What If? Superhuman Registration Acts

[ShadowArxxy]

Ugh, the SHRA. That entire plotline was a fucking mess, and I'm half-convinced the real Civil War was in the Bullpen (that is, among Marvel's writers), with writers like JMS explicitly contradicting or undermining or at least critiquing Millar's ending. Hell, half of the titles afterward were devoted to making Tony Stark look like a fascist, including the bit about Cloud 9, and the assholes never actually defined what the act really was meant for.

As I understand it, the idea was for the Superhuman Registration Act to not just be a larger-scale rehash of the mutant registration plotlines they'd already done, which and that was specifically why the Act was supposed to have been written and proposed by the good guys specifically in order to preempt the inevitable public backlash when some superpowered vigilante went too far.

Unfortunately, this plot concept pretty much got hijacked by feuds between the various writers, it pretty much degraded into exactly a large-scale rehash of mutant registration, and the pro-registration faction got massively Flanderized and retconned into being totalitarian facists because of the writer feud going maximum "take that!".

 

[Big Steve]

Yep. They couldn't even define if it was a forceful draft or "if you wanna fight crime you gotta sign up".

 

[ShadowArxxy]

My impression was that the original intent was along the lines of a compromise that focused on eliminating the (rightfully, IMO) discredited vigilante aspect of the existing superheroes, but this got rewritten as drafting anyone with "superhuman" capabilities (even purely technological ones) with the whole "you are considered a walking WMD and therefore are subject to government control if you use your powers for any reason whatsoever, ever." thing.

This is why I started out liking MCU Civil War much better, until it fell into more or less the same hole. The initial focus was on the fact that after the fall of SHIELD, the Avengers had no legitimate authority and were more or less coasting on an ever-declining basis of public popularity and support (while literally pissing off every government on Earth with their "We are above all authority, we have global absolute juridiction because we say so" behavior), and Steve simply didn't want to accept that this status quo was not sustainable.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

Yep. They couldn't even define if it was a forceful draft or "if you wanna fight crime you gotta sign up".

I am of the opinion that they really want to force people to become part of their superhuman army, it was discussed that they didn’t exactly have enough atm to fill up all 50 States(until they used the “Thunderbolts” en masse)

People like Maria Hill and Henry Gyrich wanted it to occur

That’s why Luke Cage’s house was invaded even when he decided that he would do absolutely nothing and Gyrich took Armory’s Tactigon(and not just for her to avoid accidentally killing people)and gave it to the Michael Van Patrick clone KIA

Kinda sad that I got attached to those Avengers The Initiative characters, among the first comics I read and going by the wiki they barely appear anywhere else

 

[Doomsought]

You could make the argument that superheroes are militia, thus congress cannot touch them due to separation of powers.

Even if they give a government provided salary?

What makes slavery is the coercion.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

You could make the argument that superheroes are militia, thus congress cannot touch them due to separation of powers.

What makes slavery is the coercion.

And Militia are only supposed to have muskets or something, superpowers aren’t firearms or guns....well gonna have to make entirely new laws to classify superpowers as guns or something

I thought it was being made to work without pay

 

[Doomsought]

And Militia are only supposed to have muskets or something, superpowers aren’t firearms or guns....well gonna have to make entirely new laws to classify superpowers as guns or something

No, that is stupid. So stupid that it goes right past retarded, to "quotes like that are why some people believe eugenics are a good idea." Militia are supposed to be a military threat: the purpose clause of the second amendment means that I should be able to buy an Abrams Main Battle Tank if I can gather up the money for it.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

No, that is stupid. So stupid that it goes right past retarded, to "quotes like that are why some people believe eugenics are a good idea." Militia are supposed to be a military threat: the purpose clause of the second amendment means that I should be able to buy an Abrams Main Battle Tank if I can gather up the money for it.

Is a Tank counted as a firearm?

 

[S'task]

No, that is stupid. So stupid that it goes right past retarded, to "quotes like that are why some people believe eugenics are a good idea." Militia are supposed to be a military threat: the purpose clause of the second amendment means that I should be able to buy an Abrams Main Battle Tank if I can gather up the money for it.

While logical, strictly speaking, the 2nd Amendment does not cover tanks or artillery, strictly speaking.

Is a Tank counted as a firearm?

The Second Amendment is not limited to firearms. The text of the amendment just uses the term "arms". "Arms", as commonly understood even in that period, simply means "weapons" and usually meant "weapons of the solider/warrior", and so easily covered not only firearms, but also swords, spears, knives, daggers, grenades, and, given that the Constitution, including the 2nd Amendment, has been ruled to expand with new technologies (IE, the Freedom of the Press covers mass, rapid printing machines just as much an manually set and operated printing presses in the day), this means you can make a logical argument that the 2nd applies to such things as Stun guns / tazers (in fact, this has already been said to be the case by the Supreme Court in a unanimous decision), man-portable rocket launchers, and automatic firearms of all stripes. In the future it would also cover things like weaponized lasers or something like a Star Wars blaster.

All that said, in the case of a tank you're dealing with different things. Firstly, as it stands right now, there's not really any laws preventing you from buying any tank. A tank is just an armored vehicle at its core, and the main prohibition with tanks is that they're not road legal. However, the WEAPONS on a tank are another issue entirely. One can make a case that the machine guns fall under the category of "arms", but "arms" did not generally cover cannons or other artillery. Yes, in the 18th century they allowed the private ownership of artillery, but as far as I am aware, cannon were not considered "arms", and so technically fall outside the purview of the 2nd Amendment.

As to superpowers? Going to utterly depend on the given superpower. Wolverine's claws? Those are hardly different than a sword or dagger and so easily fall under the 2nd. MR. Fantastic's stretchy powers? Well... strictly speaking, those aren't even a weapon, so not covered under the 2nd, but covered under the right to privacy and bodily autonomy. A Green Lantern Ring, Iron Man armor, and other such things? Likely covered under the 2nd. Heat vision? Again, not so different than a weaponized laser so likely considered covered.

That said, a LOT of these would have to be considered in court cases. I expect the Marvel universe actually has a long case law concerning what superpowers are considered, since many of the powers are inherently biological, so, for instance, they would have had a case where a superpowered mugger argued in court that they couldn't be convicted of "assault with a deadly weapon" since their superpower, not being separate from their being, wouldn't count as a "weapon". Such a case would end up with the laws being modified to account for such idiosyncrasies.

 

[Shipmaster Sane]

If ever suddenly superhumans, extra-species, magic users, super-cyborgs, secret super societies etc suddenly came into existence or were revealed to exist
How helpful or how obstructive and problematic would a “Superhuman Registration Act” be? With the justification that those above are far more deadly than the average human being and can use said abilities for great destruction
Think of it, not just like superheroes and supervillains fighting each other, but knowing that there are “nations within nations” that have been existing the whole time
Knowing that there are/were formerly secret subterranean civilizations of monsters as well as large organizations of human magic-users or extra-dimensional(or living here)magical nations existing, can scare the crap out of people
Think of the Unseelie Accords from Dresden Files as an example of “nations with nations” as the “supernatural nations” are many and have their own rules and are spread out
The latter adds another layer of complication as you wouldn’t be just dealing with vigilantes and criminals

We have a "registration act" for everyone, its called the census.

The revealing of a wide scale shadow-government covering up murders and violations of rights, however, would in and of itself cause tremendous upheaval and civil violence.

 

[Lanmandragon]

I oppose the idea of registration based on f**** the government. That being said alot is going to depend on what powers we're talking about. Something like MCU Ironman is far more controllable. Than something like a Kryptonian.

 

[Deleted member]

@S’task is right, anything which can be carried and operated by a single person is an “arm”. The old phrase was “guns and arms” since guns was a general term for cannon, howitzers, and mortars at the time, all of which are specific different kinds of guns, not small arms. Constitutional jurisprudence clearly holds that possession of arms is a right, whereas possession of guns (i.e. artillery) is a matter of regulation at the whim of Congress and the States. This came up often in debates over privateering and the arming of merchant ships for defence against piracy in the 18th and 19th centuries. Most private ownership of artillery at the time the constitution was written was to protect the enormous investment of the owners into a large merchant ship.

 

[Shipmaster Sane]

Also, registration for magicians, what if amongst those secret societies it’s already established there’s an organization for training, apprenticing, connecting and sort of governing them?

It's our country. They can go make their own nation on their own land if they want their own governing body.

That reminds me, in Marvel Civil War(not the MCU one)somebody made some argument about having to register your guns as being similar to needing to register your superpowers

i.e., unconstitutional and ethically wrong.

That would be the low magic ones.
In the more high magic or superhero universes, magic users with the firepower of a light artillery battery or worse aren't that uncommon.

I'm currious what settings you're referring to, where there are not "many" supernatural entities no more dangerous than a man with a rifle. Certainly not DC or Marvel.

And Militia are only supposed to have muskets or something

The fuck you just say.

@S’task is right, anything which can be carried and operated by a single person is an “arm”. The old phrase was “guns and arms” since guns was a general term for cannon, howitzers, and mortars at the time, all of which are specific different kinds of guns, not small arms. Constitutional jurisprudence clearly holds that possession of arms is a right, whereas possession of guns (i.e. artillery) is a matter of regulation at the whim of Congress and the States. This came up often in debates over privateering and the arming of merchant ships for defence against piracy in the 18th and 19th centuries. Most private ownership of artillery at the time the constitution was written was to protect the enormous investment of the owners into a large merchant ship.

The very existence of private warships in that period slants dramatically towards the idea that arms can be effectively interpreted to mean weapons.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

It's our country. They can go make their own nation on their own land if they want their own governing body.

What it the entrance into said own land is made somewhere in a country, through some sort of space-time manipulations, as pretty much everywhere has a government

But they are using said space time magic to expand the space of a place, so an entire city can be inside a closet?

Think or the Clockwork City from Elder Scrolls as an example

The very existence of private warships in that period slants dramatically towards the idea that arms can be effectively interpreted to mean weapons.

Then that just means the founding fathers were a bunch or fascists and the constitution is fascist and needs to be remade to disallow even those

 

[ShadowArxxy]

You could make the argument that superheroes are militia, thus congress cannot touch them due to separation of powers.

The militia doesn't have police powers, and pretty much every superhero engaged in vigilantism is engaging in grossly unlawful use of police powers. They don't even begin to resemble legitimate citizens' arrests.

This is why I strongly maintain that Civil War would have been amazingly better if they'd stuck to that and made registration about lawful authority versus vigilantism, with the anti-registration side arguing (like Cap in MCU Civil War) that waiting for lawful authority would "get in their way" and that they're entitled to act illegally because "we're the good guys" and "we're doing the right thing".

 

[CarlManvers2019]

The militia doesn't have police powers, and pretty much every superhero engaged in vigilantism is engaging in grossly unlawful use of police powers. They don't even begin to resemble legitimate citizens' arrests.

This is why I strongly maintain that Civil War would have been amazingly better if they'd stuck to that and made registration about lawful authority versus vigilantism, with the anti-registration side arguing (like Cap in MCU Civil War) that waiting for lawful authority would "get in their way" and that they're entitled to act illegally because "we're the good guys" and "we're doing the right thing".

You know in hindsight, I think even that What If? where Uatu showed Tony how things could have ended better, still sorta has the problem that everyone is giving their secret identities to Captain America

Sure, I think Cap would be more likely to interfere and beat the crap out of Gyrich and Osborn when given the opportunity, it still doesn’t stop the fact you’re handing over your secrets to the government

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Sure, I think Cap would be more likely to interfere and beat the crap out of Gyrich and Osborn when given the opportunity, it still doesn’t stop the fact you’re handing over your secrets to the government

For the most part, "secret identity" inherently equals no accountability, which is inherently antithetical to any sort of lawful exercise of authority. If I was writing the Registration Act, it would broadly fall under:

1. The creation of superhuman abilities via purely technical means would basically fall under the same legal regulations as weapons manufacturing.

2. Innate superhuman abilities would only require registration if uncontrolled and hazardous. Someone who has controlled abilities and is not using those abilities would be under no special legal burden, and would be allowed to use those abilities strictly for self defense under the same legal rules as any other citizen using force in self defense.

Edit: Addendum, anyone who intentionally provokes the release of uncontrolled and hazardous powers bears complete civil and criminal liability for all harm caused. This means you, Ross!​

3. Anyone who is engaged in "superheroing" beyond self-defense must be legally deputized, and that's the key point of registration. NO VIGILANTES.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

For the most part, "secret identity" inherently equals no accountability, which is inherently antithetical to any sort of lawful exercise of authority. If I was writing the Registration Act, it would broadly fall under:

1. The creation of superhuman abilities via purely technical means would basically fall under the same legal regulations as weapons manufacturing.

2. Innate superhuman abilities would only require registration if uncontrolled and hazardous. Someone who has controlled abilities and is not using those abilities would be under no special legal burden, and would be allowed to use those abilities strictly for self defense under the same legal rules as any other citizen using force in self defense.

Edit: Addendum, anyone who intentionally provokes the release of uncontrolled and hazardous powers bears complete civil and criminal liability for all harm caused. This means you, Ross!​

3. Anyone who is engaged in "superheroing" beyond self-defense must be legally deputized, and that's the key point of registration. NO VIGILANTES.

What if that person uses his powers for profit and/or charity? Like using biokinesis to cure a man’s cancer or using technokinesis to fix broken vehicles?

I guess if No. 2.2 were in effect, it would be Maria Hill and the SHIELD Cape Killers in trouble for attacking Luke Cage in his own house

What about supervillains? Frankly, allowing THEM to register and get a sort of pardon, even if they have to be captured then put into the Thunderbolts Program sounds VERY iffy

Even if most of the original Thunderbolts were a success when it comes to reform. I don’t think you can do that En Masse like they did in Civil War, even with chips inside em.

Also, can they be forced to follow orders against their will? Nobody wants to be made to risk their lives or be made to be in a job where they fight, hurt and maybe even kill others too

 

[ShadowArxxy]

What if that person uses his powers for profit and/or charity? Like using biokinesis to cure a man’s cancer or using technokinesis to fix broken vehicles?

Non-hazardous powers would fall under the same legal rules as any other citizen -- no special restrictions, but no special authority either. So they would not be allowed to practice medicine without a license, but only because it's illegal for everyone else too. It would make sense for the applicable regulatory bodies to create rulesets for people with related powers to work under the supervision of a relevant professional since most of those powers work largely by fiat and don't require actual know-how, but this would fall outside the scope of the Registration Act per se.

For jobs that aren't already regulated in this manner, a power-based practitioner could do just like anyone else.

What about supervillains? Frankly, allowing THEM to register and get a sort of pardon, even if they have to be captured then put into the Thunderbolts Program sounds VERY iffy.

Even if most of the original Thunderbolts were a success when it comes to reform. I don’t think you can do that En Masse like they did in Civil War, even with chips inside em.

Some level of amnesty would make sense; unlimited amnesty would not, and granting law enforcement powers to high level supervillains was an idiot act of plot.

Also, can they be forced to follow orders against their will? Nobody wants to be made to risk their lives or be made to be in a job where they fight, hurt and maybe even kill others too

Again, same rules as anyone else. So if you enlist as a soldier, yes you have to follow orders even in harm's way. If you're in a normal profession. . . no.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

Some level of amnesty would make sense; unlimited amnesty would not, and granting law enforcement powers to high level supervillains was an idiot act of plot.

They only got away with it due to people being so drunk on Norman Osborn, I’m not exactly remembering everything right, but I do recall supervillains fighting the Skrulls in Secret Invasion....still doesn’t stop the fact that people should be still really fucking pissed and scared of all the ”ex-supervillains”

Then again, Marvel Civilians almost always all are only afraid and full of hatred for superheroes and neutrals/rogues or mutants with powers and not doing much or anything

Again, same rules as anyone else. So if you enlist as a soldier, yes you have to follow orders even in harm's way. If you're in a normal profession. . . no.

I think Gyrich was thinking of muddying the lines between Law Enforcement and an actual Army

Still, police are supposed to only shoot with the intention to cripple and/or kill only when the situation is dire enough and they are supposed to get you to stand down