Slippery slope. Registration will not lead to round-ups.
And yet registration will encourage demonization of mutants as “the other,” when - despite their genetic differences - they generally have the same feelings, wants, and needs as those who will ostracize them.
Not to mention that the act of registration is an invasion of their right to privacy.
What, exactly, is the “interest in public safety” you mention, Rick? How does someone leading their own life, talented or not, cause a hazard to public safety?
Criminals endanger public safety, but law-abiding citizens, whatever their nature, do not.
Sez you bub. Next thing you’ll deny the existence of giant robots created to end the so called “mutant menace.”
Keep on blindly following Senator Kelly you fascist.
We register dogs, and cars. So far no one’s attempted to confiscate Porsches or Poodles as long as they are “used” appropriately.
But it depends on how you define “mutant.” Dangerous mutations, or any mutation? Some of my family are lacking wisdom teeth – a quite beneficial mutation of which I am envious. Do they have to to register? Huh? Huh?
Porsches and Poodles are Property, not People.
Good point. Similar to the one raised above about the gentleman who can only change blue objects into yellow ones.
Then why not simply register those convicted of crimes. Forcing innocent citizens to register because they may do something in the future stands opposed to innocent until proven guilty.
Of course, you could use registered precognitive mutants. But that particular movie has sailed. Wasn’t that good either.
If there has ever been a case of wining by Godwins law clearer than this one, I have not seen it.
Thank you Bricker for carrying on this important fight against ignorance. A fight for the safety of all humans normal or otherwise.
Would that be a Liebfraumilch or a Moselwein?
From the OP:
Champagne, once those foolish peoplel who oppose governmental help for the mutants within our society realise that registration can only be good for us and the mutants.
We’re not imprisoning them. This is an administrative requirement, civil in nature.
The girl mentioned in the OP is not guilty of any crime; she didn’t intend to harm anyone. But she’s dangerous.
Rick, then presumably said girl needs education and assistance in learning how not to do what she did. Accidents happen all the time, particularly where teenagers are concerned (as the auto insurance people can tell you).
However, I’d be willing to lay money that she didn’t know she was a mutant until this began happening, and therefore is unlikely to have been registered anyway. Perhaps I’m a mutant and don’t know it; assuming this genetic component, are we to have all babies tested from this point forward? Even those whose parents refuse? And must all adults go in for testing as well?
I think it’s the basest of bigotry to require mutants who have done nothing wrong to be part of some “registry.” You can’t tell me that if we have some sort of mutant war with the USSR that mutants aren’t going to be rounded up and drafted. Requiring registration for the selective service is an invasive method the government uses to keep tabs on people they might draft for their lunatic wars, and this is no different. The mutants, given their super abilities and pervasive distrust/dehumanization the media (and certain politicians) attempts to brew within the general public, are even more likely than the average 18 to 27-year-old male to be deemed “fit” for combat. It’s not right.
Not to mention that many mutants’ powers reveal themselves during childhood. As standard practice the powers that be take care to protect the privacy of minors, so should we hold mutant children to a different standard, one deemed less worthy of protectionary status? Would this registry be available for all and sundry to view? If so, what’s to stop “normal” people from protesting when they learn that there’s a mutant in their kids’ class? Or stop pedophiles with a taste for the exotic from targeting these kids? I don’t think anyone here wants to be part of helping making it easier for a monster to prey on children…
You are obviously not thinking clearly. The very existence of these mutants provides us with an ideal pretext with which to agitate for the repeal our county’s unjust laws against personal possession of destructive devices, up to and including backpack nuclear devices and 1920’s style death rays.
The nanny state has already proven itself incompetent to protect us from the dangers of simple terrorists, what makes you think they can do a better job against mutants? When government fails, personal safety becomes each citizen’s private responsibility. Government has already failed, so the time is now to reclaim the tools we need to protect ourselves!
These are good questions.
So far as I can tell - and my expertise in this area is limited to watching two movies that addressed the subject; these movies may not be completely accurate when compared to more detailed works - there is a single, identifiable “mutant” characteristic. And it’s possible to test for this characteristic.
I would say that submitting to this test should be mandatory for getting a driver’s license, receiving student loans, attending schools that receive federal support, and similar activities.
To be honest, it’s been years since I read the source material, and I don’t know if they ever determined that the “X-factor” could be tested for; we’ll have to leave that to the experts in the field.
The girl in the OP, IIRC, is in her early teens and therefore has done none of the above with the possibility of school; we don’t know if she attend(ed) public or private elementary and secondary schools (I’m assuming you are not simply talking about college or university education on that last point; please correct my misapprehension if I’m wrong). Assuming, for the moment, that she was not attending public school, then what has happened, accidentally, would still have happened, without warning.
Also, the gun analogy holds a bit, here; although there are people who go around crying that guns should be banned when one child accidentally shoots another, I think that many others simply feel that safety education is called for. The key, here, is that what has happened is accidental, not intentional. If the action is taken with intent, then a crime has been committed. Until that time, you’re asking to punish a segment of the population - and as high-minded as we would like to think people are, to be “known” as out of the norm is still a punishment - who have done nothing wrong and pose no greater threat to their neighborhood than a handgun in a properly locked gun safe. Even less, in the case of those whose mutations are in the realm of missing third molars or simple color-changes.
Plus, what elfkin said about children’s right to privacy.
sigh.
with the possible exception of school
This post has been micturated by The Micturator.
For us old-school types, don’t you mean The Whizzer?