Jane's Superhumans

[BNakagawa]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

First off, I'm a lazy bastard.

 

The way I see it, if the population of supers is a fixed percentage of the general population, then yes, India and China will have the most supers.

 

Will this greatly affect world politics?

 

Probably not. They will, more than likely, be spending nearly all their time fighting Indian and Chinese supervillains.

-----

 

On an entirely different line: female gymnasts tend to retire early not due to accumulated trauma, but due to the fact that 18 year old girls tend to develop wider hips, a fine feature for preparing one for the possibility of childbirth, but a lousy feature in a female olympic level gymnast.

 

Why, exactly do they call it 'women's gymnastics' if there aren't any women in it?

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Obviously' date=' we've hit the point where we disagree.[/quote']

I agree.

Wait, I disagree.

 

No, I agree that we'll disagree.

 

We're also living in a society where people get paranoid about nail files brought onto airplanes. Where we have hunters who go around gunning down fellow hunters one by one. My own feeling is that society is going to react a lot more harshly than you might think.

 

My own feeling is that a few are going to abuse their powers and then everyone else is going to get paranoid. Again, people get all freaked out about nail files and pocket knives brought onto airplanes. Why? Because in a few cases they've been abused badly.

Well, I don't think it's paranoia concerning pocket knives being brought onto planes; look what happened.

 

Considering how worked up people get over a normal' date=' law-abiding citizen carrying a simple sidearm (...), I shudder to think what it would be like for people who can shoot fire from their fingertips.[/quote']

Using your own analogy, I don't see it that way, maybe it's because I've grown up with a military father and now live in Texas, but we (general we) don't get worked up over firearms, merely bozos that don't know how to use them. If, using your analogy, people got worked up over powers like they do firearms, it would probably be a political issue that would pop up every four years. We might even have a NSPA (Nat'l Super Powers Assn) where a hundred or so supers get together to celebrate the fact they have abnormal powers.

 

While I could see a reasonable fear associated with mentalists (whom I actually would believe would be ones to keep quiet on their abilities, for the most part), the brick or energy projector would meld into the rest of everyday life, but with more airtime. People don't get worked up over men & women who are fitness fanatics, or martial artists extraordinaire, or anything else if they dress normally. Now, if they started putting on costumes and preaching about the righteousness of their superiority, then people would want to know who is under that white hood, I mean, costume. But if the supers dress like normals, then there wouldn't be that huge of an outcry after a few months acclimation, in my opinion. Those that could fly though, would probably be swarmed by the press and lustful fans wherever applicable.

[Lightray]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

We're also living in a society where people get paranoid about nail files brought onto airplanes. Where we have hunters who go around gunning down fellow hunters one by one. My own feeling is that society is going to react a lot more harshly than you might think.

Your examples fail to support the case you want to make. I know of no one that thinks the government's banning of nail files on airplanes to be anything more than a nuisance -- certainly not a major imposition on the lives of private citizens.

 

And despite the shock and outrage over a rampaging hunter, there has been no widespread call to ban hunting or to ban personal firearms, or even to ban assault weapons for hunting or outcries against the Hmong in general.

 

In fact, using your examples, the only plausible scenario to apply to super-humans would be a collective "Meh" from both government and private citizens.

 

Of course, that would be quite the dull game... although amusing to GM. (angsty mutant: "Ooh, I am different! Everyone is against me! Woe!" NPC: "You! Down in front! You're blocking the TV!")

 

People' date=' pay close attention to the government statement, the nasty part. The government didn't make any threats, they even said they could let the person go.[/quote']

Exactly what government do you think behaves this way in real life? Is there some example -- beyond personal anecdotes, please -- that you can give of any government treating its citizens this way? Really, any government -- democratic, national socialist, communist.

 

Because, again, these extreme overreaction scenarios just don't look plausible.

 

And frankly I don't think it's going to be too difficult to get a Paranormal Registration Act passed, the NRA and ACLU notwithstanding. Where was the ACLU when the Homeland Security Act was passed?

Although close, I'm not sure if Homeland Security is a good fit for the scenario you're proposing. It is closer to "allows government to check to see if you're a paranormal at the slightest pretense" than the "forces you to register, or else" that Marvel (fr'ex) depicts.

 

Even so, I'm not convinced that the ACLU (and others) haven't had an effect on the enforcement and future of the Homeland Security Act. Scenarios where some paranormal incident causes a massive public overreaction, which gradually moderates over time -- that sounds like a plausible scenario.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

If' date=' using your analogy, people got worked up over powers like they do firearms, it would probably be a political issue that would pop up every four years.[/quote']

 

No: we would have laws prohibiting paranormals from entering courthouses, restaurants, schools, airports, and myriad other places where normal people go with impunity and regularity.

 

People don't get worked up over men & women who are fitness fanatics' date=' or martial artists [i']extraordinaire[/i], or anything else if they dress normally.

 

Again, even the best gymnast or weightlifter can't incinerate a bus full of nuns by pointing at it. Hint: have you tried buying a flamethrower lately?

[Chuckg]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

No: we would have laws prohibiting paranormals from entering courthouses' date=' restaurants, schools, airports, and myriad other places where normal people go with impunity and regularity.[/quote']

 

The last time somebody tried passing laws like that, it involved making people wear yellow stars of david on their clothes.

 

With that as a historical precedent, the odds of anybody getting enough public goodwill to pass the next set of laws is bloody unlikely.

 

You'd have to have Ultraman go totally psychotic and nuke Cleveland before you even started getting to where the majority of the public would put up with this.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

No: we would have laws prohibiting paranormals from entering courthouses, restaurants, schools, airports, and myriad other places where normal people go with impunity and regularity.

 

 

 

Again, even the best gymnast or weightlifter can't incinerate a bus full of nuns by pointing at it. Hint: have you tried buying a flamethrower lately?

That's a big assumption. Why would we change laws preventing people from being allowed to exist with their own natural abilities? It wouldn't be against the law to use/have them, but misuse them. You can't say "sorry, you can't enter here unless you leave your powers at home."

[Trebuchet]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Although close, I'm not sure if Homeland Security is a good fit for the scenario you're proposing. It is closer to "allows government to check to see if you're a paranormal at the slightest pretense" than the "forces you to register, or else" that Marvel (fr'ex) depicts.

 

Even so, I'm not convinced that the ACLU (and others) haven't had an effect on the enforcement and future of the Homeland Security Act. Scenarios where some paranormal incident causes a massive public overreaction, which gradually moderates over time -- that sounds like a plausible scenario.

So far as I know the Patriot Act merely gives the government the same investigatory tools against terrorist suspects its had for years against organized crime. Mobile wiretaps, unannounced warrants, etc. Pretty routine stuff, except now it's being applied against terrorists instead of just racketeers.

 

While I might possibly see the government requiring registration much as with guns, there is no way I could see simply being a metahuman being a crime in and of itself here in the US. They might make failure to register a crime, but I suspect that would fail the 5th Amendment test agaist self-incrimination. (Although once you used your powers to commit a crime, the whole weight of the US Government might land on your head!)

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

No: we would have laws prohibiting paranormals from entering courthouses' date=' restaurants, schools, airports, and myriad other places where normal people go with impunity and regularity.[/quote']

Courthouses:

• No sir, you cannot enter this courthouse with your abilities. It doesn't matter if you want to pay a speeding ticket or not.
  
• Well, sir, if you don't pay this speeding ticket, we'll arrest you and take you to court.
  
• I don't care if you've been subpeoned to testify, you cannot enter.
  

 

Restaurants/Grocery stores

• I'm sorry sir, you're not allowed to eat here.
  
• You can't buy food here, sir.
  
• It's not the country's fault if you starve.
  

 

Schools

• No, you may not go to school. You are a danger to society.
  
• We don't want to educate you, we'd rather you be a danger to society. Elsewhere.
  
• A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Please go away.
  

 

Airports

• Sorry sir, you may not fly the friendly skies.
  
• You cannot fly here, but would you like a minimum wage job in security?
  
• You'll have to X-ray that thing.
  
• NO! Not the thing in your pants! That is not where your power comes from!
  
• Is it?
  

[Lightray]

Despite all these suggestions, I really have not seen any supporting analogies to assume that super-powers would cause most governments to suddenly start treating their citizens as government property, walking weapons, or any other such extreme.

 

I certainly don't think it would suddenly cause governments to start behaving like B-movie villains, twirling their moustaches while "hinting" at the "bad things" that might "happen" if the super-human citizen doesn't "cooperate".

 

I also think that looking for super-powers to be presumed equivalent to being "armed and dangerous" is a poor analogy. As noted, it requires segregating based on an inborn (or non-voluntary) trait. It also fails in that it criminalizes or penalizes the possibility of a criminal act being committed, rather than the actual commission of the act.*

 

Moreover, it completely fails to address the differences in threat for Color Kid and Disintegrate-Everything Kid. Given an assumed wide distribution of super-powers, you'd almost have to prohibit specific superpowers, and thus specific super-humans. Quite a lot for courtroom super-power screening machines to handle.

 

Again, a mild initial overreaction to a super-powered catastrophy might occur, but probably diminish in severity. At least in America, the government will probably compile lists of known super-humans, and some laws will be passed to make the public feel safer.

 

In other words: Want to fly around with your superpower? Buy a permit. Want to burn yard waste with your superpower? Buy a permit. Want to not be hasseled at airport security as they try to establish that your superpower allows you to turn anything blue? Register, and buy a permit.

 

 

 

*ETA: Remember, in America the "right to bear arms" follows from the "need for a well-organized militia". Bearing arms where there is going to be no need for a militia -- past airport security, into schools, into courthouses -- has been recognized to not fall under that right.

 

In essence, the courts have decided that you have the right to protect yourself in places that you might need to protect yourself.

 

Wouldn't apply to super-humans whose super-powers mean that they can't not bear arms.

[Mutant for Hire]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Now we're starting to see what sort of can of worms would be opened by this sort of thing. The question is, how do we handle "living weapons" compared to ordinary citizens. How can we allow someone on a plane who is far more powerful than an assault rifle while we don't allow people to bring firearms onto planes? Where and how do you draw the lines in these cases?

 

Is it all right for precognatives to buy lottery tickets? Can telepaths work on Wall Street or in other professions where access to information can lead to serious issues? Again, where and how do you draw the lines in these cases?

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Is it all right for precognatives to buy lottery tickets? Can telepaths work on Wall Street or in other professions where access to information can lead to serious issues? Again' date=' where and how do you draw the lines in these cases?[/quote']

There's your paranoia for you.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Hulk no like Jim Supercrow. Hulk smash state.

[Lightray]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Is it all right for precognatives to buy lottery tickets? Can telepaths work on Wall Street or in other professions where access to information can lead to serious issues? Again' date=' where and how do you draw the lines in these cases?[/quote']

No need for the government to draw those lines.

 

On the back of your lottery ticket, you'll now see small print saying "prescient parahumans not eligible". To claim your prize, you'll need to demonstrate your non-precognativeness.

 

It will behoove Wall Street and other business organizations to safeguard themselves from telepaths -- just like they need to safeguard themselves from hackers. Data stealing via telepathy will probably be criminalized, but it will be the telepathic act, not the telepath that is illegal.

 

In fact, it would probably be quite a good job for telepaths, hiring out to monitor for rogue telepathy.

[nexus]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Something I haven't seen really addressed that would have an impact is how detectable are superhumans? Does it take extensive genetic testing to possibly find out who has powers or is Marvel like where "Mutant Detectors" are apparently a dime a dozen and work at range.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

No need for the government to draw those lines.

 

On the back of your lottery ticket, you'll now see small print saying "prescient parahumans not eligible". To claim your prize, you'll need to demonstrate your non-precognativeness.

 

It will behoove Wall Street and other business organizations to safeguard themselves from telepaths -- just like they need to safeguard themselves from hackers. Data stealing via telepathy will probably be criminalized, but it will be the telepathic act, not the telepath that is illegal.

 

In fact, it would probably be quite a good job for telepaths, hiring out to monitor for rogue telepathy.

 

you can't really prevent precogs from betting on sporting events, or deciding what stocks to invest in.

 

If someone has superlawyering as a power, look out!

[Chuckg]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

you can't really prevent precogs from betting on sporting events' date=' or deciding what stocks to invest in.[/quote']

 

Yes you can.

 

As the man said, you simply put in the fine print "Precogs and etc. not eligible".

 

And then, when anybody shows up to claim the prize money, if they're known to be a precog, you simply say 'I'm sorry sir, you didn't read the fine print.'

 

Seriously. Read the fine print on a contest entry sometime. There's a /reason/ it goes on for 5-6 paragraphs in some cases... they've got liability disclaimers, exceptions, and waivers out the ying yang.

 

As for being sued -- if your precog could afford the lawyers it would take to win this lawsuit, he wouldn't need to win the lotto in the first place, now would he?

[megaplayboy]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Yes you can.

 

As the man said, you simply put in the fine print "Precogs and etc. not eligible".

 

And then, when anybody shows up to claim the prize money, if they're known to be a precog, you simply say 'I'm sorry sir, you didn't read the fine print.'

 

Seriously. Read the fine print on a contest entry sometime. There's a /reason/ it goes on for 5-6 paragraphs in some cases... they've got liability disclaimers, exceptions, and waivers out the ying yang.

 

As for being sued -- if your precog could afford the lawyers it would take to win this lawsuit, he wouldn't need to win the lotto in the first place, now would he?

 

if they're NOT known to be a precog, and you can't detect their particular power, there's really not a lot you can do. A magician with a secret ID would clean up.

 

More likely, after a half dozen or so incidents, lotteries and sports wagering might tend to do a slow fade...

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Remember' date=' in America the "right to bear arms" follows from the "need for a well-organized militia".[/quote']

 

I most sincerely do not want to spill the can of worms you have just opened, but let's just say that your assertion is far from universally agreed-upon. But regardless of the theory, in practice the inalienable right of free people to be armed is abridged whenever and wherever governments find it convenient to do so -- and that's just a 30 point active power through a focus, on charges.

[Whitewings]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

On the back of your lottery ticket' date=' you'll now see small print saying "prescient parahumans not eligible". To claim your prize, you'll need to demonstrate your non-precognativeness.[/quote']You do realize that no such test could ever be meaningful? Especially when any precognitive with two working brain cells can pass the no-precognition test and the lottery corporation can easily rig the test analysis any way they please?

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

You do realize that no such test could ever be meaningful? Especially when any precognitive with two working brain cells can pass the no-precognition test and the lottery corporation can easily rig the test analysis any way they please?

 

People who cheat at casinos only once or twice sometimes get away with it. No one else does. A precog very well might win the lottery. Once. And then, only if they have been very careful up to that point.

[nexus]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

People who cheat at casinos only once or twice sometimes get away with it. No one else does. A precog very well might win the lottery. Once. And then' date=' only if they have been very careful up to that point.[/quote']

 

They'd only have to be "very" careful is not making a public fuss about having precognition. And winning once could net you several million dollars. There are also other ways to make money with subtle uses of precognition. Win, wait several years, win again, or maintain your money with minor gambling and "fortunate" investments. Basically, you'd have to require anyone that seemed to luckier than someone else to be tested to be a metahuman and that still wouldn't prove their a precog unless whatever method determines powers could also catolog them. Its not like metahumans would be born with character sheets tattooed on their backs.

[Whitewings]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

People who cheat at casinos only once or twice sometimes get away with it. No one else does. A precog very well might win the lottery. Once. And then' date=' only if they have been very careful up to that point.[/quote']OK then, how about this: A person walks into a casino and wins 8 consecutive spins on the roulette wheel, betting the simple "Red/Black." This will happen, on average, to one customer in 256. Is this person an obvious cheat, a precog, or just lucky? Let's say our hypothetical player bets conservatively, starting with $2, then pulls her initial stake after the win. After each following win, she pulls out half of what she's won, walking away from the table with just under $200. You're the casino manager. Do you have her ejected for cheating? If you do, on what grounds? If you get five hundred customers a day at that table, a run of eight red/black guesses will happen about twice a day at that table. So it's well within the bounds of probability for this person to have a run of good fortune, and to pull out before it ends. And yes, I know roulette is much more complex than just betting red or black.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

what about the precog who slowly accumulates stocks 3 months ahead of their price surges?

It seems unlikely there'd be more than a dozen or three precogs at any given time, though, so maybe only a half dozen or so might try to use their powers in such a way. Some of the measures suggested would probably be overkill, in that case.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

OK then' date=' how about this: A person walks into a casino....[/quote']

Oooh a joke! Hey, where's the punchline?

 

Anyway, a Super walked into a bar, the bartender says "Didn't you see that with your precog?"

 

Okay, it's rough around the edges... of the letters, but it's a start.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

OK then' date=' how about this: A person walks into a casino and wins 8 consecutive spins....[/quote']

The casino asks the person to leave and never return. The person's face is sent to all casino on the 'heads up' list. Nothing illegal has happened.

 

Bet you didn't see that coming.