothing to do with the other, but the overall argument hinges on them being basically equivalent...
Nonono. They're different wires running in parallel.

Problem one is that not all individuals with superpowers can use them safely. Some of them have powers that are inherently dangerous to bystanders, while others are predictably going to be just plain too ignorant, immature, or otherwise incapable of the necessary level of care and precaution. Accidentally ripping doors out of walls with super-strength all the time is usually played for laughs when it happens, but some people have that problem in real life to some extent and if they were strong enough to knock down whole buildings with careless gestures, it'd happen more.

Problem two is the prospect of specifically crime-fighting superpowered individuals being reckless about collateral damage. Not all such 'superheroes' are, but some are, and it's hardly unlikely that other new ones might be.

Both problems, while unrelated, have comparable solutions: training and liaising with the metahuman community, making sure that as many metahumans as possible know their own strength and have clear ideas about how to use them safely, either in combat (for would-be superheroes) or out of it.
Besides which there is the fact that the government isn't the one that registered my disability-- it was my doctor, and it likely would be the same for anyone like Rogue. In X-Men: Evolution (which is the show that first really exposed me to the franchise), the episode that first introduced Rogue demonstrated that the act of touching people (mutant or otherwise) also transfers their memories to her, and this caused her serious distress and confusion. She was a liability to herself until after the other mutants reached out to her to provide help. I put forth that the first people to know that there is a problem will usually be the metahuman themself and their friends and family. Radiation Man might be an exception, but even then its because he experiences a different "normal" than everyone else. Spitbomb, the hypothetical character whose saliva contains sensitive explosives? Like Rogue, she would likely be the first person hurt by her own power, which is where the discovery that she has a problem will be made. Her "normal" is actually the same as everyone else, but its interrupted by the emergence of an abnormal ability that causes intermittent issues if she is careless. Indeed, I'm not sure you can even call Radiation Man's abilities a "superpower" if he can't control them, except insofar as it implies he could walk right into the heart of Fukushima and not give a damn about the hard rads he is exposing himself to. Its kind of a trade-off that gravitates more towards "disability" than "superpower" in terms of living a normal life.
We might hope that this is generally going to be the case.

Maybe my problem is that I work with teenagers, and when I envision almost any of them suddenly obtaining superpowers, I flinch inwardly, because the great majority of them would almost certainly manage to badly injure others, and possibly also themselves, by sheer recklessness. Because, frankly, a lot of teenagers are rather careless, prone to making bad decisions for ill-advised reasons, and lack a great deal of basic practical knowledge that would otherwise help them avoid causing harm to others.

And when I say all this, I'm not even counting the ones who would do so deliberately.
Sure, but my point is that they didn't test your vision until you went to get a license.
Driver's licenses are the closest analogy I have. For quite a lot of metahumans, just "breathing while super" does require a level of control and special knowledge comparable to driving. If you have those kinds of power, then if you're not as careful in day to day activity as normal people are driving, odds are that someone gets hurt.
Same idea. Radiation Man's powers are almost certainly covered by existing quarantine laws, but Bruce Banner's powers as The Hulk would be covered by an entirely different aspect of the law even though he also presents a threat to public safety when enraged; and Hawkgirl's powers aren't covered at all by existing laws because there are no uncontrolled side effects of her powers.
Thing is, it's sometimes hard to know who is and isn't dangerous without checking. And, realistically, you'd have an entire category of people who obtain powers while still too immature, undereducated, or otherwise unfit to accurately assess the situation and take appropriate precautions.
There are a wide variety of reckless behaviors which are outright banned, though.
Yeah... uh... are you going somewhere with that thought?
We routinely regulate activities, including some which are normal everyday activities for tens or hundreds of millions, to pre-empt recklessness. To explicitly say "no, you can't do that, it's too dangerous."

To me this constitutes precedent for telling certain supers "no, you can't run at a hundred miles an hour in dense traffic, no, you can't go out in public without your power-blocking goggles on," and so forth.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov
User avatar
Gaidin
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2646
Joined: 2004-06-19 12:27am
Contact:

Re: Would it even be worth it to try policing superheroes?

Post by Gaidin »

Simon_Jester wrote: Trusting each individual metahuman isn't going to be good enough. It's not just the actively toxic/dangerous ones who are the problem, it's the ones too dumb to know their own strength, or the ones who haven't thought through all the implications of their own powers. Say, the speedster who doesn't realize that trotting through freeway traffic at a hundred miles an hour while weaving between cars may be safe enough for him but is likely to cause other motorists to be startled and swerve and lose control.
I think a real life situation for one of these powers might help your argument a little bit. You know. Why the speedster gets a license to run if he wants to dick around on roads and why when on the road he doesn't ever ever ever suddenly stop or greatly slow down. Because, you know, he's not alone on the road. And these are situations they magically avoid in the tv shows and comics.

Post Reply