andros, thank you.
It hardly matter who has access to it, theoretically, for as SteveG1 said pack in post #71, “No lists would be private for long, just look at the latest credit card account incident.”
-
It’s a source available to law enforcement.
Under normal circumstances, if a bank opens its vault Monday morning and the contents are missing, with nothing but a slippery slime left behind, police would begin suspecting an inside job. If they have a database that notes that someone living in the area has the ability to move through walls holding objects, but he leaves behind a slippery slime when he does, that’s at least a reason to talk to the guy. If a woman reports that she’s been molested by a guy who vanished in a puff of purple smoke, police might be tempted to send her for a psych evaluation… but perhaps the database lists someone in the area that can apport, leaving behind a puff of purple smoke. These are valuable pieces of data for law enforcement to possess. -
It’s a source for research and data-gathering
While it seems clear that we are not able to pinpoint a specific reason for the presence of the “X-factor,” research efforts might well be aided by showing regions that have higher orr lower concentrations of mutants, or specific powers/abilities that appear in certain regions. Like census data, the individual data will be kept private, but in the aggregate, it can be used by researchers to gain valuable insight into the phenomenon. -
It provides an aid for public safety
Mutants with dangerous abilities can be offered counseling, training, and assistance to ensure that they do not inadvertantly injure or kill.
P.S> Current technology can not tell us how the mutant genre would activate, only that it might. We are not able to see if a baby might someday exhibit an ability to “to move through walls holding objects” so your idea would require teenagers past puberty to go in and get tested. “Ah, but what if they decide not to be tested voluntarily!” Well then, we would have to create devices to scan for activated mutants. It is only a short step from there to dragging them into testing centers, perhaps via the aide of policemen, or robots with built in sensing devices. However, down that way lies madness.
Effects/manifestations of the immutable differences between the members of the class and the general population is not an element of the test for protected class status. I see this going one of two ways(as a constitutional challenge is sure to arise virtually the instant the law passes). Firstly the test for suspect classes may change to include an element which relies on the effects/manifestations of the immutable differences. I wouldn’t think this would happen though because you would immediately have all kinds of racist assholes popping up with studies of how there are biological differences in the brains or bone structure between whites and blacks and therefore treating them differently with regards to hiring practices and health care, etc. would be justifiable.
The more likely course of action would be to grant mutants suspect class status and then to say that mutant registration rises to the level of compelling state interest. The state’s interest in protecting the welfare and safety of its citizens from either accidental or intentional harm from the use of mutant abilities could be the justification.
Enjoy,
Steven
Ok, it’s a source.
However, I have trouble accepting this unless you also support the registration of any and all persons with any abilities to commit crimes. I study Tae Kwon Do. Shall I be registered as having a greater-than-normal ability to kick the shit out of people? I’m taller than average. Shall I be registered as having the ability to reach the top shelves in the bank vault? You are a lawyer. Shall you be registered as having a greater-than-normal ability to circumvent the law?
Beyond that, however, I think you have a severely begged question here. You assume that the registry will include specific abilities held by those posessing the X-factor, and yet the Kelly Bill would register all mutants, whether they have catalogued powers or not.
Then treat it as census data. Gather it as self-report. We need the same kinds of data in all sorts of sociological, psychological, and medical studies right now, but we gather them without registering the innately violent, or african-americans, or AIDS patients.
Another begged question here, I’m afraid. You’re assuming that we can know who has a “dangerous” ability before said ability manifests. I don’t see how this is possible at the current time. Again, we’re left with responding to incidents, to providing, even perhaps requiring, counselling after a potentially dangerous ability manifests. And it seems you would have us register all mutants not because of what they do, or what they can do, but merely because they can do something, and it might prove a danger.
I’m also curious to know what provisions Senator Kelly and supporters of his proposal would put in place to ensure security of the Registry. If it’s accessible, as you’ve suggested, Bricker, to law enforcement, researchers, and the “we’re here to help” agencies, what provisions can we put in place to keep it from the general public? I believe firmly that Senator Kelly would like nothing more than to see it released publicly–and there are undoubtedly others in government and law enforcement who share that view. Given the recurring news stories about computer intrusions into census data, the IRS, and credit card databases, how on earth can I be assured that a Federal registry of honest Americans will not be leaked to the public?
Anyone is free to explain to me, after recognizing the fear and anger many Americans hold toward mutants and mutation itself, how this would not be a complete charlie foxtrot and shitstorm.
Once again, you are offering dire results that will not occur. And once again, you have failed to offer any specific evidence, historical or otherwise, that supports the contention that these are likely outcomes.
I don’t favor devices to scan for activated mutants, dragging anyone into testing centers, or the use of robots, with or without sensing devices.
I am supporting a registration requirement combined with testing, enforced only by requiring testing on file in order to do common things. If you apply for a driver’s license, your name must appear in the list of people that have had a test. If you attend school, your name must appear. If you join the military, get a federally-subsidized loan, work for the government, get a passport, etc., then you must have had the test.
This doesn’t purport to be foolproof. Undoubtedly, we may imagine a person home-schooled, that doesn’t drive, doesn’t use a bank account, etc., not getting tested. But the solution doesn’t have to be perfect – just have a reasonable reach. And this does.
If the testing and interview with positive subjects does not reveal the specific power or ability, then that’s that. That line of the record remains blank until some future event fills it in.
That’s all I’m proposing. Don’t argue against my proposal by filling in your own endings and then pointing out how terrible they would be.
:rolleyes:
A good analogy is census data.
In 2000, your family filled out a census form. It included all the information about each resident of the dwelling: how old they were, where they were born, where their parents were born, the occupation of each person, and (for females) how many living children each has.
Now, that data could be quite a prize to marketeers. But I haven’t heard any serious hue and cry about its collection, because it’s kept private. The aggregate data is made available to the “we’re here to help” agencies; the individual data will not be made a matter of public record until 2070. (As an interesting side note: the individual data from the 1930 US Census has now been made public, and I was able to look up my mother’s family and see my mother, age 4, my two uncles, ages 6 and 8, all living at my grandparent’s then-home).
If the concern about the release of private data is so compelling, what of the US Census data?
Re Testing
You’ll hear about in a few months. I heard about from no less a genetics expert than Charles Xavier (Yep. The author of The Structure And Function Of X. The book most folks keep next to their unread copy of A Brief History Of Time.). He read one of my papers in a psychological journal and found it interesting. While discussing harnessing the untapped potential of the mind (my area of research.) the conversation drifted to human potential and mutation. Xavier had recieved a preliminary report on a blood test that can be performed quickly and at neglible cost. The research team wants to triple check everything to be sure. But, Xavier said the test worked. You should see it on the news in a few months.
Re Registration
What about doctors Banner, Morbius, and Octavius? None of them are mutants. None of them would have been required to register. Banner has caused hundreds of millions of dollars of damage. Morbius killed over 20 people by drinking their blood. Octavius has killed more people than I can remember, stolen billions of dollars worth of equipment, and is a threat to national security.
Find me three mutants as dangerous as those three scientists. If mutants are so damn dangerous, why have I never read an article about an entire county being evacuated because a rampaging mutant is coming? I’ve read plenty about the Hulk. Why have I never turned on the news and seen a report on a superhuman serial killer mutant?
13 people in comas? How many children and other innocents has Frank “The Punisher” Castle killed over the years?
Anybody remember what the last FoolKiller’s bodycount was? Remember how he killed a university dean at a press conference because the dean had to decided to institute politically correct speech policies?
You say we should register mutants because they’re a threat? Prove it.
An argument remarkable for its cogency.
Where did you study debate?
But I chose to provide information, and what information to provide. I don’t see this as a reliable comparison.
You’re right, Census data is well-kept. But as you point out, the only release is in aggregate. You propose much wider release than that.
That’s additional evidence in favor of a test, then.
Yes, and Ted Kazinski blew people up, and John Wayne Gacy killed dozens of chidlren, and Jeffrey Dahmer ate people. What of it? This isn’t intended to stop all crime. You’re offering the fallacy of false analogy. Non-mutant criminals are a different subject, and should be dealt with by different means.
I think those guys have their own monthly title now. One’s a by-the-book law enforcement superagent, the other’s a mutant who makes his own rules and spews…welll…
It’s relevant to the issue of dissemination.
No. Law-enforcement only. At time of testing, individuals may be offered specific counseling and guidance. But I don’t propose a follow-up visit to the home of a person who can start fires by some well-meaning social services agency.
High school. But really, that is not the point. I don’t see it as my job to convince you. I see all my posts, and those of others in this thread, showing how the case against such an act overwhelms any case you might have. True, this is Gd, but I am simply posting what seem to me to be convincing arguments, and I leave it to others to show examples, or to use to actual debate format.
That is excellent news! I confess, I’ve not been keeping up with the science too well lately (although I’m one of those wierdo geeks who’s actually read Science and Function as well as ABHoT).
My bigger question, however, is the status of research into the manifestation of X. That is, it’s not enough to simply screen for it if we cannot also understand why some carriers apport, some are telempaths, or some grow toenails. Any ideas from Prof. X on the status of that end of things?
Or at least prove that they’re more of a threat than anyone else with a gamma emitter or adamantium prosthetics.
Keep trying.
Or, not.
OK. Now, let’s see some reproducible results, conducted under conditions that fall within accepted scientific and ethical guidelines for human testing.
I read enough to be aware of that, and the fact that we’re pretending the fourth wall is firmly in place. 
Sorry, didn’t preview.
Bricker, why does the existence of a test support the need to perform it?
And, back to the law enforcement angle, what was your response to my suggestion that all human traits which would assist criminal activity be registered and used as a law enforcement tool?