Crime and Punishment

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

 

[it is not a universally accepted truism that the government has the right to kill people]

 

Actually, it is. People may debate the circumstances that due process justify killing; but no one would really argue that the government has the right to kill. It is a perk that comes with being a "sovereign" body.

 

If this position were untrue, then the government would not have the legal right to authorize the military to kill, or to authorize a police officer to kill.

 

When we argue about the death penalty, rules of engagement, and other such issues. We're discussing whether proper justification and due process was used in the killing.

 

Unless the police in your campaign world never kill.

 

To stay on topic, the complexity of punishment with supers is that no punishment will restrain/punish all supers. Someone's powers will disrupt things sooner or later.

 

I think this should be taken to NGD, but I assure, it is entirely possible (indeed, even common) to argue that the state has no right to kill. (At least, no more so than any private citizen does... )

[jackalope]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

Actually' date=' it is. People may debate the circumstances that due process justify killing; but no one would really argue that the government has the right to kill. It is a perk that comes with being a "sovereign" body.[/quote']

 

Anarchist theory posits that the state does not and cannot have the right to kill, many people are anarchists, therefore you are wrong. Pacifist theory posits that the state does not and cannot have the right to kill, many people are pacifists, therefore you are wrong twice. The Catholic Church allows the state to engage in "just wars", but not capital punishment. So that's three times. Shall I continue? There are quite few religious sects that deny the right of the state to kill. We could probably get into double digits if I sit here and think for awhile.

 

I love it when people make absolute statements. They're almost always wrong.

 

Edit/ I have no interest in debating this, I just wanted to point out that there are many people who will, in fact, argue this with you. Just to be clear./Edit

 

Anyways, to the topic at hand:

 

Altering someone's mind without their consent is a very, very tricky area ethically. One the one hand, it can be viewed as some sort of psychic lobotomy or personality rape or other heinous metaphor. But if criminal behavior is seen as a symptom of complex psychological problems, then altering someone's mind may be considered as a form of healing.

 

For example, if Baron Death wants to destroy the world because he's evil, then he's made a choice and must be punished for it, and altering his mind becomes punishment - and a frightening one at that.

 

But if Baron Death wants to destroy the world because he's suffering from clinical depression and self-destructive thought patterns revolving around the negative self-image his father instilled in him, then perhaps changing Baron Death's mind on a physical level and altering his memories is not so horrendous an idea.

 

Like I said, tricky.

 

The mentalist PC I created for myself, Doctor Dyad, had never developed Mind Control. He believed that altering a person's perception was the ethical equivilent of lying to a person, and that it is acceptable to lie in order to prevent someone from causing harm to themself or others. However, controlling a person's mind removed any choice from the subject, and Dyad considered free will the most essential of human rights. So Dyad would never, under any circumstances commit such an act, and would seek to undo any such tampering he became aware of.

 

I can't think of any superhero comic book examples of mind-alteration being presented as anything other than highly questionable, but ElfQuest readers may remember Leetah's attempt to heal the psychic trauma that made Winnowill so nasty. That was presented as a genuine act of concern and love, not as an attempt to impose a punishment or take away someone's will.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

I can see ways around this. One could still hire goons' date=' or perhaps simply give harmful information about the good guys to all his enemies. It could get ugly.[/quote']Sure, but a supervillain who can't use his powers isn't really a supervillain anymore. If he hires goons he's just another gang leader. The villain whose powers are solely from powered armor or some other gadget goes to a regular high security prison; there's no need to put him in a special prison. His gadget may be stored in a special facility, but will definitely not be kept at the same location as the villain.

 

Supervillains in our campaign have already made efforts to study MidGuard and its members; we've found cameras and other instruments at several ambush sites. (In one case, a large supermercenary team called Stormfront tried to film themselves defeating an outnumbered MidGuard in a warehouse so they could use the footage as part of their team's résumé; instead the films became Exhibit A at their trials after MidGuard rallied and kicked their collective behinds.)

[wylodmayer]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

The question of how to deter supervillains who kill really isn't much different from what to do with *any criminal* who commits murder, now is it?

 

Villains - usually - are people, too, and just as there are inveterate murders who do not seem in the least deterred by the threat of the death sentence, so too are there criminals to whomt this threat seems to mean nothing. Then again, there are likewise criminals who are eager to avoid getting the death penalty, and behave accordingly. For some people, life in prison is worse than death; for others, hey, you're still alive, right?

 

Since a fair amount of my undergrad work in philosophy was on social justice and philosophy of law, and we have a public defender in our gaming group, we have been able to work out some very interesting scenarios in our superhero games. One thing we noted quickly was that robbing banks means federal, not state, time, which is guided by stricter sentencing rules and has far less generous provisions for "good time." The smarter villains in our games, especially, say, members of GRAB, avoid robbing banks like the plague.

 

As for draconian measures like hot sleep and so on, if you want a realistic discussion of an issue not-far-enough from the fictional version we talk about here, check out the Human Rights Watch's article on super-maximum security prisons - http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/supermax/. Short version - super max prisons keep the inmates under 24-7 lockdown: no contact, no leaving the cell, no nothing, except a short walk in chains to the bathroom once or twice a day. Makes for some chilling bedtime reading from the human rights angle, or some very intriguing reading from a superhero rpging angle. We assume, for instance, that Stronghold is a supermax with high tech gear, and that "skilled norms" are sent to "regular" supermaxes.

 

Oh yeah, SleepyDrug, the "right of the people to be secure in their persons" is a Fourth Amendment right, not a Fifth Amendment right.

 

Ciao.

[sinanju]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

People may debate the circumstances that due process justify killing; but no one would really argue that the government has the right to kill. It is a perk that comes with being a "sovereign" body.

 

If this position were untrue, then the government would not have the legal right to authorize the military to kill, or to authorize a police officer to kill.

 

Actually, a policeman has no greater authority to kill than any ordinary citizen. He is entitled to kill only in self-defense, or in defense of another. In fact, very little that a cop does involves powers that a normal citizen doesn't have, although an ordinary citizen who attempts to arrest a fellow citizen is more at risk of finding himself sued for it and doesn't have the advantage of job- or union-provided legal advice and protection.

[sinanju]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

Look at what 9/11 did to Civil Rights in the USA. All it would take is a few major super crimes, and the entire Bill of Rights as it applied to suspected Super-crooks would go out the window.

 

In the Anita Blake (necromancer and vampire hunter) novels, ordinary crimes are treated as usual, including capital crimes. The trials, appeals and whatnot for capital cases can drag out for years or decades, just like in the real world. It's...different for supernatural types.

 

Lycanthropes are considered varmints in several states, and can be killed with impunity (as long as a post-mortem test proves the dead guy was a lycanthrope, you're golden).

 

Vampires are too powerful--physically and psychically--to be held in prison safely. Therefore, there's only one punishment for vampires: death. And the death warrants aren't hard to come by once a vampire is discovered to have committed a crime.

 

As for magic--the use of magic against an unwilling victim is a capital crime, and self-defense is NOT a defense to this charge. And dangerous magic-users, like vampires, are just too damned scary. Someone convicted of using hostile magic will have his conviction appealed immediately, to be either affirmed or overturned, and then the sentence carried out WITHIN A MONTH.

[Metaphysician]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

. . .so, your not even allowed to use magic to protect yourself from some psycho trying to kill you??

[Kevin Rose]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

Actually' date=' a policeman has no greater authority to kill than any ordinary citizen. He is entitled to kill only in self-defense, or in defense of another. In fact, very little that a cop does involves powers that a normal citizen doesn't have, although an ordinary citizen who attempts to arrest a fellow citizen is more at risk of finding himself sued for it and doesn't have the advantage of job- or union-provided legal advice and protection.[/quote']

 

No. A Policeman has an obligation to act that a citizen doesn't have. He can use deadly force in slightly wider cases than a private citizen can - fleeing felons (techincally a citizen can do this, but justification is harder). In addition he gets the benefit of the doubt by the other cops, the DA and the papers.

[Kevin Rose]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

Her world is not internally consistent and changes based on the plot. So there are lots of issues with what she says that are never explored or thought out as they need to be in a game. This was true even before it became the "Antia Blake, vampire slut and S&F freak" series about book 8.

 

In the Anita Blake (necromancer and vampire hunter) novels, ordinary crimes are treated as usual, including capital crimes. The trials, appeals and whatnot for capital cases can drag out for years or decades, just like in the real world. It's...different for supernatural types.

 

Lycanthropes are considered varmints in several states, and can be killed with impunity (as long as a post-mortem test proves the dead guy was a lycanthrope, you're golden).

 

Vampires are too powerful--physically and psychically--to be held in prison safely. Therefore, there's only one punishment for vampires: death. And the death warrants aren't hard to come by once a vampire is discovered to have committed a crime.

 

As for magic--the use of magic against an unwilling victim is a capital crime, and self-defense is NOT a defense to this charge. And dangerous magic-users, like vampires, are just too damned scary. Someone convicted of using hostile magic will have his conviction appealed immediately, to be either affirmed or overturned, and then the sentence carried out WITHIN A MONTH.

[S7Michelle]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

. . .so' date=' your not even allowed to use magic to protect yourself from some psycho trying to kill you??[/quote']

 

In the Anita Blake world that is correct. If the police knew about the times Anita has used her magic, even in self defense against a psycho, she would be arrested and killed. That's one of the reasons she carries a gun. They don't mind if you shoot the psycho trying to kill you. They do mind if you raise Zombies and have them tear him apart.

 

Not saying I agree with it, but its how it works in that series.

[sinanju]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

. . .so' date=' your not even allowed to use magic to protect yourself from some psycho trying to kill you??[/quote']

 

Nope. Using hostile magic on someone is not allowed under any circumstances. Not fair, perhaps, but the way it is (in the Anita-verse, anyhow).

 

Which means that Anita is in a world of hurt if the truth about some of the things she's done ever comes out....

[SKJAM!]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

As mentioned in the "Strange Visitor" thread, Kira Midori's home timeline features "personality death" as a punishment for criminals who show that they can't be rehabilitated by the normal advanced methods. It's controversial even there, and other heroes she's mentioned it to find it very creepy.

[Kristopher]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

As mentioned in the "Strange Visitor" thread' date=' Kira Midori's home timeline features "personality death" as a punishment for criminals who show that they can't be rehabilitated by the normal advanced methods. It's controversial even there, and other heroes she's mentioned it to find it very creepy.[/quote']

 

For another alien punishment most would find excessive, there's always Nebula's "the Duress" (CKC pg 184).

[OddHat]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

For another alien punishment most would find excessive' date=' there's always Nebula's "the Duress" (CKC pg 184).[/quote']

 

I never liked that one; It's only excessive if you play her as insane ("For jaywaling, I sentnece you to six months in hell!"), or play up the legal jurisdiction angle.

 

"Five years in prison for a purse snaching may be how your people do it lady, but here in America we just give them a firm lecture and let them back out on the street!"

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

I kind of like the idea of Martha Stewart and Ken Lay getting dispatched to Hell...

[Korvar]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

For another alien punishment most would find excessive' date=' there's always Nebula's "the Duress" (CKC pg 184)[/quote']

 

I never liked that one; It's only excessive if you play her as insane ("For jaywaling, I sentnece you to six months in hell!"), or play up the legal jurisdiction angle.

 

"Five years in prison for a purse snaching may be how your people do it lady, but here in America we just give them a firm lecture and let them back out on the street!"

 

Not having my books in front of me, but does anyone ever come out of The Duress?

[Dr. MID-Nite]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

Not having my books in front of me' date=' but does anyone [b']ever[/b] come out of The Duress?

 

I assume at GM's discretion, but "technically" without Extra-Dimensional Movement yourself....you're screwed.

 

Rob

[OddHat]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

Not having my books in front of me' date=' but does anyone [b']ever[/b] come out of The Duress?

 

Yes; the penalties vary by the crime. Armed robbery has a penalty of 50 years. Attacking an officer of the law is a life sentance.

 

In the Silver Age, life in prison for shooting at a cop may be harsh; in Bronze or Iron Age games, not so much.

 

Of course, she has no legal right to act as judge, jury and jailer on Earth.

[wylodmayer]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

I kind of like Nebula, especially because I don't play her as insane. She sentences people who commit *real* crimes - like armed robbery, assault, murder, etc - to imprisonment in the Duress. She presents the PCs with some real serious issues, to wit:

 

1) She doesn't just sentence people at random; typically, she's punishing someone she apprhends in the act. There's no way for that person to say "I'm not guilty, really."

2) Jurisdiction? She *has* jurisdiction... as far as she's concerned. And, frankly, as far as the government she represents is concerned. Earth may not like it, but there are a whole lot of backwater areas of the United States where the inbreeders (note: I can say this, since my family comes from a place called "Possum Creek") don't particularly like the authority of the Federal Government either. Doesn't negate the authority of the feds. And if you feel like mentioning "no representation," that would be valid if her government were a representative one. But if it simply claims dominion through some other variety of legitimacy, well, as Mao said - "political power proceeds from the barrel of a gun." In such a case, Nebula would have exactly as much jurisdiction as she can enforce. Mind you, I am not arguing that she should be allowed to do her thing, but it bears pointing out that she can be played as far from insane and in very stark contrast to an actual villain.

 

I plan on using her fairly soon in my game, and really heating up the conflict by haviing her straightaway get rid of a particularly troublesome bad guy that the police have had trouble hanging on to.

[Kristopher]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

Nebula is from the Andromeda galaxy, IIRC. Even if her home government rules the entirety of Andromeda, there's really no way they can claim sovereignty over the Milky Way. Well, they can claim it, but it would be a hollow and comical claim, since there's nothing they can do to enforce it and everyone knows it.

 

They have neither legitimacy nor facts on the ground to support any such assertion.

 

And if you read Nebula's background text, you'll note that she's had her mind messed with extensively by her own government. She's insane in that she believes something to be true no matter how much evidence to the contrary, no matter how false it really might be. She can't modify her repsonses and behavior to suit her new environment.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

Earth may not like it' date=' but there are a whole lot of backwater areas of the United States where the inbreeders ... don't particularly like the authority of the Federal Government either. Doesn't negate the authority of the feds.[/quote']

 

You are confusing authority with power. If you are going to quote Mao, you should pay more attention to what he says.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

And if you read Nebula's background text...

 

Do you have a URL for this?

[Kristopher]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

Do you have a URL for this?

 

Unless someone has been a bad boy and posted big chunks of CKC, no. It's right there in her entry in CKC, though -- second column of pg 185 I think.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

It's right there in her entry in CKC' date=' though -- second column of pg 185 I think.[/quote']

 

CKC?

[Vondy]

Re: Crime and Punishment

 

Actually' date=' a policeman has no greater authority to kill than any ordinary citizen. He is entitled to kill only in self-defense, or in defense of another. In fact, very little that a cop does involves powers that a normal citizen doesn't have, although an ordinary citizen who attempts to arrest a fellow citizen is more at risk of finding himself sued for it and doesn't have the advantage of job- or union-provided legal advice and protection.[/quote']

It depends on your state codes. In washington state, for instance, private citizens have greater latitude in the use of lethal force than law enforcement officers do, but some states have laws protecting officers in a broad number of situations, as well as allowing them certain judgement calls private citizens aren't allowed to make: such as the state code granting permission to shoot a fleeing suspect when certain violent felonies are committed. American law is far from uniform. It really depends on what state you live in.