A good example of the other heroes from movies would be the hulk, spider man, or the fantastic four. All are powered though none are mutants. Would they also have to register?
And we still need to establish that mutants as a whole pose more of a danger than regular humans before I’m sold on this whole registration bit.
P.S.: No bailing out on this one bricker. You’re the only one keeping this from becoming a total nerdfest. 
I agree, Bricker–no bowing out! I rejoined specifically to join you and LHoD and several others in this discussion! If you’re more comfortable limiting it to the movies and the movies only, I’m fine with that. Some of the underlying questions (right to privacy, government’s right to know, ‘gun’ control) can still be addressed within that framework.
Hello, I’ve been enjoying this discussion and would like to jump in and move things along. (Full disclosure: I know nothing about the comic book world mutants, though I have seen the two movies. Perhaps we could proceed in this way?)
Bricker, please answer:
What, specifically, would be the use to society of a mandatory testing, voluntary disclosure system?
Could this not be compared to a system of gun registration where everyone who bought a gun legally were required to register that he/she owns one, but not required to give the details of said gun (make, model, serial number, etc)? Seems that puts the law enforcement angle right out.
I’m not sure the thread can succeed without some of the non-movie info. Part of the test for determining level of appropriate scrutiny is discrimination against the class. Without showing the anti-mutant aspect of the issue, which is a major theme all through the comics but a very minor one in the movies, I’m not sure the legal framework would apply the correct level of scrutiny. I’d say the laws would have to pass intermediate scrutiny at least(because being a mutant is an immutable characteristic) but the difference between intermediate and strict scrutiny is mainly how the group is treated by the rest of society. If the rest of society discriminates or badly treats the individuals of a class in everyday life then laws which disproportionately affect the class are subject to strict scrutiny. The rationale here is that a class of people who are routinely discriminated against are less likely to be able to wield their political power effectively to stand up for themselves.
So, as I argued back on page 3, I think mutants would quickly be recognized as a suspect class and therefore any laws disproportionately affecting them should be tailored to withstand strict scrutiny.
Enjoy,
Steven
Or a similar, but more invasive (and I’m an NRA member! 
comparison: AIDS. Surely, given that AIDS is contagious, a justification could be cobbled together* that it would be easier to track new cases if we just had the list of everyone who suffered from it on file. Therefore, should every citizen be manditorily required to give blood and be tested for the disease?
*not one I think I’d support, mind you
Let me see if I can sum up my stance effectively:
PROBLEM: There’s a new set of abilities that people have. While not all members of this ability-set are dangerous, and while not all members of this ability-set are useful, some are dangerous, useful, or both.
PROBLEM: Due to humanity’s innate fear of the unknown, and due to a number of tragic events, many people have become afraid of those people with abilities from this set. As a result, many people with these abilities are afraid to reveal them; this, in turn, can lead to trouble learning to control them.
OPPORTUNITY: Many of these abilities could, if the owners learn to control them, serve to improve humanity’s lot. If these abilities become demystified and everyday, if they become mainstream, the fear and revulsion toward those folks with the abilities could diminish.
SOLUTION: Encourage everyone to be tested for this ability–for the X-factor. Don’t strictly require it, but encourage it using means similar to those means used to encourage vaccinations. If you want to use various government services (e.g., public schools), you must both be vaccinated and be tested for the X-factor.
Someone who tests positive is eligible for government-supported training in the use and control of their ability, just like someone who tests positive for autism or for high math aptitude is eligible for government-supported training in the control of their disease or the use of their aptitude. This has four salubrious effects:
POTENTIAL OBJECTIONS:
Since the only information which is recorded by default is whether a person got tested, almost everyone will be on the involuntary list (a few holdouts may choose not to get tested, just as today a few holdouts choose not to get vaccinated). This basic list will be useless in terms of rounding people up, since it doesn’t record the results of the test.
The detailed list, with powers and everything, is completely voluntary: the only disadvantage to not appearing on that list is that choosing not to appear on it makes mutants ineligible for the government aid geared toward mutants. Since most folks aren’t eligible for that aid anyway, the mutants who choose not to take advantage of it are hardly being oppressed.
This can be worked around: for example, have a methodology similar to that for anonymous HIV testing. A person goes in for the test and gives their name and gets the card proving that they were tested. They then go to another waiting room where they’re randomly assigned a number by a new staff person (the receptionist). Numbers are called over an intercom, and the person goes down a hallway to the lab, where they give the doctor their number and undergo the test. The test results are printed out and sealed by a machine and handed to the person with the number. Machines may be audited to make sure they’re working as advertised.
Yeah, pretty much.
Daniel
There are common-sense steps a person may take which drastically reduce the chances of contracting AIDS (especially in the United States and Europe; I’m aware that this is less true for many folks in Africa). As I understand it, there are not common-sense steps a person may take which drastically reduce the chances of being the victim of a mutant’s uncontrolled (or maliciously controlled) power.
Therefore the public safety situation is more akin to a disease such as tuberculosis. If I recall correctly, there are rules limiting the behavior of tuberculosis victims, intended to protect other members of society from the perils of their disease. If tuberculosis ever experiences a serious outbreak again in our society, I would fully expect and support mandatory testing for the disease.
Daniel
I endorse post #226 in its entirety, and a tip o’ the chapeau to Daniel for neatly summarizing the results of our debate to date.
Dang, that boy’s good.
RE: post #226
The solution set forth – mandatory testing, voluntary disclosure (can we call this MT-VD?) – does not appear to solve the problem set forth: “There’s a new set of abilities that people have. While not all members of this ability-set are dangerous, and while not all members of this ability-set are useful, some are dangerous, useful, or both.”
Based of problem #2, it seems fair to grant that there is or is likely to be (perceived?) public fear and/or a degree of descrimination with regard to mutants. Thus, it seems therefore likely that a majority of people would not volunteer any information whatsoever.
Please restate what is the social value (other than research) to simply counting mutants.
Seems to me that what we’re debating now has drifted pretty far from the OP. Sounds like we’re talking more about “Mutant Support Services” than what could be accurately called “Mutant Registration”. No?
Except that if they don’t volunteer information, they’re not eligible for the aid which is specifically tailored toward their X-powers. This offer of aid serves both the straightforward purpose of helping the mutants control their powers, and of offering a carrot to mutants to get them to register their powers.
I suspect that, with the offer of that aid, a majority of mutants would register.
Again, two values:
And thanks, Bricker–I appreciate the compliment!
Daniel
This is an interesting idea. Seems nice and fuzzy like a hug from a sedated polar bear. Couple of problems though.
1)We still have not established that mutants are more dangerous than regular humans. Without that, there is no justification for any sort of registration program
2)Again, you can’t test for the x-factor until it activates. This is usually during puberty, when a person is well entrenched in the public school system (and of course we wouldn’t deny a public education to a person based on genetic reasons either).
3)Any future super villains are not likely to register if it’s voluntary. They’ll already have their powers by the time testing can detect anything. Of course, they wouldn’t register if it was mandatory either. How many criminals register their handguns? A defanged registration act is of even less value than the mandatory version.
4)Genetic flukes are not equal to vaccinations. You would again be denying governmental programs to a person based on their birth/ their genetics. That’s discrimination plain and simple.
That said, a governmental program to help train and promote positive mutant/human relations is just nifty. You would have a trained security force capable of handling any supervillains that pop up and you get a great pr force. It ain’t a registration act though.
Indeed, what it seems we’re talking about here are Social Services.
*If you want goverment aid for treating autism, generally you must show proof (through testing?) that you are autistic.
*If you want government help for poverty (welfare), you generally have to show proof/documentation of that status.
*If you want government support in dealing with your mutation, it seems quite reasonable assume that you’d need to prove you’re a mutant.
Is this really what we’re talking about?
I think we’ve established beyond doubt that some mutants are more dangerous than any non-mutant, especially if their power is uncontrolled. Absent a program that tests everyone around the age of activation (or, say, two standard deviations after the average activation age), there’s going to be a fair number of folks with uncontrolled powers out there.
At any rate, all we need to establish is that mutants with uncontrolled powers are more dangerous than mutants with controlled powers in order for this to be a useful program. Do you dispute that?
The first part is a fair point. We could make undergoing the test be a prerequisite for obtaining a driver’s license.
The second part is not valid, since this proposal would deny nothing to anyone based on genetics. Everyone, mutant and nonmutant, would have to undergo the test in order to receive their driver’s license (or other privileges).
How many supervillains both know at the age of fifteen that they’re going to be supervillains, and have sufficient control of their parents at that age that they can defy their parents’ wishes?
I suspect it’s relatively few. Thus the advantage of testing early.
Incorrect. Again, everyone would have to undergo testing, not just mutants; the sheer fact of undergoing the testing would be sufficient to gain the general rights (e.g., driver’s license); and the additional programs granted to mutants would be granted based on a genetic difference, but there’d be a strong government interest in not allowing non-mutants to take advantage of these voluntary programs.
It’s an act that helps mutants and helps mutant/human relations; it’s also got a registration act built into it, although admittedly a voluntary (and therefore weakened) registration act. The benefits of registering–additional training etc.–will hopefully be sufficient to persuade most mutants to register; but any mutant can choose not to register if they’re willing to forego the training that goes along with registering.
Daniel
Again, it seems to me that all you’re doing is counting mutants. Testing people does not equate to controlloing powers.
Yes, I dispute that this is a useful program because I still fail to see the element of control.
YOU’RE GOING TO SAY: People will go in, get tested, find out they’re positive, and then seek help in controlling their powers.
I’D SAY: This is indeed the crux of your argument and is based on a pretty big assumption. While you might say that people will take any and all help they can get, I’d say that people generally want to go it alone unless there is some life threatening reason. Even then…
(not exactly entirely relevant, but…) Only 56% of gun owners have received formal training (though I would discount nearly half of those since the training was military) li[/li]I’d love to find a cite like that, except for something more relevant like a genetic disease.
I agree with you on this. I think we’re only talking about controlling uncontrolled powers here. Not dealing with criminals and sociopaths. Almost by very definition they fall through the cracks.
?? I think you may misunderstand what I’m saying. This proposal has two parts, and it’s true that the first part (the mandatory testing) provides nothing more than an aggregate set of data about mutants. The second part–the training received in response to agreeing to register the power–is the part that helps control powers.
Let me rephrase my question: do you, or do you not, agree that a mutant with an uncontrolled power is on average more dangerous than a mutant with a controlled power?
If you agree with that, do you or do you not agree that a program that helps a mutant control her power leads to an overall reduction in danger?
If you agree with that, do you or do you not agree that leading to an overall reduction in danger is a legitimate government exercise?
You’re right that it’s the crux of my argument; you’re wrong that it’s a pretty big assumption. Keep in mind that at the age people are tested, it’s their parents that will be making their decisions for them (for the most part). I believe that a significant majority of parents keep their kids up-to-date on vaccinations, encourage their kids to do well in school, and otherwise act in a way that ensures their safety and well-being.
Unless this program is horribly marketed or mismanaged, I believe a majority of parents of mutants will believe that undergoing the training will improve their kids’ lives, and will register their kids in order to receive the training.
[quote]
(not exactly entirely relevant, but…) Only 56% of gun owners have received formal training (though I would discount nearly half of those since the training was military) li[/li][/quote]
Sorry; I don’t see it as remotely relevant. Folks who get guns do so for a variety of reasons, only 56% of which may be rational. However, they’ve all chosen to get guns; the choices they make from that point are based on the fact that they want to have a gun. Furthermore, most folks who buy guns know a gun’s basic properties (put a bullet in it, point it at something, pull the trigger, blow away whatever you’ve pointed it at). Folks with mutations haven’t chosen to do so; they know that they’ve got something that has the potential to be both immensely dangerous or immensely useful; and in many cases, they’ll lack the most basic concept of how to control the power.
Even if we stipulate that only 56% of mutants will undergo the training, however, that’s a great success in public safety.
Actually, you don’t agree with me :). Again, most criminals develop their serious criminal careers post-adolescence, and not all psychopaths have such control over their parents during adolescence that they can persuade their parents not to register them.
Daniel
Agree.
Agree.
Agree.
I conclude from your three points above that the best exercise for the government is to setup a program the “helps a mutant control her powers”. Free classes. Free counseling. Free medication (if some exists). If you want to take advantage of these taxpayer-funded services, you must prove need/eligibility.
What I do not conclude is compulsory, invasion of my personal rights in form of drawing blood, visiting a doctor, whatever.
How about a TV campaign – “You might be a mutant. Uncontrolled mutant powers can be dangerous. See your doctor today and find out! Help is available. /conforting voice”
This is how our society works at the moment.
*You don’t need to get tested for AIDS to get a drivers licence.
*“Parents, talk to you children about drugs.”
*“Teachers, do you know where little Jimmy got those bruises from? Get help with violence and domestic abuse”.
LHOD, I wonder. Are we arguing for the same thing here? It’s just so far from a Mutant Registration Act in the spirit of the movies that maybe I’m confused.
First, good point about TB being a better example than AIDS.
I’m not sure I do–a mutant with a telepathic power like Professor Xavier’s or Jean Gray’s might never know he or she even has a power–it’s not like you can see it. By training them, you’re suddenly making them dangerous. Imagine a normal human who’s just naturally built and who has just the right potential skills to become the world’s best martial artist–without training he or she is just a normal person with potential. WITH training, suddenly you have someone really deadly to deal with. Remember, “Being trained” =! “Being properly socialized”.
But that decision will affect them for life, should parents have the right to out their kids? Once that kid goes to the training, all his teachers, all the administrators, all the classmates, and all the bureaucrats doing the administration will know that the kid is a mutant. There’s no way to put the genie back into the bottle. And vaccinations are substantially different than mutations–for one, there’s no social stigma to being vaccinated…quite the reverse, actually. There is a social stigma to being a mutant.
Per the movies, there’s already a non-governmental solution, in place, effective and working, and better still costing the taxpayers nothing AND addressing privacy concerns: Professor Xavier’s School For Gifted Youngsters. No governmental list, no invasion of privacy, no chance of someone being ‘outed’ or put in a databank somewhere for later round-up, etc. Professor X, using Cerebro is already able to find mutants world-wide, and if their power is such that it would benefit from training, he offers it to the parents and the kid in such a way as to allow them anonymity. Allowing Professor X to continue with his methods insures considerably more privacy for our minor (it’s not perfect of course–but at least there won’t be thousands of bureaucrats and administrators who know–and of the people who do know, all are mutants themselves) AND lets the minor make the choice of “outing” themselves when they turn 18 or remaining in hiding.
Professor X would, however, be more effective if the government would get out of his way! Give a quasi-governmental status to the X-Men allowing them to function like a hazmat team when dealing with a young mutant with out of control powers overriding local police.
Big-government liberals* have to realize that the government isn’t the solution for every problem and that the private sector can, in some cases, accomplish a task better, more efficiently and cheaper than the government.
Down with the Mutant Registration Act, I say!
Fenris
*Said completely tongue-in-cheek!
Look, wouldn’t it be a lot simpler to design a bunch of mechanisms that would locate these mutants and round them up? No registration necessary, and so everyone’s happy.
It should be noted that as soon as y’all come up with some sort of “mutant registration act” you can all agree on I stand ready to propose a constitutional challenge on equal protection grounds. Possibly on other grounds depending on the actual wording of the “act”.
Sincerely,
Mtgman Esq.
Mutant Civil Liberties Association