Captain America, Civil War, just saw it...spoilers discussion...

[Harry Dresden]

This is, of course, a set up situation since the Avengers would have had agreements with the countries they entered.....Captain America is an honorable guy.....

The rule of law.....and which of the members of the U.N. believe in the rule of law?

I'm not saying the UN is the way to go, but the whole point of the movie (and the comic storyline) is that super heroes operate with little to no regulation most of the time. They simply do what they do because they can without regards for the rules that 'normal' people function under. Cap does the things he does because he considers them right, legal or not.

I thought it was funny that Chris Evans said he would be on 'team Iron Man' if this kind of thing actually existed.

what i found funny is that the bad super people can give a shit about rules and regulations,but the UN is getting on a group of super people who have saved many people over the years and who are at least for the most part,on their side......

Because the Avengers apparently ignore things like laws and national boundaries. Based on what was said in the movie, they went into.....whatever country it was the incident with Crossbones happened, I don't remember....without bothering to do so legally. It wasn't directly stated, but I think strongly implied, that the Avengers don't worry about whether they are crossing borders of sovereign nations.

They are vigilantes. They have not been given the authority to do what they do by the nations they operate in.

Now, in the comics the Avengers have been given that kind of authority at times, and I think they kind of had it in the first movie, under the auspices of the World Security Council. In Civil War, however, many nations seem to be saying that the Avengers have been acting without the proper authority.

It's not that the Avengers are bad guys, it's that they try to be good but do it outside the rules.

Of course there is a lot of emotional crap involved. Even in this fictional world the writers realized that many people would react from their guts and demand some sort of change after people are killed, even if the Avengers did everything they could to help. It's still a valid point that having powers doesn't make them outside the law.

i would think megalomaniacs like Dr.Doom would be more on the "we have to control you" agenda than guys like the Avengers.....but thats just me.....

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?

Unless you are advocating for unfettered vigilantism, of course the Avengers and other super heroes would be required to follow rules. The police have rules, the military have rules, intelligence agencies have rules, the only difference is the type of powers involved.

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?
it can,but who would you worry about hurting normal people more....Captain America or Dr. Doom?...and who are you no doubt going to need to help stop these villains?....Cap and guys like him can be reasoned with....guys like doom.....not so much....

 

[Montrovant]

I'm not saying the UN is the way to go, but the whole point of the movie (and the comic storyline) is that super heroes operate with little to no regulation most of the time. They simply do what they do because they can without regards for the rules that 'normal' people function under. Cap does the things he does because he considers them right, legal or not.

I thought it was funny that Chris Evans said he would be on 'team Iron Man' if this kind of thing actually existed.

what i found funny is that the bad super people can give a shit about rules and regulations,but the UN is getting on a group of super people who have saved many people over the years and who are at least for the most part,on their side......

Because the Avengers apparently ignore things like laws and national boundaries. Based on what was said in the movie, they went into.....whatever country it was the incident with Crossbones happened, I don't remember....without bothering to do so legally. It wasn't directly stated, but I think strongly implied, that the Avengers don't worry about whether they are crossing borders of sovereign nations.

They are vigilantes. They have not been given the authority to do what they do by the nations they operate in.

Now, in the comics the Avengers have been given that kind of authority at times, and I think they kind of had it in the first movie, under the auspices of the World Security Council. In Civil War, however, many nations seem to be saying that the Avengers have been acting without the proper authority.

It's not that the Avengers are bad guys, it's that they try to be good but do it outside the rules.

Of course there is a lot of emotional crap involved. Even in this fictional world the writers realized that many people would react from their guts and demand some sort of change after people are killed, even if the Avengers did everything they could to help. It's still a valid point that having powers doesn't make them outside the law.

i would think megalomaniacs like Dr.Doom would be more on the "we have to control you" agenda than guys like the Avengers.....but thats just me.....

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?

Unless you are advocating for unfettered vigilantism, of course the Avengers and other super heroes would be required to follow rules. The police have rules, the military have rules, intelligence agencies have rules, the only difference is the type of powers involved.

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?
it can,but who would you worry about hurting normal people more....Captain America or Dr. Doom?...and who are you no doubt going to need to help stop these villains?....Cap and guys like him can be reasoned with....guys like doom.....not so much....

Again, though, Cap seems to have no interest in being reasoned with. He basically rejects the idea of regulation or outside control.

Of course Dr. Doom is exponentially more threatening to the public than any of the heroes. That's not the point. The point is that societies live with rules, but super heroes often operate outside of those rules. They ignore laws, they ignore borders, they don't worry about due process or constitutional rights. They do what they want to do and, most of the time, they do so anonymously.

The opposition takes it to extremes and places far too much blame on the heroes. I happily admit that, I think it was an intentional part of the writing of the movie. The Avengers were trying to do good, but many people did die and there is no process in place to ensure that the Avengers weren't at fault for those deaths. It's just, "Trust us, we're super powered.".

The idea of regulating heroes, of having them operate within the law, of some sort of oversight, is a completely reasonable one. The government doesn't even go to the ridiculous extremes in the movie that they do in the comics. The world leaders just say, "We're grateful to you for the help you've given, but you cannot act entirely on your own with no regards for our laws or borders.".

 

[Harry Dresden]

what i found funny is that the bad super people can give a shit about rules and regulations,but the UN is getting on a group of super people who have saved many people over the years and who are at least for the most part,on their side......

Because the Avengers apparently ignore things like laws and national boundaries. Based on what was said in the movie, they went into.....whatever country it was the incident with Crossbones happened, I don't remember....without bothering to do so legally. It wasn't directly stated, but I think strongly implied, that the Avengers don't worry about whether they are crossing borders of sovereign nations.

They are vigilantes. They have not been given the authority to do what they do by the nations they operate in.

Now, in the comics the Avengers have been given that kind of authority at times, and I think they kind of had it in the first movie, under the auspices of the World Security Council. In Civil War, however, many nations seem to be saying that the Avengers have been acting without the proper authority.

It's not that the Avengers are bad guys, it's that they try to be good but do it outside the rules.

Of course there is a lot of emotional crap involved. Even in this fictional world the writers realized that many people would react from their guts and demand some sort of change after people are killed, even if the Avengers did everything they could to help. It's still a valid point that having powers doesn't make them outside the law.

i would think megalomaniacs like Dr.Doom would be more on the "we have to control you" agenda than guys like the Avengers.....but thats just me.....

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?

Unless you are advocating for unfettered vigilantism, of course the Avengers and other super heroes would be required to follow rules. The police have rules, the military have rules, intelligence agencies have rules, the only difference is the type of powers involved.

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?
it can,but who would you worry about hurting normal people more....Captain America or Dr. Doom?...and who are you no doubt going to need to help stop these villains?....Cap and guys like him can be reasoned with....guys like doom.....not so much....

Again, though, Cap seems to have no interest in being reasoned with. He basically rejects the idea of regulation or outside control.

Of course Dr. Doom is exponentially more threatening to the public than any of the heroes. That's not the point. The point is that societies live with rules, but super heroes often operate outside of those rules. They ignore laws, they ignore borders, they don't worry about due process or constitutional rights. They do what they want to do and, most of the time, they do so anonymously.

The opposition takes it to extremes and places far too much blame on the heroes. I happily admit that, I think it was an intentional part of the writing of the movie. The Avengers were trying to do good, but many people did die and there is no process in place to ensure that the Avengers weren't at fault for those deaths. It's just, "Trust us, we're super powered.".

The idea of regulating heroes, of having them operate within the law, of some sort of oversight, is a completely reasonable one. The government doesn't even go to the ridiculous extremes in the movie that they do in the comics. The world leaders just say, "We're grateful to you for the help you've given, but you cannot act entirely on your own with no regards for our laws or borders.".

you do realize if these guys existed in real life 99% of the good guys would probably obey rules and regs and help out however they can,at least i think they would since so many are humans who just happen to have powers.....back in the early days of comics the writers never thought about this shit and kids like me who read this stuff never thought or cared about what country it was happening in or if any laws were being violated.....it all began when the new breed of comic people started acting like all this stuff is now supposed to be real instead of a comic book fantasy......asking questions like ...."wait a minute!....how can he do that?....Stan Lee said once in an interview i saw...."i just wanted my heros,who are humans to have personal problems that we all can relate too,i never wanted anyone to question how can radiation turn you into a Spiderman or a Hulk or question the amazing and improbable things these people do....i just wanted them to enjoy the story....its just a Comic after all"...

 

[Montrovant]

Because the Avengers apparently ignore things like laws and national boundaries. Based on what was said in the movie, they went into.....whatever country it was the incident with Crossbones happened, I don't remember....without bothering to do so legally. It wasn't directly stated, but I think strongly implied, that the Avengers don't worry about whether they are crossing borders of sovereign nations.

They are vigilantes. They have not been given the authority to do what they do by the nations they operate in.

Now, in the comics the Avengers have been given that kind of authority at times, and I think they kind of had it in the first movie, under the auspices of the World Security Council. In Civil War, however, many nations seem to be saying that the Avengers have been acting without the proper authority.

It's not that the Avengers are bad guys, it's that they try to be good but do it outside the rules.

Of course there is a lot of emotional crap involved. Even in this fictional world the writers realized that many people would react from their guts and demand some sort of change after people are killed, even if the Avengers did everything they could to help. It's still a valid point that having powers doesn't make them outside the law.

i would think megalomaniacs like Dr.Doom would be more on the "we have to control you" agenda than guys like the Avengers.....but thats just me.....

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?

Unless you are advocating for unfettered vigilantism, of course the Avengers and other super heroes would be required to follow rules. The police have rules, the military have rules, intelligence agencies have rules, the only difference is the type of powers involved.

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?
it can,but who would you worry about hurting normal people more....Captain America or Dr. Doom?...and who are you no doubt going to need to help stop these villains?....Cap and guys like him can be reasoned with....guys like doom.....not so much....

Again, though, Cap seems to have no interest in being reasoned with. He basically rejects the idea of regulation or outside control.

Of course Dr. Doom is exponentially more threatening to the public than any of the heroes. That's not the point. The point is that societies live with rules, but super heroes often operate outside of those rules. They ignore laws, they ignore borders, they don't worry about due process or constitutional rights. They do what they want to do and, most of the time, they do so anonymously.

The opposition takes it to extremes and places far too much blame on the heroes. I happily admit that, I think it was an intentional part of the writing of the movie. The Avengers were trying to do good, but many people did die and there is no process in place to ensure that the Avengers weren't at fault for those deaths. It's just, "Trust us, we're super powered.".

The idea of regulating heroes, of having them operate within the law, of some sort of oversight, is a completely reasonable one. The government doesn't even go to the ridiculous extremes in the movie that they do in the comics. The world leaders just say, "We're grateful to you for the help you've given, but you cannot act entirely on your own with no regards for our laws or borders.".

you do realize if these guys existed in real life 99% of the good guys would probably obey rules and regs and help out however they can,at least i think they would since so many are humans who just happen to have powers.....back in the early days of comics the writers never thought about this shit and kids like me who read this stuff never thought or cared about what country it was happening in or if any laws were being violated.....it all began when the new breed of comic people started acting like all this stuff is now supposed to be real instead of a comic book fantasy......asking questions like ...."wait a minute!....how can he do that?....Stan Lee said once in an interview i saw...."i just wanted my heros,who are humans to have personal problems that we all can relate too,i never wanted anyone to question how can radiation turn you into a Spiderman or a Hulk or question the amazing and improbable things these people do....i just wanted them to enjoy the story....its just a Comic after all"...

Yeah, sorry, but I think that's just a lazy excuse. Of course the things that they do are impossible. Just about anyone reading the comics realizes that. That doesn't mean that the writers can do anything they want without any sort of realism (even just in context) or sense. They put these heroes in a world that is almost the same as our own. There would be consequences if that happened, and Civil War and storylines like it just explore what might happen were super powered people to really exist.

As far as obeying the rules and helping out, I disagree. I think that, people being people, almost no one would become a super hero. I think almost no one would become a super villain, either, not in the classic sense. I do, however, think plenty of powered people would turn to crime. It would be very tempting to just take what you want if you think you can get away with it. I think something like Powers or even The Boys are comics that are closer to what would actually happen if super powers existed.

 

[2aguy]

what i found funny is that the bad super people can give a shit about rules and regulations,but the UN is getting on a group of super people who have saved many people over the years and who are at least for the most part,on their side......

Because the Avengers apparently ignore things like laws and national boundaries. Based on what was said in the movie, they went into.....whatever country it was the incident with Crossbones happened, I don't remember....without bothering to do so legally. It wasn't directly stated, but I think strongly implied, that the Avengers don't worry about whether they are crossing borders of sovereign nations.

They are vigilantes. They have not been given the authority to do what they do by the nations they operate in.

Now, in the comics the Avengers have been given that kind of authority at times, and I think they kind of had it in the first movie, under the auspices of the World Security Council. In Civil War, however, many nations seem to be saying that the Avengers have been acting without the proper authority.

It's not that the Avengers are bad guys, it's that they try to be good but do it outside the rules.

Of course there is a lot of emotional crap involved. Even in this fictional world the writers realized that many people would react from their guts and demand some sort of change after people are killed, even if the Avengers did everything they could to help. It's still a valid point that having powers doesn't make them outside the law.

i would think megalomaniacs like Dr.Doom would be more on the "we have to control you" agenda than guys like the Avengers.....but thats just me.....

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?

Unless you are advocating for unfettered vigilantism, of course the Avengers and other super heroes would be required to follow rules. The police have rules, the military have rules, intelligence agencies have rules, the only difference is the type of powers involved.

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?
it can,but who would you worry about hurting normal people more....Captain America or Dr. Doom?...and who are you no doubt going to need to help stop these villains?....Cap and guys like him can be reasoned with....guys like doom.....not so much....

Again, though, Cap seems to have no interest in being reasoned with. He basically rejects the idea of regulation or outside control.

Of course Dr. Doom is exponentially more threatening to the public than any of the heroes. That's not the point. The point is that societies live with rules, but super heroes often operate outside of those rules. They ignore laws, they ignore borders, they don't worry about due process or constitutional rights. They do what they want to do and, most of the time, they do so anonymously.

The opposition takes it to extremes and places far too much blame on the heroes. I happily admit that, I think it was an intentional part of the writing of the movie. The Avengers were trying to do good, but many people did die and there is no process in place to ensure that the Avengers weren't at fault for those deaths. It's just, "Trust us, we're super powered.".

The idea of regulating heroes, of having them operate within the law, of some sort of oversight, is a completely reasonable one. The government doesn't even go to the ridiculous extremes in the movie that they do in the comics. The world leaders just say, "We're grateful to you for the help you've given, but you cannot act entirely on your own with no regards for our laws or borders.".

No...the only choice given in the movie...to drive the story...was the U.N. or the Avengers....I will side with the Avengers over the U.N. and the vile, corrupt governments that run it any day of the week.......

And considering the extent of Hydra's infiltration of every aspect of Shield and the government....why on earth would you trust the U.N. in this marvel world....?

 

[2aguy]

Because the Avengers apparently ignore things like laws and national boundaries. Based on what was said in the movie, they went into.....whatever country it was the incident with Crossbones happened, I don't remember....without bothering to do so legally. It wasn't directly stated, but I think strongly implied, that the Avengers don't worry about whether they are crossing borders of sovereign nations.

They are vigilantes. They have not been given the authority to do what they do by the nations they operate in.

Now, in the comics the Avengers have been given that kind of authority at times, and I think they kind of had it in the first movie, under the auspices of the World Security Council. In Civil War, however, many nations seem to be saying that the Avengers have been acting without the proper authority.

It's not that the Avengers are bad guys, it's that they try to be good but do it outside the rules.

Of course there is a lot of emotional crap involved. Even in this fictional world the writers realized that many people would react from their guts and demand some sort of change after people are killed, even if the Avengers did everything they could to help. It's still a valid point that having powers doesn't make them outside the law.

i would think megalomaniacs like Dr.Doom would be more on the "we have to control you" agenda than guys like the Avengers.....but thats just me.....

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?

Unless you are advocating for unfettered vigilantism, of course the Avengers and other super heroes would be required to follow rules. The police have rules, the military have rules, intelligence agencies have rules, the only difference is the type of powers involved.

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?
it can,but who would you worry about hurting normal people more....Captain America or Dr. Doom?...and who are you no doubt going to need to help stop these villains?....Cap and guys like him can be reasoned with....guys like doom.....not so much....

Again, though, Cap seems to have no interest in being reasoned with. He basically rejects the idea of regulation or outside control.

Of course Dr. Doom is exponentially more threatening to the public than any of the heroes. That's not the point. The point is that societies live with rules, but super heroes often operate outside of those rules. They ignore laws, they ignore borders, they don't worry about due process or constitutional rights. They do what they want to do and, most of the time, they do so anonymously.

The opposition takes it to extremes and places far too much blame on the heroes. I happily admit that, I think it was an intentional part of the writing of the movie. The Avengers were trying to do good, but many people did die and there is no process in place to ensure that the Avengers weren't at fault for those deaths. It's just, "Trust us, we're super powered.".

The idea of regulating heroes, of having them operate within the law, of some sort of oversight, is a completely reasonable one. The government doesn't even go to the ridiculous extremes in the movie that they do in the comics. The world leaders just say, "We're grateful to you for the help you've given, but you cannot act entirely on your own with no regards for our laws or borders.".

you do realize if these guys existed in real life 99% of the good guys would probably obey rules and regs and help out however they can,at least i think they would since so many are humans who just happen to have powers.....back in the early days of comics the writers never thought about this shit and kids like me who read this stuff never thought or cared about what country it was happening in or if any laws were being violated.....it all began when the new breed of comic people started acting like all this stuff is now supposed to be real instead of a comic book fantasy......asking questions like ...."wait a minute!....how can he do that?....Stan Lee said once in an interview i saw...."i just wanted my heros,who are humans to have personal problems that we all can relate too,i never wanted anyone to question how can radiation turn you into a Spiderman or a Hulk or question the amazing and improbable things these people do....i just wanted them to enjoy the story....its just a Comic after all"...

Just like life, a tiny number would be evil......there are 3 million people in Chicago....1,333 are the ones causing the murders.....and are the victims......exrapolate that out and most people are good or at least not evil....

 

[Montrovant]

Because the Avengers apparently ignore things like laws and national boundaries. Based on what was said in the movie, they went into.....whatever country it was the incident with Crossbones happened, I don't remember....without bothering to do so legally. It wasn't directly stated, but I think strongly implied, that the Avengers don't worry about whether they are crossing borders of sovereign nations.

They are vigilantes. They have not been given the authority to do what they do by the nations they operate in.

Now, in the comics the Avengers have been given that kind of authority at times, and I think they kind of had it in the first movie, under the auspices of the World Security Council. In Civil War, however, many nations seem to be saying that the Avengers have been acting without the proper authority.

It's not that the Avengers are bad guys, it's that they try to be good but do it outside the rules.

Of course there is a lot of emotional crap involved. Even in this fictional world the writers realized that many people would react from their guts and demand some sort of change after people are killed, even if the Avengers did everything they could to help. It's still a valid point that having powers doesn't make them outside the law.

i would think megalomaniacs like Dr.Doom would be more on the "we have to control you" agenda than guys like the Avengers.....but thats just me.....

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?

Unless you are advocating for unfettered vigilantism, of course the Avengers and other super heroes would be required to follow rules. The police have rules, the military have rules, intelligence agencies have rules, the only difference is the type of powers involved.

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?
it can,but who would you worry about hurting normal people more....Captain America or Dr. Doom?...and who are you no doubt going to need to help stop these villains?....Cap and guys like him can be reasoned with....guys like doom.....not so much....

Again, though, Cap seems to have no interest in being reasoned with. He basically rejects the idea of regulation or outside control.

Of course Dr. Doom is exponentially more threatening to the public than any of the heroes. That's not the point. The point is that societies live with rules, but super heroes often operate outside of those rules. They ignore laws, they ignore borders, they don't worry about due process or constitutional rights. They do what they want to do and, most of the time, they do so anonymously.

The opposition takes it to extremes and places far too much blame on the heroes. I happily admit that, I think it was an intentional part of the writing of the movie. The Avengers were trying to do good, but many people did die and there is no process in place to ensure that the Avengers weren't at fault for those deaths. It's just, "Trust us, we're super powered.".

The idea of regulating heroes, of having them operate within the law, of some sort of oversight, is a completely reasonable one. The government doesn't even go to the ridiculous extremes in the movie that they do in the comics. The world leaders just say, "We're grateful to you for the help you've given, but you cannot act entirely on your own with no regards for our laws or borders.".

No...the only choice given in the movie...to drive the story...was the U.N. or the Avengers....I will side with the Avengers over the U.N. and the vile, corrupt governments that run it any day of the week.......

And considering the extent of Hydra's infiltration of every aspect of Shield and the government....why on earth would you trust the U.N. in this marvel world....?

Why would you trust the Avengers? The Hulk destroyed part of New York. Stark created Ultron. Romanov is a former assassin. Cap is trying to protect Bucky in the movie, an assassin over the course of decades.

If I remember correctly, something like 170 different nations signed the Sakovia Accords in the movie. Even if Cap isn't willing to sign off on them as is, he doesn't even try to reach any sort of compromise. He says no and walks away from it, as though the idea of having to follow laws or rules isn't important enough for him.

Even if it's just to formalize that the Avengers are allowed to ignore national borders, don't have to operate under certain laws, whatever, at least to have countries agree to allow the Avengers to do the things they do would be an important, necessary step. Having them, instead, go where they want and do what they want is completely opposed to the idea of the rule of law.

Oh, and other than the UN, what organization would the nations of the world have to turn to if they desired the kind of agreement and oversight from the movie?

I know this is just a silly comic book movie conversation, but finding it acceptable for a group of people to operate entirely outside the law, with no checks on their power, is just incredible to me.

 

[Harry Dresden]

i would think megalomaniacs like Dr.Doom would be more on the "we have to control you" agenda than guys like the Avengers.....but thats just me.....

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?

Unless you are advocating for unfettered vigilantism, of course the Avengers and other super heroes would be required to follow rules. The police have rules, the military have rules, intelligence agencies have rules, the only difference is the type of powers involved.

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?
it can,but who would you worry about hurting normal people more....Captain America or Dr. Doom?...and who are you no doubt going to need to help stop these villains?....Cap and guys like him can be reasoned with....guys like doom.....not so much....

Again, though, Cap seems to have no interest in being reasoned with. He basically rejects the idea of regulation or outside control.

Of course Dr. Doom is exponentially more threatening to the public than any of the heroes. That's not the point. The point is that societies live with rules, but super heroes often operate outside of those rules. They ignore laws, they ignore borders, they don't worry about due process or constitutional rights. They do what they want to do and, most of the time, they do so anonymously.

The opposition takes it to extremes and places far too much blame on the heroes. I happily admit that, I think it was an intentional part of the writing of the movie. The Avengers were trying to do good, but many people did die and there is no process in place to ensure that the Avengers weren't at fault for those deaths. It's just, "Trust us, we're super powered.".

The idea of regulating heroes, of having them operate within the law, of some sort of oversight, is a completely reasonable one. The government doesn't even go to the ridiculous extremes in the movie that they do in the comics. The world leaders just say, "We're grateful to you for the help you've given, but you cannot act entirely on your own with no regards for our laws or borders.".

you do realize if these guys existed in real life 99% of the good guys would probably obey rules and regs and help out however they can,at least i think they would since so many are humans who just happen to have powers.....back in the early days of comics the writers never thought about this shit and kids like me who read this stuff never thought or cared about what country it was happening in or if any laws were being violated.....it all began when the new breed of comic people started acting like all this stuff is now supposed to be real instead of a comic book fantasy......asking questions like ...."wait a minute!....how can he do that?....Stan Lee said once in an interview i saw...."i just wanted my heros,who are humans to have personal problems that we all can relate too,i never wanted anyone to question how can radiation turn you into a Spiderman or a Hulk or question the amazing and improbable things these people do....i just wanted them to enjoy the story....its just a Comic after all"...

Just like life, a tiny number would be evil......there are 3 million people in Chicago....1,333 are the ones causing the murders.....and are the victims......exrapolate that out and most people are good or at least not evil....

thats why i said 99%.....there will always be assholes.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

i would think megalomaniacs like Dr.Doom would be more on the "we have to control you" agenda than guys like the Avengers.....but thats just me.....

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?

Unless you are advocating for unfettered vigilantism, of course the Avengers and other super heroes would be required to follow rules. The police have rules, the military have rules, intelligence agencies have rules, the only difference is the type of powers involved.

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?
it can,but who would you worry about hurting normal people more....Captain America or Dr. Doom?...and who are you no doubt going to need to help stop these villains?....Cap and guys like him can be reasoned with....guys like doom.....not so much....

Again, though, Cap seems to have no interest in being reasoned with. He basically rejects the idea of regulation or outside control.

Of course Dr. Doom is exponentially more threatening to the public than any of the heroes. That's not the point. The point is that societies live with rules, but super heroes often operate outside of those rules. They ignore laws, they ignore borders, they don't worry about due process or constitutional rights. They do what they want to do and, most of the time, they do so anonymously.

The opposition takes it to extremes and places far too much blame on the heroes. I happily admit that, I think it was an intentional part of the writing of the movie. The Avengers were trying to do good, but many people did die and there is no process in place to ensure that the Avengers weren't at fault for those deaths. It's just, "Trust us, we're super powered.".

The idea of regulating heroes, of having them operate within the law, of some sort of oversight, is a completely reasonable one. The government doesn't even go to the ridiculous extremes in the movie that they do in the comics. The world leaders just say, "We're grateful to you for the help you've given, but you cannot act entirely on your own with no regards for our laws or borders.".

No...the only choice given in the movie...to drive the story...was the U.N. or the Avengers....I will side with the Avengers over the U.N. and the vile, corrupt governments that run it any day of the week.......

And considering the extent of Hydra's infiltration of every aspect of Shield and the government....why on earth would you trust the U.N. in this marvel world....?

Why would you trust the Avengers? The Hulk destroyed part of New York. Stark created Ultron. Romanov is a former assassin. Cap is trying to protect Bucky in the movie, an assassin over the course of decades.

If I remember correctly, something like 170 different nations signed the Sakovia Accords in the movie. Even if Cap isn't willing to sign off on them as is, he doesn't even try to reach any sort of compromise. He says no and walks away from it, as though the idea of having to follow laws or rules isn't important enough for him.

Even if it's just to formalize that the Avengers are allowed to ignore national borders, don't have to operate under certain laws, whatever, at least to have countries agree to allow the Avengers to do the things they do would be an important, necessary step. Having them, instead, go where they want and do what they want is completely opposed to the idea of the rule of law.

Oh, and other than the UN, what organization would the nations of the world have to turn to if they desired the kind of agreement and oversight from the movie?

I know this is just a silly comic book movie conversation, but finding it acceptable for a group of people to operate entirely outside the law, with no checks on their power, is just incredible to me.

so is someone turning into a big green guy with incredible strength.....hence my comments above.....its a comic and should be viewed as such and not like..."well if this was real"....super hero comics dont work to well in a real world....

 

[Montrovant]

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?

Unless you are advocating for unfettered vigilantism, of course the Avengers and other super heroes would be required to follow rules. The police have rules, the military have rules, intelligence agencies have rules, the only difference is the type of powers involved.

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?
it can,but who would you worry about hurting normal people more....Captain America or Dr. Doom?...and who are you no doubt going to need to help stop these villains?....Cap and guys like him can be reasoned with....guys like doom.....not so much....

Again, though, Cap seems to have no interest in being reasoned with. He basically rejects the idea of regulation or outside control.

Of course Dr. Doom is exponentially more threatening to the public than any of the heroes. That's not the point. The point is that societies live with rules, but super heroes often operate outside of those rules. They ignore laws, they ignore borders, they don't worry about due process or constitutional rights. They do what they want to do and, most of the time, they do so anonymously.

The opposition takes it to extremes and places far too much blame on the heroes. I happily admit that, I think it was an intentional part of the writing of the movie. The Avengers were trying to do good, but many people did die and there is no process in place to ensure that the Avengers weren't at fault for those deaths. It's just, "Trust us, we're super powered.".

The idea of regulating heroes, of having them operate within the law, of some sort of oversight, is a completely reasonable one. The government doesn't even go to the ridiculous extremes in the movie that they do in the comics. The world leaders just say, "We're grateful to you for the help you've given, but you cannot act entirely on your own with no regards for our laws or borders.".

No...the only choice given in the movie...to drive the story...was the U.N. or the Avengers....I will side with the Avengers over the U.N. and the vile, corrupt governments that run it any day of the week.......

And considering the extent of Hydra's infiltration of every aspect of Shield and the government....why on earth would you trust the U.N. in this marvel world....?

Why would you trust the Avengers? The Hulk destroyed part of New York. Stark created Ultron. Romanov is a former assassin. Cap is trying to protect Bucky in the movie, an assassin over the course of decades.

If I remember correctly, something like 170 different nations signed the Sakovia Accords in the movie. Even if Cap isn't willing to sign off on them as is, he doesn't even try to reach any sort of compromise. He says no and walks away from it, as though the idea of having to follow laws or rules isn't important enough for him.

Even if it's just to formalize that the Avengers are allowed to ignore national borders, don't have to operate under certain laws, whatever, at least to have countries agree to allow the Avengers to do the things they do would be an important, necessary step. Having them, instead, go where they want and do what they want is completely opposed to the idea of the rule of law.

Oh, and other than the UN, what organization would the nations of the world have to turn to if they desired the kind of agreement and oversight from the movie?

I know this is just a silly comic book movie conversation, but finding it acceptable for a group of people to operate entirely outside the law, with no checks on their power, is just incredible to me.

so is someone turning into a big green guy with incredible strength.....hence my comments above.....its a comic and should be viewed as such and not like..."well if this was real"....super hero comics dont work to well in a real world....

But super hero comics are written as though they were in a real world. If the writers didn't want to deal with real world issues they should have put their characters in an entirely fictional world.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Why is it a one or the other paradigm? Why can't both happen?
it can,but who would you worry about hurting normal people more....Captain America or Dr. Doom?...and who are you no doubt going to need to help stop these villains?....Cap and guys like him can be reasoned with....guys like doom.....not so much....

Again, though, Cap seems to have no interest in being reasoned with. He basically rejects the idea of regulation or outside control.

Of course Dr. Doom is exponentially more threatening to the public than any of the heroes. That's not the point. The point is that societies live with rules, but super heroes often operate outside of those rules. They ignore laws, they ignore borders, they don't worry about due process or constitutional rights. They do what they want to do and, most of the time, they do so anonymously.

The opposition takes it to extremes and places far too much blame on the heroes. I happily admit that, I think it was an intentional part of the writing of the movie. The Avengers were trying to do good, but many people did die and there is no process in place to ensure that the Avengers weren't at fault for those deaths. It's just, "Trust us, we're super powered.".

The idea of regulating heroes, of having them operate within the law, of some sort of oversight, is a completely reasonable one. The government doesn't even go to the ridiculous extremes in the movie that they do in the comics. The world leaders just say, "We're grateful to you for the help you've given, but you cannot act entirely on your own with no regards for our laws or borders.".

No...the only choice given in the movie...to drive the story...was the U.N. or the Avengers....I will side with the Avengers over the U.N. and the vile, corrupt governments that run it any day of the week.......

And considering the extent of Hydra's infiltration of every aspect of Shield and the government....why on earth would you trust the U.N. in this marvel world....?

Why would you trust the Avengers? The Hulk destroyed part of New York. Stark created Ultron. Romanov is a former assassin. Cap is trying to protect Bucky in the movie, an assassin over the course of decades.

If I remember correctly, something like 170 different nations signed the Sakovia Accords in the movie. Even if Cap isn't willing to sign off on them as is, he doesn't even try to reach any sort of compromise. He says no and walks away from it, as though the idea of having to follow laws or rules isn't important enough for him.

Even if it's just to formalize that the Avengers are allowed to ignore national borders, don't have to operate under certain laws, whatever, at least to have countries agree to allow the Avengers to do the things they do would be an important, necessary step. Having them, instead, go where they want and do what they want is completely opposed to the idea of the rule of law.

Oh, and other than the UN, what organization would the nations of the world have to turn to if they desired the kind of agreement and oversight from the movie?

I know this is just a silly comic book movie conversation, but finding it acceptable for a group of people to operate entirely outside the law, with no checks on their power, is just incredible to me.

so is someone turning into a big green guy with incredible strength.....hence my comments above.....its a comic and should be viewed as such and not like..."well if this was real"....super hero comics dont work to well in a real world....

But super hero comics are written as though they were in a real world. If the writers didn't want to deal with real world issues they should have put their characters in an entirely fictional world.

but they were at least viewed as comics,make believe,no one cared if these guys were impossible, no one cared if they crossed borders,no one cared about all the things that are being brought up today by the so called "new breed" of comic people......it reminds me of Saturday cartoons for kids.....it used to be just bugs bunny,the roadrunner,Col leghorn foghorn etc,those types of cartoons......lots of kids fare.....now you see all these sci-fi, more sophisticated fare,kids cant be kids anymore,now they have to watch things more in line with advancing society.....one lady i saw commenting on the Warner Bros stuff remarked..." i dont want my kids watching that....its childish".....

 

[Desperado]

The point was supposed to be that Stark wasn't thinking rationally. He was already probably somewhat biased against Barnes, then he sees his parents killed by him. He reacts out of grief and anger. As Barnes himself says, yes, he was mind controlled.....but he still did kill the people he killed.

Yes, Cap getting involved with Sharon Carter is kind of creepy.

What makes less sense to me, and always has, is the entire idea behind the Captain America 'side' of the Civil War conflict. Stark is absolutely right that super heroes would need to have some sort of check on what they do. The Cap side of the argument is basically, "We should be able to ignore laws and borders and governments because we have power".

It was a bit different in the comics. That got into more issues and had bigger overreactions from both sides, not to mention involving far more powered people.

I liked the concept of Batman v Superman's conflict. I think quite a lot of people would feel Superman to be a huge threat were he real. I just wish that movie had done a better job exploring that issue.....well, and just been a better movie.

No.....Captain America is right...the U.N.......the group that allows human rights violators sit on the Human Rights commissions, had the oil for food scandal, and has it's troops raping and dealing in sex trafficking...not to mention that in Rwanda they stood by while 800,000 people were macheted to death....considering they were there specifically to stop it......

Cap is right.....if anyone needed a leash it would have been Stark...since the whole Sakovia thing was his fault......

You think it would be OK for people to act as vigilantes in the US, leave and enter the country at will with no customs or inspection, basically be able to ignore the law of this (and every other) country because they have power?

Most super heroes from the comics act illegally. Captain America, ironically, ignores the basis of America in the way he acts. He doesn't believe in the rule of law or the Constitution, he believes in his own personal morality being the only thing that matters.

This is, of course, a set up situation since the Avengers would have had agreements with the countries they entered.....Captain America is an honorable guy.....

The rule of law.....and which of the members of the U.N. believe in the rule of law?

I'm not saying the UN is the way to go, but the whole point of the movie (and the comic storyline) is that super heroes operate with little to no regulation most of the time. They simply do what they do because they can without regards for the rules that 'normal' people function under. Cap does the things he does because he considers them right, legal or not.

I thought it was funny that Chris Evans said he would be on 'team Iron Man' if this kind of thing actually existed.

what i found funny is that the bad super people can give a shit about rules and regulations,but the UN is getting on a group of super people who have saved many people over the years and who are at least for the most part,on their side......

Art imitates life

 

[Montrovant]

Again, though, Cap seems to have no interest in being reasoned with. He basically rejects the idea of regulation or outside control.

Of course Dr. Doom is exponentially more threatening to the public than any of the heroes. That's not the point. The point is that societies live with rules, but super heroes often operate outside of those rules. They ignore laws, they ignore borders, they don't worry about due process or constitutional rights. They do what they want to do and, most of the time, they do so anonymously.

The opposition takes it to extremes and places far too much blame on the heroes. I happily admit that, I think it was an intentional part of the writing of the movie. The Avengers were trying to do good, but many people did die and there is no process in place to ensure that the Avengers weren't at fault for those deaths. It's just, "Trust us, we're super powered.".

The idea of regulating heroes, of having them operate within the law, of some sort of oversight, is a completely reasonable one. The government doesn't even go to the ridiculous extremes in the movie that they do in the comics. The world leaders just say, "We're grateful to you for the help you've given, but you cannot act entirely on your own with no regards for our laws or borders.".

No...the only choice given in the movie...to drive the story...was the U.N. or the Avengers....I will side with the Avengers over the U.N. and the vile, corrupt governments that run it any day of the week.......

And considering the extent of Hydra's infiltration of every aspect of Shield and the government....why on earth would you trust the U.N. in this marvel world....?

Why would you trust the Avengers? The Hulk destroyed part of New York. Stark created Ultron. Romanov is a former assassin. Cap is trying to protect Bucky in the movie, an assassin over the course of decades.

If I remember correctly, something like 170 different nations signed the Sakovia Accords in the movie. Even if Cap isn't willing to sign off on them as is, he doesn't even try to reach any sort of compromise. He says no and walks away from it, as though the idea of having to follow laws or rules isn't important enough for him.

Even if it's just to formalize that the Avengers are allowed to ignore national borders, don't have to operate under certain laws, whatever, at least to have countries agree to allow the Avengers to do the things they do would be an important, necessary step. Having them, instead, go where they want and do what they want is completely opposed to the idea of the rule of law.

Oh, and other than the UN, what organization would the nations of the world have to turn to if they desired the kind of agreement and oversight from the movie?

I know this is just a silly comic book movie conversation, but finding it acceptable for a group of people to operate entirely outside the law, with no checks on their power, is just incredible to me.

so is someone turning into a big green guy with incredible strength.....hence my comments above.....its a comic and should be viewed as such and not like..."well if this was real"....super hero comics dont work to well in a real world....

But super hero comics are written as though they were in a real world. If the writers didn't want to deal with real world issues they should have put their characters in an entirely fictional world.

but they were at least viewed as comics,make believe,no one cared if these guys were impossible, no one cared if they crossed borders,no one cared about all the things that are being brought up today by the so called "new breed" of comic people......it reminds me of Saturday cartoons for kids.....it used to be just bugs bunny,the roadrunner,Col leghorn foghorn etc,those types of cartoons......lots of kids fare.....now you see all these sci-fi, more sophisticated fare,kids cant be kids anymore,now they have to watch things more in line with advancing society.....one lady i saw commenting on the Warner Bros stuff remarked..." i dont want my kids watching that....its childish".....

There are a lot more cartoon watching options then there used to be. There is still plenty of childish fare, but with not only the big 3 networks and PBS but all the smaller networks and cable channels, streaming services, and even youtube channels, kids have tons of childish stuff to watch. I'm nanny to a 7 year old and she has always had plenty of choices in less sophisticated kids programming.

With comics, the target audience is not just young kids anymore. The kids who grew up reading comics are still doing so. They are able to make comics geared towards adults now because they know adults are buying and reading them. I think it's a good thing.

 

[Harry Dresden]

No...the only choice given in the movie...to drive the story...was the U.N. or the Avengers....I will side with the Avengers over the U.N. and the vile, corrupt governments that run it any day of the week.......

And considering the extent of Hydra's infiltration of every aspect of Shield and the government....why on earth would you trust the U.N. in this marvel world....?

Why would you trust the Avengers? The Hulk destroyed part of New York. Stark created Ultron. Romanov is a former assassin. Cap is trying to protect Bucky in the movie, an assassin over the course of decades.

If I remember correctly, something like 170 different nations signed the Sakovia Accords in the movie. Even if Cap isn't willing to sign off on them as is, he doesn't even try to reach any sort of compromise. He says no and walks away from it, as though the idea of having to follow laws or rules isn't important enough for him.

Even if it's just to formalize that the Avengers are allowed to ignore national borders, don't have to operate under certain laws, whatever, at least to have countries agree to allow the Avengers to do the things they do would be an important, necessary step. Having them, instead, go where they want and do what they want is completely opposed to the idea of the rule of law.

Oh, and other than the UN, what organization would the nations of the world have to turn to if they desired the kind of agreement and oversight from the movie?

I know this is just a silly comic book movie conversation, but finding it acceptable for a group of people to operate entirely outside the law, with no checks on their power, is just incredible to me.

so is someone turning into a big green guy with incredible strength.....hence my comments above.....its a comic and should be viewed as such and not like..."well if this was real"....super hero comics dont work to well in a real world....

But super hero comics are written as though they were in a real world. If the writers didn't want to deal with real world issues they should have put their characters in an entirely fictional world.

but they were at least viewed as comics,make believe,no one cared if these guys were impossible, no one cared if they crossed borders,no one cared about all the things that are being brought up today by the so called "new breed" of comic people......it reminds me of Saturday cartoons for kids.....it used to be just bugs bunny,the roadrunner,Col leghorn foghorn etc,those types of cartoons......lots of kids fare.....now you see all these sci-fi, more sophisticated fare,kids cant be kids anymore,now they have to watch things more in line with advancing society.....one lady i saw commenting on the Warner Bros stuff remarked..." i dont want my kids watching that....its childish".....

There are a lot more cartoon watching options then there used to be. There is still plenty of childish fare, but with not only the big 3 networks and PBS but all the smaller networks and cable channels, streaming services, and even youtube channels, kids have tons of childish stuff to watch. I'm nanny to a 7 year old and she has always had plenty of choices in less sophisticated kids programming.

With comics, the target audience is not just young kids anymore. The kids who grew up reading comics are still doing so. They are able to make comics geared towards adults now because they know adults are buying and reading them. I think it's a good thing.

The kids who grew up reading comics are still doing so. They are able to make comics geared towards adults now because they know adults are buying and reading them.
its always been like that.....but the kids from the 40's kept the comics in the 60's,comics....remember what Stan Lee said about people questioning all the amazing things happening in those comics he wrote.....they are comics,nothing more nothing less.....

 

[Montrovant]

Why would you trust the Avengers? The Hulk destroyed part of New York. Stark created Ultron. Romanov is a former assassin. Cap is trying to protect Bucky in the movie, an assassin over the course of decades.

If I remember correctly, something like 170 different nations signed the Sakovia Accords in the movie. Even if Cap isn't willing to sign off on them as is, he doesn't even try to reach any sort of compromise. He says no and walks away from it, as though the idea of having to follow laws or rules isn't important enough for him.

Even if it's just to formalize that the Avengers are allowed to ignore national borders, don't have to operate under certain laws, whatever, at least to have countries agree to allow the Avengers to do the things they do would be an important, necessary step. Having them, instead, go where they want and do what they want is completely opposed to the idea of the rule of law.

Oh, and other than the UN, what organization would the nations of the world have to turn to if they desired the kind of agreement and oversight from the movie?

I know this is just a silly comic book movie conversation, but finding it acceptable for a group of people to operate entirely outside the law, with no checks on their power, is just incredible to me.

so is someone turning into a big green guy with incredible strength.....hence my comments above.....its a comic and should be viewed as such and not like..."well if this was real"....super hero comics dont work to well in a real world....

But super hero comics are written as though they were in a real world. If the writers didn't want to deal with real world issues they should have put their characters in an entirely fictional world.

but they were at least viewed as comics,make believe,no one cared if these guys were impossible, no one cared if they crossed borders,no one cared about all the things that are being brought up today by the so called "new breed" of comic people......it reminds me of Saturday cartoons for kids.....it used to be just bugs bunny,the roadrunner,Col leghorn foghorn etc,those types of cartoons......lots of kids fare.....now you see all these sci-fi, more sophisticated fare,kids cant be kids anymore,now they have to watch things more in line with advancing society.....one lady i saw commenting on the Warner Bros stuff remarked..." i dont want my kids watching that....its childish".....

There are a lot more cartoon watching options then there used to be. There is still plenty of childish fare, but with not only the big 3 networks and PBS but all the smaller networks and cable channels, streaming services, and even youtube channels, kids have tons of childish stuff to watch. I'm nanny to a 7 year old and she has always had plenty of choices in less sophisticated kids programming.

With comics, the target audience is not just young kids anymore. The kids who grew up reading comics are still doing so. They are able to make comics geared towards adults now because they know adults are buying and reading them. I think it's a good thing.

The kids who grew up reading comics are still doing so. They are able to make comics geared towards adults now because they know adults are buying and reading them.
its always been like that.....but the kids from the 40's kept the comics in the 60's,comics....remember what Stan Lee said about people questioning all the amazing things happening in those comics he wrote.....they are comics,nothing more nothing less.....

Who said they were anything other than comics?

It is far more acceptable for adults to read comics today than it was in the past.

You seem to be arguing that because these things come from the comic medium that there doesn't need to be any sense of realism or consistency. Or maybe that comics shouldn't try to address topics in an adult fashion, or use any sort of internal logic. I'm not really sure.

Whatever the case may be, the Civil War storylines exist in both the comics and the movies. In both cases I think that Captain America is clearly wrong to think that super heroes don't need to worry about rules.