Grrl Power #575 – Born again?
“But Dave,” you might ask, “didn’t Cooter literally explode?”
Well, yes, but you know, it’s a superhero comic with a little supernatural stuff thrown in, so the possibility space is… wider.
Not sure how Sydney assessed that Cooter was a hillbilly that quickly. I guess just assume he’s got that drawl which is hard to actually write into a word bubble, unlike a French or Boston accent.
Sorry if it’s a little hard to decipher some of the panels. Turns out drawing people and feet covered in red in front of walls covered in red makes the foreground and background a little muddled in places, but I think this should be the last page that happens on. At least until Maxima gets most of her clothes burned off then has a fist fight with someone in a vat of molten gold or something. Again, wide possibility space.
This page colored by Keith.
Double res version will be posted over at Patreon. $1 and up, but feel free to contribute as much as you like.
SuperheroThey're super, thanks for asking!
Meatspace ComicSeriously these are awesome. Check 'em out!
Not UpdatingNo longer updating or only updates sporadically, but definitely worth reading.
SeriouslySeriously you guys. If you like Grrl Power the check these out.
"Mature"Mature subject matter and occasionally something explicit but usually safe. Can't guarantee the ads are safe though.
Dongs Ahoy!Full frontal and backal. Lots of skin, sex on some or all pages, explicit or otherwise.
Hmm, no one else is seeing this?
Notice how much time Sidney has to call out she’s falling asleep.. yeah, the spell didn’t hit her. She’s suffering the downside of the placebo effect. :-D
Deluding herself then making it work? Is she still sleep deprived? Excellent excuse if so.
Or she’s faking it as a joke.
Could be it was pointed at normal humans. Ingsol probably assume’s she’s a super.
And how many humans can explode, covering a room in gore, and then shake it off
Any, which have help from an external source. There was a vault full of objects which may have that capability. The Regenator sounding like one possibility, for example.
As someone with ADD with a brother who has ADHD, I can tell you it takes a fair bit more to make either of us fall asleep. People with either can naturally resist sleep easier than neurotypicals.
Saw it, just did not comment on it. Most likely she is just being Sydney, as others have said. Alternatively it is ‘talking is a free action’ combined with a lesser version of ‘famous last words are allowed’. Otherwise known as ‘moderately well known words, before falling asleep, are allowed’.
One important point to recall Sydney is just how icky that floor is. You really do not want to lie down in that!
This would be a good time to find your hidden willpower and make your saving throw!
Sydney doesn’t get Will saves; all her saving throws are based on Dex. Because Dex is as close as one can get to a ‘Spastic Nerdgirl’ stat.
…alternatively, Max catches her before she falls in the Cootgoo and wakes her back up with some Command Voice action. Or specifically does _not_ catch her before she falls in the Cootgoo. A faceful of hillbilly slime is a fantastic incentive to not be a klutz in the future.
Okay, you should never say or type “cootgoo” again. Ever.
Once was already too much.
But you just typed “cootgoo”! Does that mean other people can type Cootgoo?
What about Cootgoo Cachoo?
You saying that made me realize something.
I have that power.
My blood sugar drops from 112 to 83 any time I eat anything, which makes me black out. I’ve been with my doctor when it happened before, and I was able to carry on a conversation as my consciousness faded. Even as I lost my ability to keep my eyes open or head up or back straight, I could still talk until I was completely out.
Because Ingsol is a vampire, who is to say that the vampire “sleep spell” isn’t just minor blood magic, draining someone’s blood sugar to give the same effect?
vampires are depicted as having powers of charm against weaker-willed beings, it doesn’t have to be blood-fueled
sydney, weak willed? it takes some damned firm self control to run a small business.
On another paw, she failed to resist the urge to play with the stock (even if she is an expert repackager). And, on the other paws, she again failed in resisting her impulses both in her marketing scene (with the startled doggy and angry walker) and in hiring Ophelia, before Joel came back from his lunch-break.
Sorry, but this will be off topic.
But well… I love your paws. and RP.
We rarely find anything to be off topic, so no problem at all.
And thank you kindly!
*wags tail lovingly*
Impulse control problems that go with adhd aren’t like those experienced by neurotypicals. An nt person will characterize an impulse, and failing to resist, by how much they were tempted by the impulse, i.e., “the bate and the bite” are based on the person’s internal emotional interplay and priorities. But adhd isn’t based on that, and priorities and feelings can have little or relation to which impulses the adhd person resists, and which they don’t. The wires can shortcircuit on a minor urge, like the grocer checkout lije gauntlet that every mother is familiar with; or something more drastic, like saying something that even the adhd person condiders socially unacceptable at exactly the wrong time.
So don’t try calculate the chance of Sydney’s yielding to an impulse by how yucky the floor is. If it’s caused by adhd, the goo may not be a factor at all.
Maybe Sydney can make her saving throw by confusing the spell?
Actually it’s all a manor of degree. Adderall boosts willpower in “Neurotypical” (No such thing) humans the same way it does people with ADHD.
It’s just more likely to drag you into the bell-curve if you’re not already inside it.
You must use a different scale for blood sugar.
3 is the loosing consciousness line and a serious medical issue, 16+ is post Halloween/Easter binge.
If your base level is higher it’s possible to loose consciousness higher than 3 without it being serious.
Doctors are useless even if they check and get a reading of 3.
I now only rarely fall unconscious from hypoglycaemia. Eating normal doesn’t help, weirdly I need extra sugar intake. I used to be trim, eating healthy / normally and hitting the deck frequently. Now I swapped that problem for a spare tyre. Kendal mint cake is great emergency reserves.
Yes, that’s a different scale. Most blood sugar testers in the USA use the milligrams per deciLiter measurement (mg/dL) where the norm is 80, low is below 75, high is above 125, for non-diabetics. For diabetics, optimal ranges are deliberately a bit higher, between 90 and 125, and over 200 is actively ‘spilling sugar’ through the kidneys into the urine.
Other measurements, especially HgAlc (long term control test) measure in millimol per liter, or mmol/L where the ranges are as you indicated, between 2 and 16+, with “healthy” being somewhere between 4-5.5, for normal non-diabetic, 5.5 to 7 being pre-diabetic, and over 7 being diabetic.
I didn’t think of this until a week later, but… what about how much caffeine Sydney ingests. Would that provide a resistance to sleep spells?
Probably. :-D
But only until her body metabolises it. At that strength it would take longer than with a regular cup. However I got the impression that the trip down here took a fair while. So I imagine most of the kick has worn off.
Ingsol doenst look like he believes it if you ask me.
Maxi does, though why she isn’t catching her…
Same reason she didn’t avoid fear vomit.
Agreed. Just like Sydney went for the shield orb, Maxima will have pumped a lot of her pool into defense.
That said Sydney has only started to wobble/go down. We have yet to see if she continues. Or how Maxima reacts.
Maxima is used enough to Sydney’s play acting that she would not want to shift her dial from defense to speed, until she thought it necessary. Which, admittedly, may be too late. But the trade off is loosing her tanking ability versus stopping Sydney getting icky stuff on her.
Yes that would require extensive decontamination, but it is not as immediately life-threatening as a vault with unknown villains in it. They know that at least half a Wyrmil is unaccounted for, and have no idea if that is the limit.
Maxi doesn’t need to have the speed boost, all she has to do is move! She is a trained soldier, her reaction speed should be great enough, even at ‘normal’ (for her)
True. But a trained soldier does need to be able to take in what is happening, and decide how to react. Which can take a moment (and we are seeing that very moment).
Her decision may be that saving Sydney from getting messy does not outweigh risking slipping, on the bloody floor, and compromising her ability to counter any other threats. Halo has just been taken out of action (temporarily), it may not be wise to compound that at a potentially critical moment.
They do still have at least 0.5 of a dangerous suspect at large, in the immediate vicinity, not to mention any unknown others.
It wasn’t an Instant Sleep command
Originally the page just had her pass out without comment, then there was a pause panel as everyone looks at her, then someone says something snarky, but I didn’t have the space for the extra panels. :/
Having Sydney be Sydney is better than someone else be snarky
It’s perfectly reasonable for Sydney to have got a slightly weaker shot than Coot: she was looking at Ingsol, but Ingsol’s gaze and attention were on Coot. Being unsure of how strong-willed this bloody apparition is, I doubt Ingsol was holding back. Coot got the main ‘beam’, enough to put him down hard and fast; Sydney got a spillover, enough to put her down but not so dramatically.
As for writing the dialect in a speech bubble:
“Wut in th’ sam hill Jaysus Hefner Amurica Chrahst is goin’ on? Mo’,freaks? Ah’ve had ’nuff o’ yew double-crossin’ monsters!”
Yeah, I write for a living. No, I’m not afraid to write dialects. *snicker*
There are two types of Authors. Ones that don’t write dialect at all, an’ those wut don shy ‘way frum ’em.
I’ve seen a lot of, “You shouldn’t use dialect, etc. in your writing,” but that’s a very recent fad, really, and I think if you can write dialects, accents, etc. then it makes for a good short cut to establishing a character. I used to do theatre, and that’s one of the factors that goes into creating a character, so I approach my writing the same way. I’ll even go off and listen to recordings of regional patois, just to get it right for a given character.
Yeah, I suppose I could have done that if I’d given it a bit more thought, but I’ve already established his dialog on other pages. I suppose I could go back and change those as well.
I’m glad you liked it, so did I. But I must admit each time I read it I am hearing a Scottish accent, rather than one of the Southerner accents.
Mind you one of my friends is a Texan, who plays the bagpipes, and has many friends who holiday in Scotland to attend piping festivals. He tells me that they have a big piping community there (one of the biggest outside Scotland, as befits Texas). So perhaps the similarities are not as coincidental as I first assumed.
Call it a “translation patch”
Oh, I didn’t mean to come across as criticizing, DaveB. I was just pointing out how you might have done it. I’ve been enjoying the strip immensely.
That’s accent, not dialect. Dialect is word choice, sentence order, specific phrasing, the like. Accent is inflection, tone, and general sounds.
That is one definition only. Others would match BinaryWatcher‘s usage. Still others cover both or neither respectively. The online dictionaries give a wide variety of different options, here are a few:
So he is hilly-billy Deadpool?
I’m thinking ghost I think I can see the background through him in a few panels. That said not sure whether a sleep spell would work on a ghost hillbilly
I thought that too. Although a Wyrmil, with a shed skin, may have a translucent body. But it is best to check out the author’s blog, to aid in informed speculation:
hehehe redscreen insteada greenscreen
No, that’s just where the blood has gone, not sure how, looks kinda like lightning of sweat, we saw it on Sci-frights and Gunnies outfits shortly after they entered
Ingsol’s gonna have a problem with “Ingy.” Calling it now.
now is the question are you dealing with coot, coot + wormy hybrid, or wormy wearing a cootskin suit?
Heh – Cootskin Cap…
Does that mean Wyrmil is like Hive from agents of shield? o.O
i’m thinking the giant space-cockroach from MIB: Wyrmil is wearing a Cooter-suit…
Alternatively: Splattering blood all over a bunch of relics containing immense amounts of dark magic might be a recipe for regeneration, especially if said blood was already infused with explosively powerful blood magic. It’s possible at least one of the artifacts said “Screw it, I’m putting this shmuck back together and hitching a ride out of here lodged inside his ribcage. I’ll claw my way out later. Anyone else want out?”
Very well argued.
Sapient relic possession, that wasn’t an angle I’d thought of. Nice angle.
And I just realised something that would help to substantiate that more, in that we initially see Cooter in a broken artefact display pillar (panels 2 & 4).
One drawback being that Cooter died in the antichamber not here. However plenty of blood got brought in here, on Sciona’s team, so there is still a mechanism. And artefacts tend to break whatever rules are inconvenient to them anyhow.
That’s not an artefact display pillar, it’s the remains of one of the defensive turrets
Ahh, I stand corrected.
*eyes pop open*
Does this make him a dalek?
Hmm. The trail leading to his body from Wyrmil’s makes me think this IS Wyrmil. He’s been hired by Deus to point the investigation at Sciona. We still don’t see obvious signs of Gunnhilda or Doctor Chuckles yet, so it’s possible that they’ve found new, gainful employment. Of course, they could also be part of what’s on the walls.
Still, if Wyrmil is inside the Coot Suit, I don’t see him lasting past the initial examination stage. I’m sure there will be a … complete medical examination after they leave the vault, and I’m pretty sure he’d be found out. It should be interesting to see how it’s explained, at the least.
Or maybe Sciona is playing a deep game. Infiltrating Archon with somebody who is outwardly human (unlike us, the good guys do not know that he died earlier), so may not be contained in as secure a facility as a super would. Giving him the chance to use his Wirmil powers to escape and get up to mischief within Archon or the Council’s base.
I think Wyrmil is making his own play, just to survive.
Archon appears to have not neglected its defenses. There’s an Irish vampire in this very who tried and failed to infiltrate. And before the obvious “But now they are inviting him in!” protests start, remember that the Irish vampire was also haled inside for interrogation.
But there is yet another flaw in your suggestion. This is a Council facility, and Cooter is trespassing on their property. Archon was asked to come assist, not to take over. Cooter should be held and questioned by the Council, not by Archon. Of course we’ve also seen that Maxima is more than willing to step all over her supposed allies prerogatives, arrest and interrogate their personnel for thought crimes, and other ridiculousness. And is also more than willing to back up those actions with the threat of violence. So, *ahem* wide possibility space.
“in this very” comic. Damnit. Hauled. Double damnit.
I did cover my bases by saying:
I agree that the latter is the more likely mind. But included the former as Cooter is (allegedly) a human. Supernaturals fall under the Council’s jurisdiction, but humans are Archon’s responsibility.
Clearly we must be reading different comics.
> Clearly we must be reading different comics.
I think Oberon is calling out the time when Maxima said to Krona (the reality warper girl with the blue hair) “You can maybe break time? You *will* come with me for debriefing.” A lot of people got bent out of shape on that, claiming that Maxima was forcibly arresting her and it was abuse of power and etc. My answer: No, Max was making a presence attack. It would only have been questionable had Krona said, “No, I’m not. Bye” and THEN Max used force to bring her in.
Even then, I suspect any real-world jury would be fine with the following conversation:
Lawyer: Officer Bob, is it true that you forced my client to go with you to the station for questioning?
Officer Bob: Sure did.
L: Had she committed a crime?
OB: Nope.
L: So you were in violation of her civil rights?
OB: Nope.
L: How can you claim that???
OB: She had demonstrated that she was a plausible threat to herself and others and was not entirely in control of her ability to cause harm.
Judge and Jury: Case dismissed!
Agreed.
Need to speak up since… lawyer. Plus the scenario seems like something I’d see on the internet which ends with a ‘And the whole room started to clap’ meme.
Here’s what would actually happen.
L: Let the record show that Office Bob has admitted that despite the plaintiff not committing any crime, she was detained under an implied threat of force without the ability to leave because Office Bob merely thought she MIGHT do something bad in the future, despite having not committed any crime. Officer Bob, how exactly are you able to tell the future with such amazing clarity that you can suspend someone’s freedom in violation of the writ of habeas corpus?
OB: I don’t know what that means.
L: Clearly you don’t. (To the Jury) A writ of habeas corpus) is a court order to a person or agency holding someone in custody (such as a warden) to deliver the imprisoned individual to the court issuing the order and to show a valid reason for that person’s detention. Did you have such a court order?
OB: No.
L: And she did not commit a crime and was not in the act of trying to commit a crime?
OB: Well uh… she might have been!
L: Are you able to read minds?
OB: No I’m just super strong and super fast and can fly and shoot death beams from my finger.
L: But no clairvoyance.
OB: No.
L: And no mind-reading ability.
OB: No.
L: If you did not have those physical powers, and someone else who did had told you that you were coming with them to be detained, would you feel that you have no choice but to come with them? It’s okay, you don’t have to answer that. The jury can ask themselves that question instead and hope that someone like you never decides that you are worried that one of them might be a danger in the future, despite not committing any crimes or precursors to any crimes. Juror #4 seems like a very strong fellow. Perhaps you think that he might be a risk of beating up someone weaker than him. Despite him never doing that in the past. Juror #6 was in the army and owns a firearm. He might shoot someone on the future, despite never having committed a crime, since according to Officer Bob, it doesn’t matter if there’s any reasonable suspicion that a crime is going to be committed…. all that’s necessary is that Officer Bob is worried that a crime might happen in the undefined future, with no other evidence EXCEPT Officer Bob’s worries.
Judge: Since I know the law at least as well as a first year law student and do understand that this is not the world of ‘Minority Report’ where the future can be known before anything happens and before there’s even a reasonable threat that a defendant will commit a crime, I will not be dismissing this case. Especially since there was a police officer who earlier this year did something similar to a nurse in Utah, and he wound up being fired and sued.
Jury: We rule that Officer Bob was guilty of unlawful detainment and find in favor of the plaintiff. And when the damages are to be decided, we’ll award $2 million to the plaintiff.
Officer Bob’s department settles the case for $500,000 (they hope), like what happened in Utah to the cop. Officer Bob is fired and has to go work as a mall cop or security guard since no other police department will take him.
Again, you are forgetting the fact that Kronachrome admitted she had no idea what she was doing, and in fact made a monumental fuck-up, and everyone involved was just very lucky things didn’t go badly
No, I’m not forgetting anything. If you own a knife, but have never used it to attack anyone, you will not be arrested because you’re not good at throwing knives, even if someone worries that you might one day take your knife and throw it at someone.
Same deal here. You can’t arrest or even detain someone because you’re worried that they might do something when they havent done anything illegal, as in the ‘Officer Bob’ example, and where they were not PLANNING on doing anything illegal.
Not sure why you want to give police and government the ability to arrest or detain you based on their flawed beliefs about you.
You are ignoring Guesticus‘s point that Krona has done wrong already. So your arguments about ‘future crimes’ only has bearing about preventing a re-occurrence.
As Maxima was not making a formal arrest, she did not stipulate the charges that such would be made under. Her priority was not punishing the earlier actions, but to prevent Krona carrying on with this irresponsible behaviour.
However had Krona decided not to cooperate, Maxima did have those grounds that Guesticus was referring to, to form the basis of her charges.
It is realistic that Maxima did not need to spell this out to a fellow law enforcement officer (as Krona is a federal agent, of one sort or another). Krona was wise to admit that Maxima was in the right. It allowed her to get help to stop being a menace to society!
Nothing is being ignored. You are inventing history with your “Krona has done wrong already” accusation, and then using it to justify an unlawful arrest.
We’ve been through this before… But here, have another go at it:
Please prove to the court exactly what Krona had done wrong. Not something invented, not something imagined. Name some actual harm.
Krona saved lives and prevented injury. This can be trivially documented. Any harm she did is purely invented. Moreover, she was an “officer” assisting “officers of a different type” at their request. Using your firearm in these kinds of situations without injury to innocents does not result in you immediate arrest. It would be like the State Police asking for assistance from the FBI and then arresting the FBI agents even though those FBI agents only pointed their firearms at the bad guys, and no one else was injured by them at all.
Your entire premise is preposterous and without merit or basis in fact, and yet you persist in your ignorant* defense of your ignorant position. You have the right to be ignorant, but it is disheartening to demonstrate over and over to someone who is supposedly a reasoning adult that 2+2=4 and have them insist over and over that 2+2=10. Even children can learn when taught patiently, but you apparently are immune to that process.
* The word “ignorant” has a meaning. It indicates a lack of understanding or knowledge. The use of this word is not a pejorative.
Krona has wiped the memory of several police officers, most notably Pixel, erasing any evidence that she could provide against Sciona.
Further she did this without Pixel;’s concent, and Pixel was furious at the manner in which this was done. So she has not provided retroactive concent either.
Final Pixel indicated that she felt that it was unnecessary This is corroborated by the fact that we have seen Pixel rapidly recover from having a girder through her torso. She is a top-tier regenerator who could easily use her laser claws to escape.
Therefore your assertion that:
Is not a certainty. Plenty of people have argued, perfectly reasonably, that Sydney need not have died from being stabbed by the needle. And Krona confirmed that the checkpoint is not activated by death, rather by fear.
So the most you can say, with certainty, is that Krona prevented Sydney from being stabbed by a needle.
Except that I have shown that injury has occurred. Memories are laid down physically in the brain. Erasing them is therefore causing actual bodily harm.
Krona did more than just point her gun at the bad guys. She fired it, and hit her own side!
Your counter-argument hinges on:
Please can you explain to us how police officers are able to arrest someone for driving dangerously? I see plenty of prosecutions for this, including film stars with fancy lawyers. In both the analogy and the comic the officer has to decide whether an action is threatening the public. Once they have decided that they have grounds, they can arrest the suspect.
In this case Maxima needed to avoid that though, as they were working on a covert mission. But she could still fall back on that, if necessary.
In any event it would be up to the court to prove the case, not the police officer. Maxima need merely show that, despite Krona claiming that her code was safe and predictable, it was producing results which she could not explain.
This is like a hacker running buggy code, on your computer.* It does not matter what the results are, they do not have the right to be doing that.
* This though is not just manipulating information, but is actually changing things in the real world, including police officers. Without people’s concent or even knowledge. We know that all it takes is a simple error and such complicated programs can cause serious problems. In this case, in the real world.
Yet Krona has not bothered to have anyone check her coding. Nor has she arranged alpha or beta testing. Rather she is exposing members of the public to the risk of buggy programming. And we have seen the results are indeed buggy!
Causing police officers to loose their memories of criminal activities is not to be taken lightly!
Likewise risking putting people into a never-ending loop. Krona does not have the right to manipulate other people, without their concent. Be that by manipulating time (as she thought) or rearranging matter locally (as it appears to actually work).
This is only ever justified if the people involved are in a condition where they cannot give informed concent, yet there is a life-threatening situation posing them a clear and present danger. For instance through being unconscious, or if there is insufficient time to go through the process before the crisis point.
At the time of activating the power there were no such constraints.
“Please can you explain to us how police officers are able to arrest someone for driving dangerously?”
There are actual laws dealing with various aspects of driving dangerously. An officer arrests someone for driving dangerously when they break those laws. There is an actual LAW being broken. That’s the difference. You can’t arrest someone because, for example, they’re an asian teenage woman who has a higher percentage of likelihood that they MIGHT get into an accent because of some officer’s worried concern.
“I see plenty of prosecutions for this, including film stars with fancy lawyers.”
Hollywood tends to be really stupid when it comes to law.
Just to be clear, err towards Law and Order, NOT Matlock.
Storrs’ example would never, ever, EVER happen. No judge in their right mind would ever let a police officer get away with violating someone’s civil rights because the police was worried, despite no crimes being committed and no crimes ABOUT to be committed. You actually need reasonable suspicion in order to detain someone even for a very SHORT period of time. Maxima didn’t have that. Officer Bob doesn’t have that. You CAN detain someone for X hours (usually between 24 and 48 hours depending on the jurisdiciton) before you give the reason for the detention, but it wouldn’t fit in the Maxima or Officer Bob examples for one simple reason – she already GAVE the reason why she was detaining Krona. So she doesn’t get the leeway of X hours to detain. At that point where you give a reason, you have to either charge them or let them go. It’s not some blanket excuse to grab people off the street. Unless you’re saying that Maxima should lie and abuse her position, which doesn’t seem particularly heroic.
“In both the analogy and the comic the officer has to decide whether an action is threatening the public.”
Nope, in both the analogy and the comic, there has to be an actual threat done. It can’t be a nebulous worry about a possible future threat. Otherwise if Im a police officer and I see you swing at the air, I can just go over to you and tell you I’m taking you down to the station because you might eventually swing your fist at a person instead in the undefined future.
“Once they have decided that they have grounds, they can arrest the suspect.”
Nope. They have to have probable cause that a crime HAS been committed or was going to be committed by the suspect. They can’t just arrest a person without that probable cause that a crime has or is going to be committed. Key word here is CRIME.
“In this case Maxima needed to avoid that though,”
She needed to avoid the Constitution?
“as they were working on a covert mission.”
Working on a covert mission does not make the Constitution no longer valid.
“But she could still fall back on that, if necessary.”
No she can’t. Because there was no crime committed, and even Maxima had admitted that she didn’t think Krona was going to commit a crime, and in fact had HELPED them, even saving Sydney’s life (and probably Pixel’s as well).
“This is like a hacker running buggy code, on your computer.*”
Actually it’s not. Lets say the hacker was invited into your house to try to unlock your computer because you forgot the password. And she tries something which fixes the computer, but also wipes important info from the hard drive in the process. She’s not going to get arrested, even if there’s the possibility that, in the future, she might use her hacking skills for something illegal. She hasnt done anything illegal, and she wasn’t planning on doing anything illegal in the future, even if she has juuust enough knowledge of hacking to be dangerous, until she actually IS planning to commit some sort of crime.
“It does not matter what the results are, they do not have the right to be doing that.”
They do if they were given permission to try to ‘fix’ a problem. Like Krona had. And again, you’re missing the major point that there was no CRIME being committed, and Maxima admitted that Krona was, in fact, helping. You KEEP on skipping over that little part.
Also, every single thing you accuse of Krona, you can accuse 10 times over of Maxima. Remember in the bank? Where she threatened the civilian who wanted to know why she didn’t do something earlier, and she kept saying how ‘no one was ever in danger’ because she can catch the bullets? She’s sooooo cocksure that she can do it every single time? How many times has she caught bullets if, for example, she wasn’t prepared to do so. Like with fear vomit? It’s the height of hypocrisy. Not to mention with Maxima being essentially a police officer, she’s held to a higher standard than a layperson.
“Likewise risking putting people into a never-ending loop. Krona does not have the right to manipulate other people, without their concent.”
1) She didn’t.
2) She had a lot of safeguards on the ‘time loop’ to begin with.
3) You’re having a pretty nebulous definition of ‘manipulating other people’ – because apparently saving someone’s life is ‘manipulating other people’ as well based on your definition.
“Be that by manipulating time (as she thought) or rearranging matter locally (as it appears to actually work).”
Or be that by using your finger plasma blast and assuming that Sydney won’t accidentally let go of the shield orb like she let go of the fly orb, causing every reporter to die a fiery death?
Hell, by this logic, Maxima should also have detained and arrested the geokinetic because there’s a ‘worry’ that he can collapse the global economy in the future. Yet he hasn’t. They guy didn’t HAVE to show them where he even kept the gold. They couldn’t detain him if he said no. In fact, they couldn’t detain and arrest him even if he DID flood the market with gold. She might as well be trying to arrest George Soros, who’s collapsed markets in RL (skeezy practice, but not illegal).
Worry about the future does not give you the right to arrest or detain someone without going through the courts first. Due process of law. They would have filed a writ of habeas corpus immediately. And Archon would have lost and its credibility as a government agency would be in the toilet only DAYS after they were revealed to the public.
Cool. One law, amongst many, that has been broken is assault. Memories are stored by physical connections in the mind. Krona wiped Pixel’s memory, without her concent. Pixel agreed to have Krona on her team. She did not agree to having her memory wiped. Krona has done physical harm to Pixel. Krona assaulted Pixel. A crime has been committed.
Likewise for every person affected (according to Krona’s testimony that should include everybody). None of whom consented to being assaulted, nor taken back in time.
Actually there has been no assault. No one was in any imminent apprehension of immediate physical harm by Krona.
And if you mean battery, there was no unlawful touching so you are wrong there as well.
Also, saving someones life from a third party is not assault or battery even if there is touching involved.
My apologies, as usual I use the English terms for these matters, as I am not conversant with the variations across all of the states. In England assault is legally considered synonymous with battery (or so Wikipedia tells me). I do get terribly absent minded, so I only now recall that the distinction between the two, in the US, is something which has been brought up here before.
Again, I am relying on Wikipedia, for the following, but it seems to contradict your assertion that touching is required:
Emphasis added on the key part. Whilst I appreciate that this is an encyclopedia entry, and not a legal source, that is saying that offensive touching is not required, when bodily injury has occurred. Which my argument has already shown that it had.
I do have to query whether that provision can be applied to persons other than the individual being rescued? Sydney was the one who was endangered, being the one who triggered the recall (Pixel was so confident of her ability to escape that she did not trigger the recall even, with being strung up naked)..
However Pixel is the one who’s memory got erased. Not to mention the billions of others that Krona’s account of her powers (at that time) would have us believe.
“Again, I am relying on Wikipedia, for the following, but it seems to contradict your assertion that touching is required”
Silly me. I’m referring to 12 years of practicing law instead. And yes, touching is required for a battery. Imminent apprehension of immediate physical attack is assault. These are standard definitions on the books. Offensive touching IS ALWAYS required, or it’s not battery. If you take even a first year law course on tort law, you will be taught this on the first day that they teach about assault and battery.
So I’m correct. You’re incorrect.
“I do have to query whether that provision can be applied to persons other than the individual being rescued?”
It applies in the ‘offensive’ part of ‘offensive touching.’ Saving someone’s life is inherently NOT offensive. If someone’s about to jump off a bridge, and you grab them and pull them to safety, you have not committed battery, even if you saved their life and touched them without their permission. Even if they are suicidal and want to die.
Actually 8 years. Although I was also including 3 years of law school and one year getting my LLM, since I was a law clerk andmediator for the courts while I was going to law school for credits…. but point is it only takes one year of law school to learn the basics of what we are discussing/arguing. Its frustrating when you then take a wikipediaarticle and even misunderstand what it is saying. Or when you try to use layperson definitions in an argument about tge law involving assault when youclaim, incorrectly, that Kronacommitted it, or ANY crime. Youre just being obstinate at thispoint and making walls of text where you repeatedly say things that are provably factuallyincorrect on thusparrucular topic.
The main reason I even typed anything was the cringe inducing post about the lawyer and officer bob.
Ps – typing on my phone hence the spelling errors
Here Yorp. Instead of using Wikipedia, use this:
https://injury.findlaw.com/torts-and-personal-injuries/battery-basics.html
Thank you. And I stand corrected, regarding both assault and battery. Hopefully you will be gracious enough to suggest what law causing physical harm, other than by touching, may be covered?
If there is none, then I will propose that she is conducting a medical procedure (a physical alteration inside someone’s body) without informed concent and whilst (as far as we know) lacking a licence.
All the while bearing in mind that all I am doing is the same thing as they had to do with Al Copone. When they could not prove that he was a crime lord they got him on his taxes. I am just going through the options that Maxima may have considered (perhaps consulting Ariana) in order to find a specific point to justify formally arresting Krona, should it prove to be necessary.
“Hopefully you will be gracious enough to suggest what law causing physical harm, other than by touching, may be covered?”
None. There is no physical harm that was caused by Krona’s actions at all, therefore even if there HAD been touching (which there wasn’t) or if there had been touching through an object (which there wasn’t) it still would not be battery. Or assault. Or any crime at all.
And even if there had been touching, the problem is the legal definition of HARM. There was no harm. There was the opposite of harm. There was AID. She saved lives, she did not harm lives. You (and Guesticus) seem to keep on trying to turn a theoretical possible, NEBULOUS danger into a real thing. That’s not how law works. That’s never been how the law worked in the US. Ever. It’s antithetical to US law, in fact, to try to detain or arrest someone over a possible future crime which they haven’t caused yet and have not planned on causing. It’s ‘Minority Report.’
“If there is none, then I will propose that she is conducting a medical procedure (a physical alteration inside someone’s body) without informed concent and whilst (as far as we know) lacking a licence.”
She is not. There is no medical procedure happening. There is no physical alteration of anyone’s body that is happening in a harmful way. By the widest stretch of the imagination, what she is doing cannot be considered ‘medicine’ and is not going to fall under any sort of medical licensure laws. You’re trying to stretch things because what she is doing is not illegal.
“All the while bearing in mind that all I am doing is the same thing as they had to do with Al Copone.”
Actually they did not arrest Capone for anything he ‘might do in the future.’ They arrested him for tax evasion, which happened in the past. Watch The Untouchables. It’s actually correct on what they arrested him for…. just with some Hollywood flair that never happened thrown in.
“When they could not prove that he was a crime lord they got him on his taxes”
Even when they were trying to prove that he was guilty of ordering murders and violating prohibition and bribery and all those other crimes, it was NEVER them trying to prove he was going to commit crimes in the future. It was always for past crimes, or to prevent a crime in which the crimes were already in effect. That’s not what happened with Krona at all. To paraphrase what Maxima told Sydney, it is not illegal to merely have or use powers.
Just like it’s not illegal to merely own a knife. Even though you might use a knife to stab someone in the future. But is illegal to use that knife to stab someone just standing there, once you’ve tried to do so, or once you’ve at least started in the attempt.
Simply put, you can never arrest someone simply because you’re worried they MIGHT do something in the future, for which no CRIMINAL plans have been made to do so (thus no start of a crime has even happened).
“I am just going through the options that Maxima may have considered (perhaps consulting Ariana)”
If Ariana is even a halfway decent attorney (which she obviously is), she would tell her not to ever do that again, since the next time it might be on someone who isn’t utterly clueless about her rights.
“in order to find a specific point to justify formally arresting Krona, should it prove to be necessary.”
There’s no way to formally arrest Krona for anything she’s done, and definitely no way to arrest her for ‘worries about what she might do in the future’ without Congress or a state legislature or city legislature passing a new law. And even then the law would almost definitely be unconstitutional and overturned. They already know they can’t, or they’d have arrested that Geokinetic already.
I was referring to news articles about celebrities being charged with ‘dangerous driving’, ‘causing death by dangerous driving’ etc. I made no mention of fictional stories.
The rest of your paragraph goes on about ‘future crimes’ again. Whereas a crime has already been observed and confessed to (twice).
No, there has been NO crime confessed to, or observed. You’re making up facts.
Also celebrities are not charged with ‘dangerous driving.’ They’re charged with actual crimes, like vehicular manslaughter, DUI, etc. There’s no such crime as simply ‘dangerous driving.’
My statement quoted is good English and means the same as yours. I did not stipulate a nebulous worry about a future threat, either in that sentence or in the argument leading up to it.
The suspect having already demonstrated, and confessed to causing, an actual threat though, it is incumbent upon a police officer to prevent it reoccurring
Now I am not sure if you know what nebulous means.
Yes there was. Despite the subsequent attempt you make to try and wriggle out of it, as below:
Krona was invited to join the team (I agree with your ‘invited into your house’ as a fair analogy), to scout for Sciona (OK = password)
Whoa! This is where your analogy breaks down. Firstly because it did not result in Sciona being captured,(so the ‘computer’ was not ‘fixed’).
But, more importantly, because your version implies that there was an accidental wiping of the hard drive information. Whereas Krona knew full well that this would always be the result of her power being activated, for everybody involved, other than the person triggering it.
Yet, despite being able to raise this with them, in advance, she did not give them the choice of saying ‘yes this is an acceptable price to pay’. Or ‘no that information is very important and must not be lost’. Hers was a premeditated crime. Not a split second judgement call, in a crisis, as you keep trying to imply.
Plus you can try to downplay the crime to being a ‘trivial loss of data on a hard drive’ but in actuality it is the memory of a police officer witnessing and being subject to a major crime. All evidence of which, be it forensic, eye witness testimony, or otherwise, Krona has destroyed!
Finally do not forget that Pixel was offended at the suggestion that she had needed help. You seem to think that being hung upside down means that she was on the verge of death. Yet we have seen that Pixel can shake off having a girder punch through her torso!
Krona’s own power corroborates this, in that Pixel was unconcerned enough that no reset was triggered by her. So Pixel was likely just playing possum, knowing that Sciona was in earshot. Remember that being naked is no hindrance to Pixel, as she is always armed with her laser claws and invisibility.
Krona may well have interfered with Pixel saving Sydney, by taking Sciona’s head off again!
But this is just speculation because Pixel cannot testify to that, due to Krona wiping her memory! This was not her call to make. Krona has done wrong.
Just as with a rape case concent is critical and it was lacking here.
Please provide the 7.5 billion concent forms which Krona obtained to wipe the memories of everyone on Earth (as she claims).
“Please provide the 7.5 billion concent forms which Krona obtained to wipe the memories of everyone on Earth (as she claims).”
No offense, but that’s a dumb thing to require. you don’t need consent of every person on earth to do something, even if it changes the lives of every person on Earth. Not to mention that did NOT happen anyway, so you’re basing an already incorrect requirement with flawed logic on a non-existent event. No one outside of the immediate area was affected.
It was Krona’s intention that it did. Which is the whole point. She was doing this on purpose. The fact that she was too incompetent to do what she intended just compounds the problems. It is why the team got immediately attacked by the construct, the second time round!
Sorry I will not accept your euphemism of “even if it changes the lives of every person on Earth” as an acceptable substitute for “even if it wipes minutes worth of memory from every person on Earth”.
“It was Krona’s intention that it did. Which is the whole point.”
1) Intent alone is not a crime. A crime is mens rea + actus reus. Guilty Mind + Guilty Act.
2) She had no GUILTY act even, so her intention is not a crime even if there was a corresponding act which met up with the intent.
You keep trying to create a crime where there is none. You don’t like something, say ‘this oughtta be a crime’ and think therefore people can treat it like a crime. It’s not. You’re wrong. There’s no crime. She can’t be arrested. She can’t be detained when Maxima is already specifically saying WHY she’s detaining her (for something which is not a crime).
“The fact that she was too incompetent to do what she intended just compounds the problems.”
Still not a crime.
“It is why the team got immediately attacked by the construct, the second time round!”
As opposed to two of the team being either dead or incapacitated already. Her actions were a benefit, not a harm. Not to mention you can’t create a ‘but for’ scenario with the construct. Perhaps the Construct attacked because they were being REALLY loud and obvious.
She did. Demonstrably so. Nobody was aware of what she had done until it started to go wrong. If they did not know that it had been done they had not agreed to it
.
Saying “lets find Sciona together” does not equal “please wipe my memory”. Giving permission for one act does not automatically extend to another act, when the consequences of the latter are far more serious than the former.
Giving someone permission to borrow your car carries with it the risk that they may accidentally crash. It does not extend to them deliberately crashing the vehicle though. Krona deliberately wiped their memories.
So she claims. Yet her program was flawed, in not one but two ways (of those we observed in even a brief investigation in to the matter). Maxima should not have experienced the full time. Harem should not have had mixed memories.
This is proof that either her programming skills, or her underlying knowledge (that she bases that on), is fundamentally flawed. As we subsequently found out to be true!
My following post (which you considered your reply to adequately rebuff) defined this as “assault”. Although I would probably have been better off saying “assault resulting in actual bodily harm” (using the UK terminology that I am more familiar with).
However I am surprised that you are being so one -sided in the opinions you are offering here. Even though I am not a lawyer I am aware of the principle that if you commit a crime against an individual (let us say stealing their car) but they confirm retroactively that had they been present they would have given their permission (you needed it to take someone to hospital, to save their life), then that is not considered to be a crime.
Sydney and Maxima are grateful for Krona (apparently) saving her life. Which exonerates her for her actions in helping Sydney, against her will. She is giving retroactive concent.
Pixel did not though. Nor everybody else affected.
So, to run with the analogy, on the way to the hospital you crash into a bus, killing various passengers. The fact that you have the retroactive thanks of the initial victim (who survived your crash and got to hospital OK*) and even the police officer, who is her friend, does not get you a ‘get out of jail free’ card for killing the other victims!
To point out the analogy ‘killing the other victims’ equates to ‘wiping the memories of everyone on Earth’ (if Krona had been actually doing what she claimed).
* But only by a fluke as you taught yourself how to drive and did so badly.
Plus, elsewhere you mention violating constitutional rights.
You are not acting in your client’s best interests here. Krona is a citizen of Twilight. Their government has been in existence for 3,000 years. They have the elder civilisation and the elder courts, in a matter where a crime has taken place in overlapping jurisdictions
Krona’s constitutional rights that will be considered are therefore the ones granted to her by Twilight. Which I doubt permit her to endanger the whole world, and all the galactic member races beyond that.
Given the circumstances (this occurred during a mission to preserve the secrecy of the Veil) and the fact that any trial would have to reveal the existence of the Veil, require that the only court this could be held would be the Twilight Court. The US government has had long-standing arrangements with the Twilight Council, so this is likely to be formalised in some treaty.
Krona’s own testimony indicated that this should affect everyone in the world (if she indeed was turning time back). Yet this was provably only working for some people and not others. An effect inexplicable by modern science. Meaning that Krona was risking exposing the Veil.
A capital crime!
Maxima was doing Krona a big favour by offering a way to resolve the matter out of court. Which Krona doubtless realised, once the gravity of her error sunk in. Check out her face, when she confessed to Pixel. Plus, later, she knew that Maxima’s ‘this is not optional’ was backed up by the threat of going to court (and only that).
*sigh*
Sleep never came. Time to try again.
Sorry, very long post. Any attempt to edit it down is just making it longer. I need to get to bed, so am posting it ‘as is’, as I feel the points are better said, overlong, than abandoned.
I feel that the above dangerous driving comparison is a fair analogy,* and one which does demonstrate comparable points, thus that there must be similar legal principles involved. Just to point out the similarities that I see:
A1. Suspect has a near miss, whilst performing a complex maneuver, at high speed, that they are untrained in, whilst on a busy highway.
B1. Krona uses time control powers (as it appears to be,at that stage), arrogantly assuming that she knows how they work, yet it has results which are different to what should have happened (for instance Maxima experiencing time differently).
Importantly even its correct operation results in people loosing their memories (or having them mixed up, in Harem’s case)! Including having Pixel loose memory of criminal activity. She will never be able to testify what lead up to her being found tied, naked, with the blood being drained from her!**
A2. A police officer witnesses the aftermath of the incident, and, although not a traffic police officer, decides that the incident had put people’s lives at risk. So pursues the vehicle, and orders the car to pull over. Then interrogates the suspect who, at first, believes that nothing was wrong.
But upon being challenged over the specifics of the maneuver they performed, realised that they had come close to causing a major multi-vehicle crash. The suspect indicates that they will find out how to do the maneuver correctly.
B2. Pixel cannot recall the incident directly (because Krona has wiped her memories, by using her power, without Pixel’s concent) however becomes aware of it due to observing the aftermath and the interactions between Krona and Sydney. Challenging Krona for the details, and assessing the information provided, Krona believes that Krona had endangered everybody, in the Universe, by risking a time-loop.
Initially Krona indicates that she has many fail-safes, and that there is no risk. But comes to appreciate that the fact that the power is not operating the way it should (Maxima should not have experienced a different lapsed time and Harem should not have unaccounted for memories). Krona then confesses, by indicating that she can fix it herself.
If Krona did not think she had done anything wrong, then she would not have said this.
At this point a crime has been established in both the analogy and the comic situation. Corroborated by the suspect’s testimony.
A3. This is complicated by the fact that the suspect is an FBI special agent, and one working on a joint operation, with the officer attending the incident. The officer therefore calls in their superior, to decide what to do.
B3. Pixel and Maxima both know that Krona is a Semper Vigilantis, thus is a federal agent. Plus is wary of compromising their joint task-force (with all the political complications which might occur). Krona therefore calls in Maxima, to decide what to do.
A4. The superior (who is armed) speaks with the suspect, who’s back is turned to them, whilst doing something complex on their mobile phone. Getting their attention, and asserting their authority, by placing a hand on the suspect;’s shoulder, the superior indicates that the suspect cannot be allowed to continue to put the public at risk.
Note the superior is deliberately not charging the suspect with a crime, as a favour to a fellow member of law-enforcement. However they are both aware that there are grounds for an arrest.
Thus the officer makes it clear that co-operation is not optional. Unspoken is the threat that failing to do so will result in a formal arrest. Likewise, as always, that resisting arrest could result in force being used.
However the superior is aware that the suspect is armed and is entirely competent enough that they could kill anyone attempting to arrest them. But is unconcerned as they are confident that the suspect will co-operate, being a fellow law enforcement officer.
B4. Ditto but mobile phone = super power display.
A5. The superior indicates that the suspect should attend a driver training course. The suspect agrees that this makes sense.
B5. Ditto but driver training course = super power assessment and training course.
I acknowledge that a lot of the above is unspoken, but Dave is portraying the scene as it would play out. Fellow law enforcement officers do not need to keep saying “as you know the following is applicable in this situation”. Both sides know the score and they behave accordingly.
Krona is not some naive little girl. She is somebody who arrests (or as need be kills) monsters as her primary job. She realised that Maxima was in the right and acceded to the demand.
Both you and Oberon are not taking into account the background to this complex scene, and continue to view it purely on the spoken dialogue, despite what we know about the setting, the roles of the characters and their duties. This is being pedantic and not viewing the scene in a realistic manner.
At no point during the scene, or afterwards, did Krona indicate that she felt threatened or to have acted under duress. Thus supporting my contention that you are both misreading this. Rather she was happy to be retrained, if disappointed that she could not after all affect time across the universe.
* All the while bearing in mind that Maxima is the most senior field officer, in the organisation legally tasked with protecting the nation from extraordinary threats. Therefore your comments about her super powers being inappropriate are irrelevant. It is her job to make these judgement calls.
Maxima has been trained in identifying extraordinary threats (of extremely diverse natures), assessing the best course of action to contain them, and to put that into practice. Claiming that this does not fall into her area of expertise is, respectfully, a nonsense.
Yes, if it came to court, a range of experts would be consulted to offer opinions on the matter. One of whom would likely be Pixel. However the cop is not expected to have such expertise. Provided that they have sufficient grounds to suspect that the suspect has committed a crime, they have the right to arrest them.
In this case Maxima chose to resolve this without taking Krona to court (given that this side of their work is required to remain secret). However she still had her duty to protect the public. So found a good compromise.
** Krona was not having to act in the heat of the moment, to save people’s lives. Krona should have sought the team’s concent to being manipulated. Yet even that would only justify using her power on the team (and any villains who may attempt to harm them). But it would not cover every other innocent civilian caught up in the event.
According to Krona’s explanation that should be everyone in the Universe. None of whom agreed to having their memory wiped (which what happens when ‘time is reset’). With this happening (the way Krona explained) nobody else would be able to change their actions in a loop, other than the one individual who triggered the reset.
Yet if they were to be shot, a moment after the checkpoint had been set (a very real risk being on an exposed roof-top, near to a criminal base), they could not take any actions to break out of the time loop.
Krona’s claims to have built in safeguards can be ignored, as her code is clearly not functioning correctly.
Read my above post. This is getting almost prohibitively long, and you keep ignoring what I wrote about Maxima.
That was not visible whilst I was writing my comment. However had I seen it, I would have ignored the part about Maxima’s actions, in the bank, as they are not pertinent to whether she is acting correctly in this incident.
Besides which I cut Dave some slack for the bank, as that was done in the early days of the comic, before he realised that people would be analysing every scene to death. As he was concentrating on ‘this would be a fun way to introduce this character’ and ‘this is an amusing way to show off that capability’, rather than the legality, there were various errors made.
Personally felt you explained, and countered, everything nicely
Of course you do. Ignorance loves company, after all.
If I had a few spare weeks, I could write the novel to point out every mistake hou made in your legal reasoning, but by this point I realize you are going to ignore my points. Then Guesticus will parrot it.
And since I like you I dont feel like getting insulting since if you were in Kronas situation with a cop, you would have avery different opinion.
Plus you seem to repeatedly ignore the law in your reasoning and make up crimes by Krona. Youve also used the tactic of pages upon pages of text in order to sidestep the legitimate legal points I made.
I am a little disappointed in you here Yorp, sorry.
Pander I do hope that you appreciate you are demanding two separate things in this one complaint. I am happy to modify my replies to you, in either direction, but am at a loss to know which you prefer:
I have used pages upon pages of text in order to respond to the points that you make. I certainly do not ignore them. I simply disagree with the root one, which negates all of your other points.
You assert that no crime has been committed. Whilst I remain adamant that one has. So every time you try to claim that it has not, I have to counter with why I believe it has.
I am sure you are aware that I can be won over to an opposing camp, once I have been convinced of an argument. I do that frequently. Please just think of me as a
pig-headeddog-headed jury member who’s vote you need to clinch your case.Setting aside the legal issues completely, I would be interested to know your feelings on the morality involved?
I feel, like Pixel, that it is morally wrong for someone to risk halting the progress of time, for all eternity Despite the precautions Krona claims to have taken there were at least two bugs in her programming, that have indisputably occurred already.
As such I do not have confidence in her ability to avoid a time loop. Even if it is only a 1% chance that she has made a mistake , she should seek out suitably skilled individuals to check her work.
“I have used pages upon pages of text in order to respond to the points that you make. I certainly do not ignore them. I simply disagree with the root one, which negates all of your other points.”
No, you used pages upon pages of text in order to bury my points, all the while not bothering to address what I said and ignoring what the law is, and using wikipedia to try to claim things which ANYONE with a basic understanding of the law from a first year tort class would be able to tell you. In fact, just pick up any first year Torts textbook and read up on Assault and Battery, and you’ll find that you’ve been completely wrong about everything you’ve been arguing with the walls of text.
I don’t like arguing with you because I think we’re generally friendly, but on this topic you’ve been completely wrong, and it’s actually irritating since this is actually something VERY basic for any attorney to know, even if they don’t engage in civil lawsuits and litigation, because it’s literally from the FIRST class that most law students take – Torts. And Assault and Battery is usually one of the first things that are defined in a torts class, particularly because laypeople seem to get to easily confused about it.
So you, as a lawyer, can find no way to provide a legal recourse for people who have been attacked, in a way that causes them physical harm, unless it involves touching?
If so, no wonder you have so many people shot by guns if there is no such recourse under any US law.
If you had one of the US embassy staff, recalled from Cuba, who had solid proof that a named individual had indeed been using a sonic device to harm them, would you just tell him “Sorry, nothing I can do to help you. No law against that”?
And if that got improved, to one that completely mind-wiped whole populations? “Go ahead and transmit that nationwide. All perfectly legal. It is a free country.”
Call me a liar all you like, but you are wrong. My intent is as stated. I sought to reply to all of your points. As is my usual practice with any comment I do so in depth.
Plus I was not ignoring your points, as I quoted each one that I was replying to. Adding to the size of the replies but making it easier for you, and others, to pick out what I was talking about. Without having to scroll through your own long posts to find the relevant bit. Not that I am trying to claim yours were excessive.
I do concede that it has created a huge amount of text. I tried editing it down, but failed. I apologised for that up front and do so again now.
And, I should also concede that I used an inappropriate term. I do find it interesting that the resource you linked regarding battery opens in exactly the same way as the section I quoted on Wikipedia (and likewise giving the same wrong impression). Making me wonder if the Wikipedia article was based on that.
However it does go on to confirm exactly the point you were making. Thank you for enlightening me on that. I am still sure that there would be some other torte or law against causing physical harm to an individual. If there is not, that is a shocking hole in the law!
“So you, as a lawyer, can find no way to provide a legal recourse for people who have been attacked, in a way that causes them physical harm, unless it involves touching?”
1) No one was ATTACKED. That’s the point you seem to be intentionally acting ignorant on (and I don’t mean that as an insult to you, but you’re intentionally mislabelling what happened as an attack by Krona, when it wasn’t).
2) No one had physical harm caused as a result of what Krona did – they had physical aid. They LITERALLY had the opposite of harm done. They were saved by her actions. This is another thing you keep repeating, and NEVER address what I’m saying. You just keep repeating something incorrect that never happened because you really want it to be what happened.
3) No, if someone does not touch someone, or touch someone with another physical object (like with a stick, a sword, a bullet from a gun, etc), and they’re somehow physically harmed, you can’t prove any causation, so no, there’s no wrongdoing. You have yet to be able to show ANYTHING that is a crime, wrongdoing, or other type of tort on behalf of Krona.
“Call me a liar all you like, but you are wrong.”
1) I didnt call you a liar. I said you are wrong, and that you are just burying my points by making mountainous walls of text while not addressing anything pertinent that I said, just picking and choosing and ignoring where convenient for you.
“My intent is as stated. I sought to reply to all of your points. As is my usual practice with any comment I do so in depth.”
But you didn’t reply to all my points. You replied to almost none of them. You’d take a sentence, write several paragraphs, without ever addressing what I said. It’s honestly infuriating, especially since we’ve been so friendly and you’ve been so respectful in other instances.
“I do concede that it has created a huge amount of text. I tried editing it down, but failed. I apologised for that up front and do so again now.”
I accept your apology. I just can’t respond to walls of text though. I don’t have the time to give you in-depth lessons on tort law when I’ve already explained the basics multiple times.
“And, I should also concede that I used an inappropriate term”
Well… now you know what assault and battery actually mean :) I’ve had to explain to laypeople in the past different terms, like that if someone tells others about something they did, it’s not slander, since truth is an absolute defense to slander (or libel). I’ve had to explain battery to others in the past as well.
“Making me wonder if the Wikipedia article was based on that.”
Most likely someone cut and pasted part of it. Findlaw is a good resource for correct legal terms.
“I am still sure that there would be some other torte or law against causing physical harm to an individual.”
There are torts and laws against causing physical harm, yes. But Krona didn’t cause harm. And definitely not physical harm even if you can claim harm was caused. And there was most definitely no CRIME committed by Krona. That’s been my point the whole time. There’s no physical harm. There’s no crime. There’s no causation. There’s no touching. There’s no anything.
“If there is not, that is a shocking hole in the law!”
I don’t see how there’s a hole in the law from this. It just requires you to be able to show actual harm, actual physical harm (or emotional harm I guess if you’re going for intentional infliction of emotinoal distress, although Krona wasnt intending to inflict emotional distress so… nope).
The only thing I can see you saying is that there should be a law against being able to use powers to help other people. In which case Archon violates that already. And it goes against what both Ariana and Maxima have said publicly and to Sydney. That it is not, and will not be, illegal to have and use powers. You just have to abide by the same laws as everyone else when using them. And Krona hasnt done anything which can be a crime while USING her powers. So unless they make a law about ‘no messing with time’ – she’s in the clear, and Maxima was entirely wrong to do what she did (and in fact Maxima’s the one who violated Krona’s civil rights).
OB: She had demonstrated that she was a plausible threat to herself and others and was not entirely in control of her ability to cause harm.
Judge and Jury: And your evidence for this is?
OB: Uhhhh, ummmm, uhhhhh.
Judge and Jury: Guilty as charged.
Listed numerous times in my points above. I shall not bore everyone with repeating them here again.
Literally nothing you’ve listed has been evidence. It’s just your opinions using facts that don’t actually exist. Such as your ‘fact’ that Krona committed a crime, or admitted to a crime. Neither happened. You also have continuously made up incorrect definitions of assault and battery, or taken a wikipedia article and either read it incorrectly or the wikipedia article was written by someone who doesn’t know the basic definitions of legal assault and battery, since assault and battery REQUIRE the requisite intent of touching or making offensive contact without consent, where a harm occurs. Krona did not do any touching. And no harm occurred. In fact, the exact opposite of harm occurred. Saving lives occurred. Anti-harm occurred :). Look it up in findlaw. Or in Gilbert Law Summaries. They have pdfs on the basics.
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/2432 Panel 4. Krona: “You are the only one who remembers what happened”
This is a fact. It has already been established that Krona re-writes reality. In this case she has chosen to “roll-back time”, but has selectively programmed in who will and will not remember the events. If she had not done this then either everyone would remember or nobody would. Further it was Krona’s intentions that this affect everybody in the world (and elsewhere), barring that one exception (memory wise).
The encoding of memories involves physical changes in the brain. Which Krona was deliberately and knowingly undoing. Resulting in memory loss.
Sorry but you are overstating your case. My arguments are using real facts, which do exist. You can look up the ones on memories in medical text books if you wish.
Contrast that to your claim that Krona saved their lives, which panel 2 (of the page linked) has Krona testifying that that is not necessarily the case.
Anyhow it is your opinion that it is acceptable to attempt to wipe the memories of 7.5 billion people, because it allegedly saved the lives of two people. I think that is a flawed argument, even using the legal principle you described. Otherwise anybody who wanted to cause widespread harm could justify it if just one person was helped.
“You must now thank me, for turning Earth’s atmosphere to methane. Otherwise I, as a methane breather, would have died!”
Knowingly attempting to cause physical damage to billions of people, just because one person became anxious (which is what Krona HAS DONE, despite all your protestations) is something which Archon needed to act upon.
Which Maxima has found a way of doing, with the concent of the perpetrator.
Thank you kindly for linking me to Find Law. That allows me to counter your point using appropriate legal terminology. As per the following:
https://injury.findlaw.com/torts-and-personal-injuries/necessity-defense-and-intentional-torts.html
Regarding “Affirmative Defense”, under the heading “The Necessity Defense: What You Have to Prove”, we have the following point:
The criminal act that Krona did was activating a power that she programmed to wipe the memories of billions of people, knowing that this would trigger when one individual became anxious. The actual way it played out is irrelevant, as Krona had absolutely no control over events after that point, given that she was remaining in a position of relative safety.
It is my contention that attempting to wiping several minutes of memory from billions of people (even if combined with “rolling back time” to allow them to repeat those minutes) is excessive when compared to it just stopping whatever happens to be frightening one individual.
Given that included an emotionally volatile rookie, that could have been caused by anything that spooked her. Even imaginary ninjas, in broad daylight, have done that, as shown on national TV!
Even worse, it does not even prevent the emotional distress, as Sydney can still remember it!
“Regarding “Affirmative Defense”, under the heading “The Necessity Defense: What You Have to Prove”, we have the following point:”
The necessity defense cannot be used to make a theoretical harm greater than an actual harm. And again, you keep seeming to not acknowledge what is ‘harm’ vs what is ‘helping.’ She wasn’t even intending to ‘wipe’ anyone’s mind. Time travel would not be the same as ‘mind wiping.’ Once you go back in time, nothing had happened in the first place. Not to mention that’s not even what happened anyway, and even when she (and Maxima) thought it was a ‘localized’ temporal loop thing, that would also mean NOT billions of people were involved.
“It is my contention that attempting to wiping several minutes of memory from billions of people”
Incorrect contention. See above.
“Given that included an emotionally volatile rookie, that could have been caused by anything that spooked her.”
Stick to what actually happened. Not what ‘might have happened.’ You’re not able to accuse someone of a crime of what ‘might have happened.’ Sort of the whole point of what was wrong about the movie ‘Minority Report’ (and in that movie they had a foolproof way to tell what was going to happen). Only about what ‘did happen.’ And what did happen is she saved lives of that emotional rookie, AND the seasoned veteran too.
“Even imaginary ninjas, in broad daylight, have done that, as shown on national TV!”
Then… by that logic, Maxima did the same thing when she had Sydney help with her ‘example’ at the firing range. Since it’s possible that Sydney might have still become startled anyway and let go of the orb. Thus killing every reporter, most of the supers, and Sydney herself. But that didn’t happen. You don’t use ‘might’ as a reason to arrest someone.
“Even worse, it does not even prevent the emotional distress, as Sydney can still remember it!”
Two points. 1) The emotional distress that Sydney has experienced would not be a tort, since the torts for emotional distress are intentional infliction of emotional distress (and Krona did not intend to cause Sydney emotional distress) and Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress (which is the CLOSEST thing to a tort that has happened here at all, but there’s no physical manifestation of the emotional distress on which to have Sydney sue, even if Sydney wanted to sue in the first place). Not to mention that in NEID, it must have been foreseeable that the defendant’s negligent conduct would result in emotional harm. Which you also can’t argue here, since there’s no ‘but for’ between what Krona did and what Sydney experienced. Sydney would have experienced the emotional distress either way (THIS IS IMPORTANT, PAY ATTENTION TO THAT PART OF MY SENTENCE PLEASE) – but one way, she would have also died afterwards by Sciona’s actions.
“What might have happened” =/= “what she was actually trying to do”. An attempted crime can still be prosecuted.
The sticking point in this argument appears whether Krona has caused harm or not. I like the reckless driving analogy: she didn’t, but she could have, because she was provably doing something she wasn’t sure about in a way she couldn’t entirely control.
Is mishandling construction equipment you’re not trained with in a way that could have injured someone a crime? A misdemeanor?
Also, I can’t believe nobody has focused on what happened to Harem. Her brains are quantum-entangled, and Krona tampered with that by forcibly rewriting one of them! Anything could have happened to her as the result, and Krona is super mega lucky it just resulted in some confusion. Krona had no idea what she was doing and was actively endangering people in the process. People don’t need to -already- be hurt for someone to be justified in stopping the dangerously reckless person waving around a chainsaw. Even if the intent of waving around a chainsaw was to help, even if the net result at the moment of stopping was a plus, saying ‘stop waving around a fucking chainsaw’ is 100% justified and you don’t need to wait for it to take someone’s head off!
Sure, Krona was helping. She was earnestly, well-intentionedly helping (attempting to help) by waving around a chainsaw. An officer of law enforcement was 100% justified in telling her to put down the chainsaw until she’s learned how to handle it properly, and would have also been justified in arresting her. For endangering everyone who happened to be in her vicinity. They didn’t even KNOW what she had done! Maybe Harem would have had some objections to voice if she’d realized what Krona’s idea was!
Nicely argued. Glad that there would be more than one friendly face on the jury!
*ducks down behind the jury box to avoid Pander‘s scathing glare*
Reading? I didn’t know you could read.
Have you met many dogs who can read?
Time to snappy retort: 12 hours 51 minutes – I am on a roll!
*wags tail scholarly*
Maths mind… there are probably better doggies than me. ;-)
Mr.Peabody comes to mind…
…a most scholarly canine, wouldn’t you say…?
(…I always wondered what he did for a livelihood…)
So wait, how Irish is crimson? Not one person in my family has ever managed to get that level of tan. We all kind of ruin red then end up with a slight tan.
Well, if she’s American Irish she could have any number of genetic markers.
Of course I doubt she has a drop of Irish blood in her. You know, unless she fed on an Irishman recently.
She is as irish as Red from the Shawshank Redemption :)
spray tans with a huge SPF rating would probably be popular with young vampires.
There is a healthy black immigrant community in Ireland.
Some years back customs officials got suspicious about the importation of Guinness from an African country, in containers. So they checked with Guinness if they were illegal copies. Turns out though that they were a variety legally made in that country, under licence. Trouble is it had a noticeably different taste to traditional Guinness. Hence why they were importing their preferred brand.
Fortunately Guinness were keen to support their customers, as there were a significant number of them. So they started up a production line, in Ireland, to replicate that version.
Anyhow, if she was born in Ireland, or gained Irish nationality, she is Irish. Just like I am a South African, despite being white.
Yorp, since you have the expertise:
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the early Dutch settlers reach the Cape before the various Bantu-speaking groups? I’d remember being very startled when I first read that after the Khoi-San people the Dutch settlers have been there the longer than any of the other ethnic groups.
And yeah, my kids are “American”, even though their mother came from China and my paternal grandparents came from eastern Europe in the 1920s.
News to me. But I was only nine when I left, so that is not surprising.
It does not seem credible though. South Africa has very many different tribes and languages. Plus have the most genetically diverse peoples on Earth. Which does not gel with a single group having been the only ones there until that recently in history.
Fortunately Wikipedia is my friend. The Bantu migrated to Southern Africa 700 years ago. Whilst the Dutch did not start to colonise South Africa until the 17th Century.
I should point out that migration dates are highly contested though, so it is not surprising to find differing opinions. The dates are likely to be narrowed down , in due course, as we improve the mapping techniques and models for languages and genetics.
‘Southern’ Africa is not ‘South Africa’
The Dutch reached the Cape area before the Bantu, at the time, it was just the ‘Bush People’ who were pushed up into the Kalahari and the Bantu came down from the north
The Cape does not comprise South Africa, it is only the southernmost tip . And South Africa did not exist as a country, at that time, so a verbal distinction would need to be made.
But fair distinction none-the-less.
Darn it, five kitties on my lap at the moment, and one lent on the mouse sending the above prematurely. Initially I thought it would do, but have reconsidered, as the final bit is pertinent enough that it leaves my reply flawed otherwise.
In checking up in Wikipedia I had forgotten that Javahead had only stipulated ‘the Cape’, and failed to double-check the comment before completing my reply.
Hooray, Cooter’s alive! He’s a really interesting character, I’m glad to see he’s going to get more exploration.
He seemed/seems more like a one-dimensional throw-away character to me, and I wasn’t sorry to see him go. I’m hoping that some of the “It’s the Wyrmy regeneration at work!” theories are correct. We didn’t see much of Wormy, but what we did see wasn’t a hackneyed character with no possible depth. I’d far prefer to see Wormy come back than Cooter.
I’m calling it, a code Goa’uld. Wyrmil is playing pretend to escape.
Can we call it a “code red” please? The code alert light only has red or green bulbs.
“Step up to red alert!”
” Sir, are you absolutely sure? It does mean changing the bulb”
“There’s always an excuse, isn’t there?”
Well connected.
*wags tail in congratulations*
Arent dogs colorblind?
Not completely, we can see yellows, blues and violet. But the boxes are labeled, so it is OK.
Whereas we don’t need the alert light ourselves. We can smell fear.
His eyes do appear to glow in the sixth panel.
Appear, granted, but not actually. We can see any glow effects easily in this comic, take the orbs as the best example. Wheres Goa’uld do have an actual glow.
The effect is happening because most of his eye surface is white, with the pupils extremely dilated. The lack of any visible iris could either be attributed to wishing to depict extreme emotion (understandably) or because ‘this s**t has turned the dude’s eyes white!’
For info, Wyrmil’s eyes are yellow with blue irises.
Actually, in that image it looks to me as though Wyrmil’s all-yellow eye was in the process of turning grey because the front of the orb was pressed against the “kill”-barrier.
Yea. Looking at it again, I agree with that.
i’m seeing Wyrmil as something like the parasites in the series “The Strain”. they start out small and hidden, so you have the original host body/personality as normal, but as they reproduce inside the victim, then you get more and more physical changes, one aspect of which is that the victims eyes change colors… since Cooter just recently got infected/possessed, he has relatively few symptoms, but as time goes on, I’ll bet he ends up looking more and more like the Wyrmil we know and lo…like… yeah, yeah, LIKE… i was gonna say “love” but that didn’t sound right… that can also be one of the reasons that everyone that knew of him was surprised that he was “dead” because they don’t know about his way of survival/reproduction… anytime they see any part of him they think Dam he’s hard to kill cause they only “wounded” him… but they actually DID “kill” him, but only PART of him, the other part jumped into someone/something else and escaped unscathed, regenerating/growing back to the point of looking just like the original and they think he’s just healed up…but the SAME one as last time they encountered him… jumping genre’s here, an example of what i’m talking about here would be like the “Agents” in The Matrix, they jump into somebodies body, and when that agent gets “killed” they really only killed the human body, the Agent is freed and can jump into another body… but to an inhabitant of the matrix, the next time they see them, it looks like the Agent has not been hurt at all!…
Way-ell don’t that jus’ bust tha stee-tches in yo’ fewt-ball?
Say that out loud and you’ll get the drawl. Another example of the drawl is to watch Hee Haw.
But yeah, it’s really easy to pick up the drawl out loud.
Watch some old Andy Griffith or Gomer Pyle episodes. There is also the occasional Malaprop thrown in for comedic effect. When the series ‘American Chopper’ visited an army base in the south (I can’t remember exactly which one) to do a custom build, the training officer took them out for a ride in a personnel carrier in the area they use to train against insurgents. As they were going down the dirt road the officer said “See thayut pile uh dirt over on the sahd of the road? Yuh got to be car-ful of things like thayut. That’s whur the enemy likes to plant explosives, or whut we call an ‘I.U.D.'”
And no, I am not making up the last item, I backed it up and listened to it again.
…This is really terrible biohazzard drill. I mean, they are literally standing in a room painted with bloody remains. they should have suited and booted before wandering on in there. Also, this a crime scene, does CSI not make the required viewing list for Sidney? I mean, half those people can just float! They all need new shoes now!
And Sydney is about to face-plant in it. I suspect getting a new face issued will be harder.
Not face-plant, she’s falling backwards
Pirouette. :-P
hm, or maybe sciona isnt as much of a dick as we were thinking. the thing she gave cooter might have reassembled him after blowing him up.
… or maybe chuckles testing the lazarus scalpel before he left.
Sciona did used to have an orc dick, so you are right. Your other two suggestions are sold too.
E: Are you guys seeing this? You saw that right? He’s stealing my schtick!
S: There there, I’m sure there’s a perfectly rational reason for all this, perhaps some form of regenerative nanote…
E: To hell with that! He got blown up and now he’s staggering around without any idea how he got there and not a scratch on him, those bastards did it again, didn’t they? I thought I killed the last of them when we blew up Nerva Beacon!
S:Well Cap… At least you get your clothes back everytime it happens to you…
E: Is he…? Ugh! I’ll second that… Mind bleach definitely required!
S: No worries Cap’n! I’ll just whip you up some! It’s got cyanide, tapioca flour and a 90% alcohol chaser!
E: Are you daft? That will just kill m… Oh I see, very funny.
S: You don’t know what you’re missing Cap, this stuff is delicious!
I’m not getting your reference. ^^;
It’s probably a Dr. Who reference.
The only ‘Cap’ on Doctor Who is Captain Jack Harkness
Captain America and Deadpool? I am sure Pander, or one of our other comic experts, can say if their real identity initials match the above dialogue.
Well since they mentioned Nerva Beacon, I’d have to assume it was Dr. Who, since Nerva Beacon is a space station in Dr. Who.
*sigh*
I miss watching Dr Who. And little else mind, other than quality sci fi series. Still my time in my philosopher’s retreat is coming to an end. So one of the compensations of reentering the rat-race will be getting back into those.
*double sigh*
To be fair it did sound like something Deadpool would have said:).
Have a Yorpie Snax.
Yay!
Fank u.
You’re welcome Yorpie. Good doggy.
If it wasn’t for the initials, I’d have said ‘E’ sounds like Captain Jack Harkness. From the tone, it’s probably more Torchwood than mains-series Doctor Who. ‘S’ is evidently ‘the sensible one’ in the scenario, endlessly providing ‘straight’ lines for Jack to play off, but that’s a less distinctive role.
Yeah, not getting who these are supposed to be either.
When will cast page have any cast on it?
At some point in the future. Currently it is not compatible with a WordPress update and Dave has concluded that he will have to rebuild it completely. Given that he spends most of his waking day creating the comic, that does not leave him much flexibility for the less important things.
But it is being looked at.
Hey Great Idea! Nude Liquid Gold Wrestling! I’d watch that…
Oh sure tell me you wouldn’t!
I would. With a bucket, to catch any splashed gold.
Might be a tad melty and scalding and death causing, Yorpie dear.
Mmm, when you are as poor as a church mouse, the risk to reward looks attractive. Scars don’t bother me, and it won’t hurt anymore if dead.
You can’t spend the gold if dead, Yorpie.
Striking me down will only make me stronger.
You’re Yorpie. Not Doomsday.
No, but if it totally coats me then I will transform into a golden retriever!
Nuh-uh. I don’t think that’s Cooter. I think Wyrmil has a bigger bag of tricks than the council gave him credit for. o_o
No, can’t be Wyrmie, not the way Coot is talking and acting
Wyrmil could be putting it on, as he has seen and heard Cooter. Assuming that this is indeed a deliberate act. Any decent form-copier or shapeshifter would practice how to do such things, and may have more in the suggested ‘bag of tricks’ which allows for that automatically.*
My preferred option though would be that this is an accidental copying, in that Wyrmil had no choice in what organic matter to acquire, in order to replace his bits lost in the death field. In part because it becomes a nice parallel to Sciona herself getting a male orc body, grafted on to her head, as that was the only option to survive.
In this case the assumption would be that brain matter was absorbed too (given how mixed up and unrecognisable all Cooter’s bits would be). With clear implications on how Cooter thoughts and behaviours could presently be dominating their combined form.
Story wise this is preferable as Wyrmil-Cooter would not have the option to ‘mind his tongue’ around Maxima, thus making for some entertaining conflict of personalities.
Or it may just be Cooter, somehow. But I prefer the logic of the Wyrmil trail leading to Cooter having a link, rather than being a red herring.
* For instance Dopplegangers, in D&D have ESP, to read minds. Be that the copied person or the ones they are trying to fool. Not that Wyrmil would match their description (they could take any form but near-indestructible they are not).
As an aside, that is one of Dabbler’s parent races. So are in this setting, albeit nothing directly connected to the above scene (unless Wyrmil is a super version or otherwise has extra powers somehow).
Now you’ve got me picturing the remains of Wyrmil, squirming-up to the resurrected-but-still-unconscious Cooter, entering his body thru a “convenient opening” (ohgawd – PLEASE don’t ask which one!!!?!), & “core-ing him like an apple”, to be used as a “meat-puppet”. Thus disguised, he can then either infiltrate Archon or just play-along until he can make his escape later.
The Mind Bleach that Sydney wants appears under a large variety of different formulas. According to Crimson, it’s 12 dozen Tequila; from DaveB, there’s 9 shots of Absynthe, 6 Long Island Ice Teas, or a pound of bad shrimp. There are also a few “recipes” put forward by some people here.
However, the official Brain Bleach™ of Champions has no rivals…Accept no substitutes!
I had a boss once who was telling me about being at a bar with a business colleague who got him to do shots of absinthe. I told him that either they guy was trying to get him drunk to put the moves on him, or trying to get him drunk to make a fool or him.
Absinthe is diluted liberally with water before being served to lower the proof, since it is typically bottled at very high proofs. Anyone who wants you to drink the stuff straight does not have your best interests in mind. And since the general knowledge of the high potency of absinthe is fairly low, and it has an anise/liquorice taste instead of the raw fuel taste of every rail tequila ever used to do shots, it is a better option than tequila for purposes of being an “alcohol roofie.” For some value of better.
Or one Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster.
Crimson’s Irish? Huh.
Yea, I would have placed her as Scottish myself.
Me too.
Um, why would anyone take SHOTS of absinthe?
That’s just bad manners.
I mean, shotting your beverages is bad manners in general, but as a huge fan of absinthe, that is particularly offensive. I also like tequila, but I’m not gonna worry about that. Tequila shots are a free pass. Traditions and whatnot.
How do you take your absinthe then? I like mine in the form of a “Death in the Afternoon” cocktail, made with sparkling grape juice instead of champagne. Because apparently I’m not fond of any other alcohol…
I take mine in a glass, well diluted with water. I have a very small sweet tooth and omit the sugar.
Here’s a demo of how to prepare it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFK36JQyabI
Note that it was 2 oz. absinthe to what appears to be about 8 or 12 oz. of water. The listed proportions are 1:5 absinthe:water, but there was a distinct lack of measuring of the water. But the guy ends the video with these words: “God this is strong.”
I did not recognize the brand used and absinthe can be bottled at widely differing proofs, but every version I have seen is at least 90 proof and some are much higher than that.
I’ve never seen an absinthe less than 50% ABV (~100 proof) and the strongest bars around here serve (I’m pretty sure for weird legal reasons) is 89.9%. I find 60% seems to be the norm, which would result in a (very) roughly 10% drink. About twice most beers. Unless he’s using a particularly strong brand, that doesn’t seem too unreasonable.
I believe that is, indeed, the traditional method but, whenever I’ve tried it, the result has been too woody for my tastes,
I will note, also, that my line of work involves routinely ignoring the suggestion that things be diluted to sane levels.
Sipping it neat, while not my prefered method, is also a way in which I drink absinthe.Just, in moderation, since the intensity of the alcohol is overpowering in bigger sips and why drink if you’re not going to taste it?
Typically to get rat-arsed, sadly.
Like other units, America has different versions of ‘proof’, so you are actually talking comparable numbers.
No idea on the weird upper limit. Possibly just a gimmick by the manufacturers, to make it look like ‘the highest legally allowed’. Or maybe above that it gets classified by the EU as medical alcohol, rather than something that can be licensed as a drink?
Actually, we only have one version of ‘proof’. Take the ‘proof’ and divide by 2, and that is the percentage alcohol by weight. So a drink that is 80 proof is 40% alcohol (most of the rest is water).
I thought I had written “a different version”. I did have the reply phrased very differently before, but decided that it sounded like I was having a dig at America. So I daresay I forgot to amend the grammar when rephrasing it. Thanks for pointing that out.
Tequila shots… For some reason, reading that reminded me of a story I heard many years ago, about the older brother of one of my classmates. They’d been on a class trip to the Canary Islands, which of course involved a lot of partying and drinking. One morning when returning to their hotel they passed by the hotel bar and saw some of the locals doing tequila shots. The whole salt, shot and lemon routine. So this guy, still very much drunk, walked up to the bar, grabbed the still half full bottle and said, “Let me show you how vikings drink!”, after which he chugged the bottle – including the worm – then slammed it down on the bar, burped loudly and walked away. I was told that the look of disbelief on the locals’ faces was priceless.
Yep, that’s pretty much any scandinavian abroad. Cheap booze is a novelty, we have to drink it up before someone takes it away from us.
Just don’t try that with Absinthe.
I’m sure her absinthe would hardly be noticed ;) But it’s all whiskey business in any case…
Absinthe makes the heart grow fonder
Although the Big Ol’ Book of Vampires does have a formula to make it grow armour.
i thought Absinthe made the farts glow, yonder
My preferred explanation for Sydney having time to announce that she’d been whammied is that talking is a free action.
Maby the death field going down let them regenerate
Within the super genre it is indeed possible that failing technomagic might malfunction and trigger super powers. The presence of so many artefacts (half still remain) would allow for all sorts of weirdness, with no further explanation needed.
I should point out though that Cooter was not in the room with the death field, but in the room with all the traps. That does not discount your theory though, as the death field was ‘slowly expanding’ so could have reached his corpse splatters.
If so that would also require the death field to have turned off completely, before now, in order for the team to have reached here, without fatalities. That though is not an additional component but one which must be in effect for what we see above.
Dave, I can’t be the only one wanting a bigger version of Ingsol in the last Panel, that expression is just perfect.
I think Dave should put some pixelation on Coot’s nether area in the full belly panel. That would have emphasized the fact that he is wearing nothing but a smile, wait… he’s not smiling, he’s freaking out. Ok, nothing but gore.
After thinking about it for an additional 30 seconds, I’ve changed my mind. Pixels would set a bad precedent. Next we would have flying pixies holding cherries in front of nipples and gnomes hoisting a 16oz ballpark hotdog in front of some guy’s crotch. Never mind.
:-D
A ghost???
Not unless ghosts can sleep and be covered in blood. Although I must admit that was my first impression. But check out the author’s blog above.
The newly dead often don’t realize they are dead. Coot does know hes covered in blood and in an explosion. I think ghost is a good guess and it would open up some funny spirit realm aspects that this supernatural(science)/super world has been lacking. Imagine Max walks up to check Coots pulse post vamp nap(I am rather sure vampire powers work just as good on ghosts and ghoul types) and gets him bound to her haunting style. Next arc will be finding a way to get rid of his ectoplastic ass as he screams at anyone around her about monsters and aliens and she, the most powerful super in the world cant do shit about it.
Cast page is broken
No, it is disabled. It had incompatibilities with a WordPress update. Dave is looking into rebuilding it, but there is no e.t.a. as he only gets to work on it when not busy with creating the comic. Which is to say, very rarely.
Cooter-wyrmil gonna need a super uniform. Might I suggest this scheme ?
RED WHITE AND GOO!
Well, at least we know why Coot has a hat…
Heh. Goo point.
I can’t decide whether or not I am impressed with the crew’s reflexes.
Either Coot popped up screaming and Ingsol was the first to react (possible but unlikely with Maxima and Dabbler present), or Max and Dabs had already judged him a non-threat before Ingsol dealt with him. Also, letting Ingsol act first could be a protocol/politics thing.
But I would expect Max to be more protective of an un-bubbled Sydney (Sydney should have her bubble up, if not be ordered to stand guard in the main room with Decollete, a presumed noncombat specialist). At least until they sweep and clear the dangerous areas.
Then again, maybe Ingsol has several dots of Celerity.
Although he was covered in blood, Cooter was, to all other appearances, a normal human, reacting by picking up a club, at presumably normal human type speeds. Given that Maxima can intercept bullets, there was no pressing need to engage him.
Besides which she needs to issue a verbal warning, as Sydney is not within arms reach, so is in no immediate danger. Cooter would have to cover a number of paces to become a threat. And if he changes his stance, to throw the club instead, see ‘Maxima vs bullets’.
Finally it is more appropriate to convince a human to put down an improvised weapon. That reduces the risk of injury to him (it is all to easy for Maxima to accidentally seriously injure or kill a squishy human.
Plus it is unfair on any suspects, not to give them a chance to reconsider a rash move. If he puts it down, then he may not need to be charged with any crime.
Whereas if he takes a swing at Maxima he will be adding ‘Assault with a deadly weapon’ to the charges (or whatever comparable charge exists in the Twilight Council jurisdiction). Avoiding the complications of having to deal with jurisdictional matters is a nice bonus. So Maxima was probably, as you intimate, quite pleased to let Ingsol cast his spell.
If anyone is looking for some Halloween entertainment I can recommend Ghost Hound (神霊狩/GHOST HOUND Shinreigari/Gōsuto Haundo), a.k.a. The Unseen World.
Plus if you want Sci Fi themed short movies then it is worth subscribing to the linked YouTube channel. They provide one a week! Presently showing horror flavoured ones.
It is created by a wide variety of individuals (I suspect film and animation students) so the style varies a lot. But there are some good ones amongst them. I have never been into short stories, be that in book or film format, but I do find myself clicking on these, from time to time, and finding them worth the watch.
Soooo Where is Gunhilda?
She was around with the rest of Sciona’s team. So likely wherever they are. Either in another chamber (there were several doors from the antichamber) or having made their escape (on their own or with Sciona’s assistance, if she teleported to join them earlier).
Note that Dave has confirmed that all the ones we saw on that team did enter the complex, he just does not wast time depicting those that are not playing an active part in a scene. They are always ‘somewhere out of shot’.
Nobody expects The Naked Gore-covered Hillbilly!
Our main weapon is surprise. Surprise and nekkidness.
Our 2 main weapons are surprise and nekkidness… and blood. THREE!
Our three main weapons are surprise, nekkidness, and blood. FOUR!
Amongst our weaponry are suc diverse elements as: surprise, nekkidness, blood and unsubstantiated hate…
Oh, come in again…
And now for something completely different…
Monsters killed his family. I would say that his hate is substantiated. Or are you saying, that since Coot is a satire/parody of a redneck hillbilly, that he is also a bigot? I don’t think that we have seen him exhibit hate toward anyone but monsters…..What the hell? I was going to say, “No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!” I don’t know where that first part came from. I think I’ve been exposed to much propagan..er, news.
His hatred is only substantiated as regards a few, specific monsters. Yet he has directed a willingness to kill at all monsters, no questions asked.
Would you say The Winchesters from Supernatural are hate filled bigots too though? Sonfar Cooter hasnt shown any more unreasonableness than the two main hunters in that show have shown.
And he definitely has good reason to think all monsters are evil. He hasnt yet seen anything to the contrary and the veil doesnt exactly give monsters good press as a side effect. If you found out that vampires and werewolves and trolls were real and you know some of them killed your family, would your inclination be #NotAllMonsters, or would you accept your personal experiences plus centuries of stories about them being evil killing machines? I am going to guess the latter until you meet a Casper the Friendly Ghost who can prove they arent out to destroy humanity.
I live just outside Transylvania, in an ancient fortified manor house, in a village where there are more graveyards than all the pubs and shops combined. And where the last vampire hunter in the country retired.
I am obliged to actively discourage monster hunting. All it would take is for one of them to see me howling at the moon, and they would all be coming out with the pitchforks and flaming torches!
Ooh, was just about to do a small details check, but spotted the colouring credit for Keith. Very nicely done. You have captured Dave’s new style indistinguishably. Especially impressive, given the unusual nature of their current situation.
Keith did a nice job bringing depth to just two colors, gray and gore.
Hehe, “Gray and Gore”, a good name for a band.
Glad to see Coot is back. He is too amusing to kill off permanently!
Maybe someone else has already mentioned this, but has anyone ever heard someone who wasn’t a hillbilly swear by Sam Hill? Because I sure haven’t.
I’ve never heard anyone say “Sam Hill”.
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. ”
That is to say, well, I have. Although a fast check on the internet shows that the origin of the phrase is obscure (two or three very plausible accounts, wildly different), it is a phrase generally used instead of actual profanity.
I’ve still, in person, never heard someone say that.
Also, what the honk does a quote from Hamlet have to do with this?
I am mildly certain Sciona is smart enough to know what witnesses are. So I’m pretty sure this is something multilayered. Or maybe she just really figures anyone at all is going to believe Cooter is the mastermind here.
Maybe she turned him into a two-stage bomb? Blow up once, slowly reconstitute a new body, blow up again.
RUN SYDNEY RUN!
Oh, you’r asleep…
MAXIMA, GRAB SYDNEY AND CRANK YOUR DEFENSE UP TO MAX! Getting out of the room is a good idea too, to avoid splatter.
See!? If she had been properly bubbled (or outside with Decollette) all along, she wouldn’t be in this predicament.
Assuming she’s not just funning.
Granted, leaving her alone with Decollette might lead to a different kind of peril.
Indeed. Story wise though it is dull to have a character who is always invulnerable. See Super Man, as an example, his stories cannot put the protagonist in peril until the Kryptonite comes out, or someone with weaponry capable of overcoming his invulnerability turns up. Besides which, Sydney needs toughening up, and this is character building. If she lives.
There is one other important thing, and that is Sydney is clue hunting and tracking. The sense of smell is important for that!
*sniffs around for fresh Wyrmil scent*
I have mused long and hard about how, in my opinion, Superman stories should be written. You guys let me know if you want me to blather about it here.
Please feel free to. But you need not worry that I would want Superman stories to stop being told. I was only complaining about one aspect which I find dull (including the lengths that writers have to go around to overcome it).
Despite that drawback though, they do still manage to turn out interesting stories, which I too enjoy (on screen only mind, as my reservations kick in when exposed to the problems too much).
I bet one of the reasons why Sydney is not keeping herself bubbled up, all the time, is because Super Man can look cool whilst remaining invulnerable, yet Halo would look to be uncool, due to hiding behind a shield.
Compounded by her being a fan of Batman, who does exactly what Sydney is doing here. Wandering around a crime scene, with no more than enhanced body armour (in her case not looking like a bat adds to her cool, I don[t think she could pull that off).
Mind you Batman does use stealth, so that does offset his risk. But Sydney has her Forb to do likewise.
Short version:
The Superman Problem is actually a subset of a much larger problem within superhero comics; most stories are written to build to a ‘final boss battle’. Such a battle involving Superman is essentially a foregone conclusion (barring using one of his weaknesses or inventing a somehow more powerful foe, Shonen style).
Therefore one way to get around the Problem is to structure stories around mysteries (even Superman can’t beat up a bad guy he has not found or identified, and these days even mundane criminals try to avoid leaving microscopic evidence at a scene) and Problematic Reveals.
Problematic Reveals can involve Superman finding out information that causes him emotional harm or creates an intellectual problem that his powers are not directly effective against. For instance, the solution to a problem might involve having to convince an ordinary person not to take an irrevocable action now or in the future, or winning a philosophical debate with someone from a different culture or perspective.
In conclusion, the Superman Problem can be looked at as an opportunity to tell stories that are unusual in the superhero space (and which probably shouldn’t be so rare): stories where the super powers are useful for gathering resources to solve a problem, but not necessarily directly useful in solving the problem.
Sometimes, punching the bad guy in the face is not the best solution. Which is not to say that sometimes they shouldn’t be punched anyway, with the fallout from that being part of the story.
Very passionately and well said. Especially so as regards limitations leading to innovation.
Agreed :)
“I love the colour scheme. Every time I press one of these black buttons labeled in black against a black background, a black light lights up black to show me what I’ve done. What is this, some kind of galactic hyper-hearse?” – Z. Beeblebrox
Don’t wear it, you’ll get cooties.
[ba da bish]
Coot DID explode.
But it was all part of his master plan to kill all of the demons. He nunchuck’d his way out of Hell.
My man is back in action! Monsters beware!
How’s tequila become an Irish girl’s drink of choice? With her skin tone I would’ve thought Caribbean Rum, which is tastier and superior for cauterizing offending neurons.