Welcome to unstablemolecules.com, the discussion home for mightyavengers.net, uncanon.com and uncannyxmen.net!

The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Level 10: In this section, people will argue about all x-related topics, such as certain character ages, continuity or the nature of the Phoenix. Newbies beware!
Red Strings
Posts: 168
Joined: 09 Apr 2007, 20:20

The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Red Strings » 25 Jan 2020, 12:06

So I was reading up about MRA for general geeking (fanfiction) purposes and I had a thought. Now I know we're all on an X-Men board here and obviously we all love mutants haha. But I want to propose a hypothetical to you; if mutants were real, would you support a registration act? (Second conditional hell yeah).

I'm just interested to see people's responses here and I hope it's the correct forum for this.

User avatar
tokenBG1009
Posts: 6032
Joined: 19 Jun 2007, 20:34

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by tokenBG1009 » 25 Jan 2020, 12:20

Yes and No.

Mutants are dangerous. Scott Summers could level a neighborhood without even trying. Emma Frost has proven in HoX how dangerous a telepath with few moral qualms could behave. Magneto is Magneto. Mystique could be literally anyone. Shadowcat could go almost anywhere. I've never actually had an issue with the idea about the Mutant Registration Act.

The problem is, governments and the people that run them are fallible. Someone is going to get their hands on that list and try to use it for something nefarious. Because of this if I had to vote on it I would vote "No."

I don't support a lot of registration type things because I do not trust the people in the government to not use it for something bad.
"Sometimes I do feel like I'm a failure. Like there's no hope for me. But even so, I'm not gonna give up. Ever!" -Izuku Midoriya

User avatar
Lavettye
Posts: 1077
Joined: 22 Feb 2016, 18:33
Location: Germany

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Lavettye » 25 Jan 2020, 12:47

I'm with token here.
What would even be the point of registration? Let's say three dozen telepaths have registered willingly, and then there's a telepathic attack on the president. You still can't determine, which of the telepaths did it. Besides, the mutants planning to commit a crime will do everything they can to avoid registration, so you'll just have some peaceful harmless mutants on that list and suffering whatever negative fall-out there will be. Registration will lead to segregation and eventually incarceration. As such, in real life, I'd be happy if there were a Krakoa to where all the mutants would emigrate willingly.

The "mutants are dangerous" argument can be applied to so many other things. Who's next? People with an IQ over 140? They are dangerous as they could be inventing the next WMD. What about people who have trained and mastered several styles of martial arts - do they need to register too? They could easily kill a person with their bare hands. In times where anyone can download a blueprint for a bomb on the internet, everyone is potentially dangerous. It comes down to personality traits and personal choice not to harm each other, but that's nothing you can determine by genetic test and have registered.
Last edited by Lavettye on 25 Jan 2020, 16:05, edited 1 time in total.
[PL_2.0]

User avatar
Blackcyclops
Posts: 20434
Joined: 12 Apr 2007, 21:03

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Blackcyclops » 25 Jan 2020, 14:45

^^^^

Agreed and I think that’s the fundamental difference between a mutant registration and a SUPERhero registration. One is an identity group that a person generally has no control over being a member of, the other is an occupation that a person willing participates in.
Morrison Era 2001-2005, Decimation Era from 2005-2012, Bendis Era 2012-2016, M-Pox era 2016-2017, and Resurrxion 2017-2019, Hickman Era 2019-?

Red Strings
Posts: 168
Joined: 09 Apr 2007, 20:20

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Red Strings » 25 Jan 2020, 16:03

I completely agree with you guys (just to clarify). For me, the idea of registration in itself might not be such an awful idea, like Token said, some of these mutants have the ability to cause some serious destruction, but it's the possibility (and probability let's face it), of this registration being used for nefarious purposes, whether it be to commit hate crimes or even to use the mutants for other clandestine purposes. The first episode of the TAS showed it being used for this very purpose (to kidnap those registered aka Jubilee using the Sentinels). The idea of a registration act could have some serious world wide ramifications (as shown in Days of Future Past) and could end with our mutants being branded and imprisoned.

I ask this purely because I've been debating writing a fanfic and wanted to consider the idea from the opposite side, the everyman in the street who doesn't have powers, who sees mutants causing world wide destruction, who worries his daughter might be in school with a mutant who accidentally causes a disaster. This kind of issue is something I imagine our politicians (whatever country we hail from) would jump on in order to base their election campaigns on and this kind of hypothetical is kind of fascinating.

The entire point of sci-fi is that it's just that; sci-fi but I've always enjoyed the kind of story that draws from our own experiences and it's stuff like that I try to incorporate into my writing and was simply curious about everyone's thoughts. Do I think it should happen? no. However, do I think it would be voted in? Hmmm, I think it probably would in today's political climate for whatever reason. But that's just my two cents.

It's kind of an awful double-edged situation. Vote to register them and pose a risk to these innocent people because who knows what will be done with the information or vote to not register them and if something awful happens, worry that you could have done something to prevent it.

User avatar
Nu-D
Posts: 2829
Joined: 18 Dec 2013, 00:22
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Nu-D » 26 Jan 2020, 14:25

I would oppose a mutant registration act because it is the antithesis of living in a free society. The very essence of a free society is to be free from government monitoring, unless you forfeit that freedom through your own actions. There are effective methods for minimizing the harms caused by mutant powers that don’t offend fundamental freedoms, which I discuss in the second post below.

The registration requirement of the Mutant Registration Act would be unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution because it removes liberty without due process.

There is no dispute that a registration requirement is a government infringement on the liberty which is protected by the constitution. This has been long established. For example, the due process clauses imposes notice requirements on registration statutes. See e.g. State v. Young, 140 N.C. App. 1 (2000) (A sex offender required to register cannot be held criminally liable where he has been adjudicated incompetent and therefore did not have actual notice of the requirement); see also Lambert v. California, 355 U.S. 225, 2 L. Ed. 2d 228, 78 S. Ct. 240 (1957). It's important to note that there are two distinct infringements on liberty interests here: both the registration requirement itself, and the penalty for failure to comply. As seen from the above cases, formal notice through indictment or criminal process for failure to comply with the registration requirement does not remedy the failure to have notice fo the registration requirement itself. Thus, it is clear that simply the requirement to register infringes on a liberty interest protected by the Due Process clause, irrespective of the enforcement mechanism employed.

Having established that the MRA is a government intrusion on a protected liberty interest to which the Due Process clauses apply, the question remains whether the MRA violates the clause. "The essence of due process is the requirement that 'a person in jeopardy of serious loss [be given] notice of the case against him and opportunity to meet it.'" Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 348, 96 S. Ct. 893, 909 (1976). "All that is necessary is that the procedures be tailored, in light of the decision to be made, to 'the capacities and circumstances of those who are to be heard,' to insure that they are given a meaningful opportunity to present their case." Id. (internal citations omitted). "The fundamental requirement of due process is the opportunity to be heard 'at a meaningful time in a meaningful manner.'" Id.

In Connecticut Department of Safety v. Doe, 538 U.S. 1 (2003), the Court upheld a statute which required convicted sex offenders to register and publicly disclose their whereabouts after discharge from custody. The Court reasoned that due process was satisfied because the requirements were met by the criminal process that imposed the registration requirement as a collateral consequence of the conviction. The respondent in that case was on notice that their conduct carried the potential consequence of a registration requirement, on notice that the State sought to impose the requirement on them through the criminal process, and was afforded a criminal trial to defend against the State's proposed infringement on that interest.

In contrast, under the MRA, the respondent has no "meaningful opportunity to be heard," because nothing they can say or do will change the outcome of any hearing afforded. A mutant is born with the status that requires registration, and there is no meaningful way for that person to defend the protected liberty interest that is being infringed.

In contrast, a person who obtains superhuman abilities through artificial means can be afforded a meaningful opportunity to be heard. A distinction may be made between those who intentionally sought those abilities, and those who came by them through accident. A hearing could afford the person an opportunity to defend against the registration requirement on the basis that they did not have the requisite mens rea to require registration. Arguably, a registration requirement that applied indiscriminately to all acquired power superhuman would have the similar constitutional infirmity as one that applies to mutants.

I will note that the distinction BC makes above between the MRA and an act that requires registration of superheroes is significant. A person who elects to use their abilities in a certain manner or for a certain purpose may be regulated by the state like any other professional licensure. Though Due Process applies, the person can chose not to engage in the regulated activity, or can chose to register, and that falls within the lawful ambit of the police power of the state.

I think it is beyond the scope of what I can do here to discuss the equal protection and substantive due process arguments as applied to either the MRA or a superhuman registration act. I think there are arguments that being a "mutant" is scientifically indistinguishable from race, and thus the registration requirement would be held to a strict scrutiny standard under the equal protection clause. Though there is a “compelling government interest” in regulating and monitoring some mutant powers, I do not think the MRA’s blanket registration requirement can meet the “narrowly tailored” requirement.

Substantive due process is quite esoteric, and I'd have to really study up to make an argument, but it frequently rears its head when the State tries to regulate a status rather than an activity; it likely would apply here.
Last edited by Nu-D on 26 Jan 2020, 16:31, edited 4 times in total.
He/him/his

User avatar
Nu-D
Posts: 2829
Joined: 18 Dec 2013, 00:22
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Nu-D » 26 Jan 2020, 14:55

If I were a legislator seeking to regulate mutant powers and protect the public, there are a number of things that could pass constitutional muster, and this be consistent with the right of the people to be free. (I'm going to leave out non-mutant superpowers for now).

Criminal laws pertaining to the intentional or negligent use of powers. First, I would propose a statutory penalty enhancer that any crime committed with the use of a mutant power carries an enhanced sentence. The penalty enhancer becomes an element of a more aggravated crime (the same way an assault is aggravated by the use of a weapon). The new element must be proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. The element requires that the power is actually used in the commission of the crime, not just present or incidental to the criminal conduct. As with the charge of robbery with a dangerous weapon, it is not sufficient that the defendant have in his possession a dangerous weapon when the robbery is committed; the weapon must be used as a part of the robbery, or else it is a common law robbery at the lower class. You don’t want Glob Herman convicted of a powers-related enhancement for using a stolen credit card just because he’s a mutant. You want the powers to be related to the crime.

Then I would create an escalating penalty scheme based on the harms caused and how the power was used. For example, a simple assault is enhanced to a assault by superpowers, raising it from a class F felony to a class E felony. If a person is injured by the use of the powers, that could raised it any number of degrees, depending on the nature of the injury. At a certain level, the penalty might include mandatory use of "The Cure." For example, a second degree murder done with the use of superpowers might result in prison + the cure. I might also impose the cure on habitual offenders. At lower levels, convicts might be mandated to wear power dampeners as a condition of probation or parole.

There also would likely need to be some new crimes defined. While some uses of telepathy likely would already be felonies (varieties of kidnapping, sexual coercion, trespass), it likely would help the courts and the public to make that explicit. We’ve added statutes to clarify, for example, that extreme voluntary intoxication can render sexual conduct non consensual. Likewise, I think it worthwhile to note that telepathic manipulation would vitiate consent. Further, I think it worth being explicit that active mind reading is a trespass, and thus criminal in some degree.

Civil commitments for involuntary or accidental use of powers: The second schema would be intended to protect the public from accidental uses of mutant powers. I would create a system analogous to our civil commitment statutes for mentally ill people who are a danger to themselves or others. It's been a while since I dove into that stuff, so this will be a bit general. Basically, I would create mandatory treatment for people who have powers they cannot control and create a risk to others. This is for powers that are involuntary, and allows the State to manage them. The State would be required to show first that you are a risk to yourself or others because of your powers. Second, that you cannot control your powers without intervention, either because the powers themselves are uncontrollable, or because your mental state renders you incompetent to control them (say, an infant whose dangerous powers manifest at birth). However, someone like Cyclops or Rogue, if they voluntarily managed their powers, would not be subject to this law. The State has to show not just that the power is dangerous, but that the person is dangerous because s/he is unable to voluntarily control it, with or without technical intervention (gloves, visor).

The nature of the intervention sought by the State must be the "least intrusive means necessary." Under this law, the State could mandate Scott Summers to wear his visor, and assuming he complied, no further intrusion would be lawful. But someone like Proteus (in his original incarnation) could have the Cure forced on him, since he could not survive without killing other people. For mutants whose powers are dangerous, but control can be learned, the intervention must be something that allows the person to train and eventually demonstrate they can have their rights restored. Someone like young Rictor could be required to wear a power dampener, but if he chose to get treatment and learned to control his powers, he could go back to court and prove the intervention no longer necessary.

Regulation of lawful, intentional use of powers. Lastly, I would regulate the use of superpowers. This would be complex, but I would make sure superheroes are licensed. Unlicensed superheroing would follow the same laws as private law enforcement; occasionally legal under limited circumstances, but usually not. Powers used for other professions could be regulated too, depending on need. But it would essentially follow the basic regulatory scheme that already exists.
He/him/his

User avatar
Spectral Knight
Posts: 1804
Joined: 14 Apr 2007, 21:00

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Spectral Knight » 27 Jan 2020, 06:51

I'm going to go against the grain here slightly, and argue there should be some format of mutant registration.

There's a few reasons why...the first is state provision of facilities. It's a given that IF mutants exist there should be a state funded provision of education and control of mutant abilities for the safety of both mutants and the wider population. However, how much should be allocated? Well that is dependent on:
a) The numbers of mutants in the general population (IE a census)
b) How many of those mutants have "active" powers and would therefore require special educational focus.

How do you get that information other than through registration?

The second is provision of adequate social support, the emergence of the mutant gene, as we know, can be a traumatic experience for both children and parents, and there should be provision of counselling for both. Of course, this will require public funds, and it is right that should public funds be allocated there is a clear understanding of the numbers of mutants in society to properly budget for them, therefore there needs to be a mechanism in which mutant numbers are accurately assessed.

Thirdly I think it makes sense from a trend analysis perspective. Are the number of mutants in the general population rising or falling, and do we consequently need to adjust our budget provisions for points one or two, and also what additional funding do we need to provide for security and health - given that we know there may be differing needs of mutants for both these public services.

The MRA of the comics was deliberately designed to illustrate the worst behaviour of humanity, by codifying differences for nefarious means. I see a MRA that can be used to actively support gene minorities, providing adequate support through the state, but which needs registration, much like a census, to determine the levels of support that the state needs to fund.

User avatar
tokenBG1009
Posts: 6032
Joined: 19 Jun 2007, 20:34

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by tokenBG1009 » 27 Jan 2020, 12:35

I think everyone sees WHY a thing could be good, but the bad outweighs it so much it's hard to support.

Mutant Registration carries a complete lack of anonymity. Jean Grey wouldn't be able to simply register as a mutant for the very reasons you name. That means that there would be a database entry specifically about her that I am uncomfortable with any government controlling. The census is, more or less, anonymous. The government is able to know "X% of this population is black" but they don't know WHO in that area is black. Mutant Registration removes that and leaves those registered open to any kind of malicious activity by the wrong people with that information.

You mention education, but the Xavier Institute exists for that reason. I would imagine the student body is just a number for whatever governmental purposes they must fulfill.

I would honestly assume a world where mutants existed would be very similar to the world of Harry Potter. They would be largely self-policing and governing with the necessity of also following the rules of the mundane world, but not having any interference.
"Sometimes I do feel like I'm a failure. Like there's no hope for me. But even so, I'm not gonna give up. Ever!" -Izuku Midoriya

User avatar
Blackcyclops
Posts: 20434
Joined: 12 Apr 2007, 21:03

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Blackcyclops » 27 Jan 2020, 13:21

These perspectives are no doubt colored by our ideas about bureaucracies.

Token, who in most cases seems more “progressive or liberal minded” than SK (you both are awesome btw though), but he’s an American like me. And in America our feelings and ideas toward bureaucratic institutions isn’t as pleasant. At best, for someone who is a liberal as me and believes the in positive power of the state, I still see them as only necessary when nothing else will do.

For someone like SK (I don’t live in the UK so I’m just goinf off an observation and not a lived experience or research), having experience with a larger social safety net, even if his experiences might have been bad at times, he still is more inclined to consider the usefulness of the bureaucracy.

So a registration for us might not only violate our Constitution but also might rub against our larger cultural feelings toward personal liberty...those feelings aren’t absolute of course, as post 9/11 can show you but with mutancy being more distributive regardless of race/social class and possible ways that mutancy could be integrated into the socio-cultural histories of different constituencies in US history, I don’t think a MRA would be politically feasible here.

It’s like passing universal healthcare like in the UK or Canada or the kind of split policy like Australia, there would be no political will for it...
Morrison Era 2001-2005, Decimation Era from 2005-2012, Bendis Era 2012-2016, M-Pox era 2016-2017, and Resurrxion 2017-2019, Hickman Era 2019-?

User avatar
Spectral Knight
Posts: 1804
Joined: 14 Apr 2007, 21:00

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Spectral Knight » 27 Jan 2020, 14:12

tokenBG1009 wrote:
27 Jan 2020, 12:35
You mention education, but the Xavier Institute exists for that reason. I would imagine the student body is just a number for whatever governmental purposes they must fulfill.
Isn't the Xavier Institute a privately managed school for all intents and purposes? I.e. there's zero state or federal funding that exists for it, and that the curriculum is only assessed in as much as does it meet mandatory education guidelines, rather than governmental guidelines in regards to instructing individuals to understand and control their potentially dangerous powers? In addition, it was established independently with nowhere near enough capacity for all students who would require such services. It exists, and has become a solitary target, precisely because there was no state intervention (in a supportive manner) to develop educational facilities appropriate to mutant characteristics.

I get that a database containing the details and registration of mutant abilities could be massively mis-used. But so can every form of government database. I tend to think though that there's huge elements of society that would need to be considered IF mutants were real, that registration would almost become a necessity. Think about how an array of mutant characteristics might affect healthcare provisions. For those mutants with abilities that lead to extended lifetimes still be eligible for age-related benefits (i.e. should Logan be claiming his pension by now?). Would mutants with telepathic powers have to take school exams in isolation / with power dampeners for a level playing field? There's so many variables that I think should mutants exist, it'd have to be documented by the state. The alternative is an assortment of private data stores that will exist (it'd be inevitably - look at the information that data aggregate compilers already have on us today...!) that would be far more open to corruption, not least as there's no legal protection that would exist in regards to mutant characteristics.

BC's right, I'm not particularly a progressive, but I would believe that mutants would need 'benefits' from the state that the average Joe Human wouldn't, and that it is right that it should be funded at a state level, as it's nothing more than a fluke of genetics. As such, if these provisions need to be considered at a national level, using taxpayer £/$/€ there needs to be a governmental database to manage this data. Where I do struggle is how much recognition of differing needs could result in segregation - a perfectly valid concern, and where I don't have the answers.

I think the point of the MRA in the comics was how to protect 'humans' from mutants. My view is that a MRA can be used to better support mutants and alleviate the dangers they face, often because support systems are not in place in the Marvel Universe. Whilst the Xavier Institute does exist - it caters to a minority of mutants in almost a completely segregated manner - I mean it's a boarding school - segregation from the off, and it's a target because it's isolated rather than being part and parcel of the educational system.

If I compare mutantcy to say disabilities that are flukes of birth - yes, there exists separate education provisions in terms of special schools etc, but there's also funding and legislation in place to support these individuals being able to be educated in mainstream education through adaptive provisions (ramps, special educational support workers etc.), as well as medical records that are all recorded by the state (actually pretty badly through my experience but nonetheless). If we believe that provisions should be in place to support mutant individuals, then a state record is obligatory.

Also, don't speak to me about the Constitution :lol: I think the US in general see it as some sacred parchment that must never be changed, despite there being codified amendments to suit then current needs...!
It seems daft to me - almost as daft as having an unwritten constitution based on tradition and precedent which is headed up by someone purely on the basis of who their parents are :D

User avatar
Blackcyclops
Posts: 20434
Joined: 12 Apr 2007, 21:03

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Blackcyclops » 27 Jan 2020, 14:19

See again, this is turning into such an illuminating discussion!, your response really goes to show your UK-mindset versus one that would dominate the US.

People here don’t want to register their guns because they fear the government will come and take them away...now imagine that but the guns are potentially their children? Not going to happen...the people who typically favor gun rights have an oversized impact in the Senate and if they made that comparison, would never support such a thing.

And as for the Xavier Institute, we already place ALOT of services in the private sector and generally people are not really fond of them being a public thing. People’s response to healthcare reform or education reform or even dealing with general poverty is that we should leave it to the market (ie the private economy), charities, or religious institutions. Xavier being a billionaire and kind of a philanthropist fits two of those three groups and people would be fine with that here lol...
Morrison Era 2001-2005, Decimation Era from 2005-2012, Bendis Era 2012-2016, M-Pox era 2016-2017, and Resurrxion 2017-2019, Hickman Era 2019-?

User avatar
Blackcyclops
Posts: 20434
Joined: 12 Apr 2007, 21:03

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Blackcyclops » 27 Jan 2020, 14:22

This is literally the best discussion on the internet right now lol
Morrison Era 2001-2005, Decimation Era from 2005-2012, Bendis Era 2012-2016, M-Pox era 2016-2017, and Resurrxion 2017-2019, Hickman Era 2019-?

User avatar
Anna Raven
Posts: 4762
Joined: 28 Jun 2007, 22:53

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Anna Raven » 27 Jan 2020, 14:47

Blackcyclops wrote:
27 Jan 2020, 14:19
People here don’t want to register their guns because they fear the government will come and take them away...now imagine that but the guns are potentially their children? Not going to happen...the people who typically favor gun rights have an oversized impact in the Senate and if they made that comparison, would never support such a thing.
The ironic thing is that I would bet you a million dollars, if mutants were real in the current day US, the gun control sides would flip in regard to a MRA. The typically conservative gun-rights activists would suddenly be all in favor of regulating and policing mutants, and liberals (probably led by the ACLU) would drastically oppose it, arguing that you can't legislate people the same way you would an object. Neither side would recognize the irony either.
X-Men Editorial 2: Wolverine | Shadowcat | Beast | Deadpool | Sabretooth | Puck | Pixie | Toad | Prodigy | Eques | Vange Whedon |Snowbird | Wolfsbane
X-Men Generations: Rogue | X-23 | Colossus | Juggernaut | Bruiser | Blink | Scout

User avatar
Blackcyclops
Posts: 20434
Joined: 12 Apr 2007, 21:03

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Blackcyclops » 27 Jan 2020, 15:15

It would really depend on mutant’s history in the US to how the issue would fall on partisan lines...

The one thing about mutants that make them different than so many other things you can ban or regulate is that it can happen to anyone (so unlike race) but it’s also potentially very dangerous (so different than sexual orientation or gender identity).

That’s what makes it in my mind so hard to perfectly fit it over the issues we face today. Its unlike race because any two humans could potentially have a mutant. The way race is categorized in the US, two white folks can’t just give birth to a Black kid. It’s kinda like guns but you don’t have to purchase it and it again does not discriminate in terms of who can yield it. It’s unlike sexual orientation because a potential power can be more devastating than any gun.

So it’s like, on one hand registration COULD happen but equally I can see forces against it.
Morrison Era 2001-2005, Decimation Era from 2005-2012, Bendis Era 2012-2016, M-Pox era 2016-2017, and Resurrxion 2017-2019, Hickman Era 2019-?

User avatar
Nu-D
Posts: 2829
Joined: 18 Dec 2013, 00:22
Location: Durham, NC
Contact:

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Nu-D » 27 Jan 2020, 15:23

Anna Raven wrote:
27 Jan 2020, 14:47
Blackcyclops wrote:
27 Jan 2020, 14:19
People here don’t want to register their guns because they fear the government will come and take them away...now imagine that but the guns are potentially their children? Not going to happen...the people who typically favor gun rights have an oversized impact in the Senate and if they made that comparison, would never support such a thing.
The ironic thing is that I would bet you a million dollars, if mutants were real in the current day US, the gun control sides would flip in regard to a MRA. The typically conservative gun-rights activists would suddenly be all in favor of regulating and policing mutants, and liberals (probably led by the ACLU) would drastically oppose it, arguing that you can't legislate people the same way you would an object. Neither side would recognize the irony either.
For the record, when the Black Panthers were exercising their right to bear arms in the late 60’s, early 70’s, the NRA was lobbying for stricter gun control measures, including registration.
He/him/his

User avatar
Blackcyclops
Posts: 20434
Joined: 12 Apr 2007, 21:03

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Blackcyclops » 27 Jan 2020, 15:32

Nu-D wrote:
27 Jan 2020, 15:23
Anna Raven wrote:
27 Jan 2020, 14:47
Blackcyclops wrote:
27 Jan 2020, 14:19
People here don’t want to register their guns because they fear the government will come and take them away...now imagine that but the guns are potentially their children? Not going to happen...the people who typically favor gun rights have an oversized impact in the Senate and if they made that comparison, would never support such a thing.
The ironic thing is that I would bet you a million dollars, if mutants were real in the current day US, the gun control sides would flip in regard to a MRA. The typically conservative gun-rights activists would suddenly be all in favor of regulating and policing mutants, and liberals (probably led by the ACLU) would drastically oppose it, arguing that you can't legislate people the same way you would an object. Neither side would recognize the irony either.
For the record, when the Black Panthers were exercising their right to bear arms in the late 60’s, early 70’s, the NRA was lobbying for stricter gun control measures, including registration.
Yup, the famous time in California when they all were outside of the city hall in Oakland (I believe) fully armed...

There more pro-gun stance developed in the 1980s and then fully bloomed in the 90s.
Morrison Era 2001-2005, Decimation Era from 2005-2012, Bendis Era 2012-2016, M-Pox era 2016-2017, and Resurrxion 2017-2019, Hickman Era 2019-?

User avatar
Spectral Knight
Posts: 1804
Joined: 14 Apr 2007, 21:00

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Spectral Knight » 27 Jan 2020, 15:42

Blackcyclops wrote:
27 Jan 2020, 14:19
See again, this is turning into such an illuminating discussion!, your response really goes to show your UK-mindset versus one that would dominate the US.

People here don’t want to register their guns because they fear the government will come and take them away...now imagine that but the guns are potentially their children? Not going to happen...the people who typically favor gun rights have an oversized impact in the Senate and if they made that comparison, would never support such a thing.
Isn't this different from guns being taken away though - although your quite right in terms of who should be registering individuals. We already have to register both births and deaths, both of which are obligations we place on someone other than the person being born, or dying. Let's put it another way, if a mutant orphan who is currently a ward of state (in a state run orphanage / foster home) is offered a permanent home with adopted parents, would the State have a formal role to play in 'outing' that child as a mutant as part of the adoption process?
Blackcyclops wrote:
27 Jan 2020, 14:19
And as for the Xavier Institute, we already place ALOT of services in the private sector and generally people are not really fond of them being a public thing. People’s response to healthcare reform or education reform or even dealing with general poverty is that we should leave it to the market (ie the private economy), charities, or religious institutions. Xavier being a billionaire and kind of a philanthropist fits two of those three groups and people would be fine with that here lol...
And a lot of the times, it doesn't work. Has anyone ever considered what the 'right' circumstances are for educating mutants - is being segregated and enlisted into a paramilitary strike force an adequate development mechanism for living a carefree life as a mutant adult a la the Xavier Institute albeit one that is a productive member of society?

User avatar
Aeon
Posts: 1016
Joined: 30 Apr 2019, 12:05

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Aeon » 27 Jan 2020, 15:49

Guys!! Please!!

Image

User avatar
Anna Raven
Posts: 4762
Joined: 28 Jun 2007, 22:53

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Anna Raven » 27 Jan 2020, 16:05

Nu-D wrote:
27 Jan 2020, 15:23
Anna Raven wrote:
27 Jan 2020, 14:47
Blackcyclops wrote:
27 Jan 2020, 14:19
People here don’t want to register their guns because they fear the government will come and take them away...now imagine that but the guns are potentially their children? Not going to happen...the people who typically favor gun rights have an oversized impact in the Senate and if they made that comparison, would never support such a thing.
The ironic thing is that I would bet you a million dollars, if mutants were real in the current day US, the gun control sides would flip in regard to a MRA. The typically conservative gun-rights activists would suddenly be all in favor of regulating and policing mutants, and liberals (probably led by the ACLU) would drastically oppose it, arguing that you can't legislate people the same way you would an object. Neither side would recognize the irony either.
For the record, when the Black Panthers were exercising their right to bear arms in the late 60’s, early 70’s, the NRA was lobbying for stricter gun control measures, including registration.
Yes, and generally speaking, law enforcement experts are also in favor of gun control, even though they traditionally are more conservative in nature. So I could see how the argument for an MRA could evolve along those lines.
X-Men Editorial 2: Wolverine | Shadowcat | Beast | Deadpool | Sabretooth | Puck | Pixie | Toad | Prodigy | Eques | Vange Whedon |Snowbird | Wolfsbane
X-Men Generations: Rogue | X-23 | Colossus | Juggernaut | Bruiser | Blink | Scout

User avatar
Blackcyclops
Posts: 20434
Joined: 12 Apr 2007, 21:03

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Blackcyclops » 27 Jan 2020, 16:25

@SK: let me say that I’m not agreeing with the general stance our country takes on those issues (ie leaving them solely to an unregulated private sector). I’m just bringing up how the arguments go over here...this argument just goes to show how someone who is moderate like you are would probably be considered left (even far left to some) in the US.

About the orphan point: would we expect them to “out” a kid who isn’t heterosexual?
Morrison Era 2001-2005, Decimation Era from 2005-2012, Bendis Era 2012-2016, M-Pox era 2016-2017, and Resurrxion 2017-2019, Hickman Era 2019-?

User avatar
Spectral Knight
Posts: 1804
Joined: 14 Apr 2007, 21:00

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Spectral Knight » 27 Jan 2020, 16:50

Oh no, totally getting that... and I'm too full of my own contradictions to be considered left, right moderate or progressive. I like to think of myself as a well-intentioned pragmatist ;)

No, absolutely not. However, a non-hetero kid isn't a potential walking nuclear bomb or a mind-reader or can walk through walks (might mean groundings being difficult to implement...!). They might be green and furry, in which case there's little to 'out' - as unless they're using an image inducer, they're kinda out by default, but see how those differences have some very different scenarios. It's so muddy.

User avatar
Blackcyclops
Posts: 20434
Joined: 12 Apr 2007, 21:03

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Blackcyclops » 27 Jan 2020, 17:07

True...

I mean you do make a compelling argument for MRA in the real world...
Morrison Era 2001-2005, Decimation Era from 2005-2012, Bendis Era 2012-2016, M-Pox era 2016-2017, and Resurrxion 2017-2019, Hickman Era 2019-?

User avatar
Spectral Knight
Posts: 1804
Joined: 14 Apr 2007, 21:00

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Spectral Knight » 27 Jan 2020, 17:18

Yeah, I mean if I was a legislator, I'd definitely try to bring in under a different name, but I think there probably does need some formal Governmental database of mutants and their characteristics. I don't know if it'd be under the NHS medical records, or if it'd be under something else entirely (one of the shit shows from our own Government is how different departments don't speak to each other, so you have to fill in everything in triplicate etc.) but I do see a need. It'd be controversial for sure, but I can't see how it could be avoided to be honest.

User avatar
Blackcyclops
Posts: 20434
Joined: 12 Apr 2007, 21:03

Re: The Mutant Registration Act (debate)

Post by Blackcyclops » 27 Jan 2020, 17:31

Well the thing is, in the MU, UK mutants are registered right?
Morrison Era 2001-2005, Decimation Era from 2005-2012, Bendis Era 2012-2016, M-Pox era 2016-2017, and Resurrxion 2017-2019, Hickman Era 2019-?

Post Reply