[Snowflakian]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CLASSIFIED

If we are going to require that people register things like firearms, and automobiles and the like, then it seems a no-brainer that we would also require people to register their super powers.

That said, the question becomes why?

Maybe people shouldn't be required to register anything if the intent of registering said thing is to limmit the possibility of commiting a crime with said thing.

If that is the case, then having the crime be a crime seems enough legislation to me.

That's the same argument Tony made before he instigated the Reg act.

Be sure to read the Ironman issues before Civil War too when talking about who was in or out of character.

Frontlines also pointed out Tony was the one who may have 'accidentally' made stamford happen by pointing the new warriors in that direction to where the criminals were staying. This was his plan to push the legislation through to put him in power. Granted it may have happened bigger than he planned, but he wanted a massive super brawl in the middle of suburbia to give his plan momentum.

Cap was in character because there is a Civil Militia part of the american ideal for when the government enacts something that's bad for its people. Though that's supposed to be when a dictator or tyranny happens. Granted it got out of hand, hence his surrender to fight from the inside to plead his case but he was shot.

Sue switched sides because of what her husband was doing to their friends and she couldn't agree with the negative zone prison.

Tony Stark committed an illegal act by destroying the database. If he followed the letter of the law Osborn would have the list. Hence why he was a fugitive and he erased his brain. He made a lot of stupid choices not thinking about what would happen if he were removed.

I'm anti-powers-reg, but both sides really did some stupid crap when all is said and done.

And yes, Cap fights for an Ideal. Freedom, truth, and justice. He fights for what America is supposed to represent. Just because a law is passed doesn't mean he won't object to it. As someone else said, just because it's law, doesn't make it right. He was a concientious objecter, but then Maria Hill acted on him and forced his hand. In the military you can disregard an order if you view it as unlawful or destructive without reason(which usually gets taken eventually to an aritcle 32 hearing). That's what cap did at first. Now in a time of war, that gets muddled. Then you can jailed or killed for not following an order even if that order is to shoot and kill innocent people. In essence that's what this escalated into. The legislation declared war on unregistered heroes.

Stark on the other hand wanted to control it all. He thought the reg was a good idea after what happened in his series prior to civil war, but he was too arrogant in thinking he could control it forever. One of his many downfalls alongside his pride. In the end it was his arrogance in this that gave Hammer all his tech and made him a fugitive by erasing the data. Even his brain became part of US property thanks to his arrogance and abuse of funds. Yes, he also helped write the legislation and pushed it through. In his series prior to civil war he decided the reg act was best for everyone and pushed gears so it would happen thinking he knew best. (His entire speech about guns are registered, so why aren't powers in the issues building up to civil war.)

To be fair though. It's Marvel. They'll find a way to rationalize whatever story. Making sense isn't a priority. (*Cough* Reed's Rationalization. *Cough*)

As for X-Force. That's an entirely different debate. Remender does fantastic on the title because he balances the moral dilemma, ditto to Yost/Kyle at first. Other areas of it are them going too far and being sociopaths(Fear Itself: Uncanny X-Force). Their way isn't the best way either, but that goes back to that age old question of should batman kill the joker which is best answered in the Red Hood Movie.