Grrl Power #288 – Hearts and mind fingers
Those of you who are not huge fans of Arianna will find this page cathartic. I’m not sure how much of the comic will be dedicated to the PR and political side of things. I suspect very little. Just the occasional reminder than it’s a thing.
A quick googling tells me it’s probably not a big deal getting properly loaded modern ammo wet. Long term storage? I assume it’s not ideal. Sure if you put it in something that’s water tight first, which if you’re going to store ammo in a well for some reason is probably how you’d do it. Sydney is less of an expert on the matter than I am, and it’s also possible she’s thinking about black powder charges or something.
Arianna isn’t about to turn to the press and lead in with the worst case version of events, she’s mostly just venting for a moment. She probably already has a plan of attack, and hopefully it’s something more nuanced than the oft-relied-upon-by-politicians flat out denial of facts.
I thing the font I used for Max’s gravelly voice might not be the best for the size it appears in the comic. Hopefully it’s legible enough, and it will only be around for a few more pages.
Here’s the link to the new comments highlighter for chrome, and the GitHub link which you can use to install on FireFox via Greasemonkey.
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.
And if you actually believes Max’s ‘you wont have a record’, I have a bridge to sell you. A record accessible by vanilla law enforcement agencies, probably not. But you are, and will forevermore be, part of ARCs watchlist. Expect your browser history to be parsed for possible supervillain tendencies for the rest of your life.
Record as in to hire vs not to hire.
Your browser history? Lol. Please sell me that bridge. Something tells me I’ll be able to sell it back to you for more right after.
Pro tip: if you’re not a computer technology expert… keep your comments about hacking a bit more vague so those of us who are won’t call you on it.
I don’t consider myself an ‘expert’, which is why I defer to sources that can be held libel if they knowingly mislead a reader..
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/08/03/the-nsa-might-be-reading-your-searches-but-your-local-police-probably-arent/
Getting your google search history vs. getting your browser history are two very, very different things. Theoretically they could get your browser history from your ISP (pro tip: you have *no* 4th amendment protections when it comes to your internet history) but that’s easy to get around by anybody who uses the right tools.
History, not so much, but it’s not entirely trivial to hide which websites you are accessing if a shady intel-type agency really wants to know.
I have a friend who works in computer forensics. The stuff he was able to learn about me from looking at my computer was downright… well, I wouldn’t say frightening, but I might say embarrassing. I suspect people who really have criminal tendencies could be in some real trouble…
There’s a difference between ‘record’ and ‘criminal record’. Even if the government decided to forget about it, the media footage isn’t going to fall down the memory hole, so almost everyone involved will have a record of some sort, but not necessarily one that’s mandatory to report when a form asks “do you have any felony convictions”.
The real annoyance is that we don’t know how many of these people would have been convinced without mind control. Probably a non-zero number of them, possibly all of them (since we don’t know whether mind control was actually used).
Possibly none, but probably lots of them. If you’re a criminal, then encountering (much less engaging in violence with) the police is a bad thing which you should avoid. Ditto if you’re a super-criminal.
Real life violence with super powers is going to be brutal and short, Max already set a really high bar, most people are in it for the money.
Heh, the very existence of mind control powers isn’t just a reason to not trust supers. It’s a very good reason to be all-around paranoid and has a quite profound effect on how the whole world is perceived. I still hold that mind control trumps every power short of reality warping and (do-anything) magic, and even users of those aren’t safe unless they specifically make counter-effort.
Arianna is way cool. She just has to deal with the capricious beast that is public opininion, which supers, thanks to HER efforts, can largely ignore.
Mind Control is kind of a weak power to be honest.
Mostly because, more often than not, it can fought off through sheer will power and or mental training. Things anyone can do, super or not.
I always thought it was unfair for mind controllers that their powers were so weak. I mean Cyclops could never beat the Hulk at arm wrestling, no matter how hard he tried, no matter how much he believed in himself or wanted it, but if he’s mind controlled, he can almost always resist shooting someone he doesn’t want to. So basically, if you’re strong, you get to be 1,000 times stronger than a regular person, but if you have mind control powers, you can exert what, 25-50% more influence than a human normally does over themselves in the course of a day? If you were 50% stronger than a regular human, there’s a lot you could do with that, but you probably wouldn’t try and take on the X-men.
I think it was Gunslinger Girls where a character reveals to the brainwashed assassins that they are mind controlled, and their response is “we know, but we are mind controlled not to care.”.
The obvious first order of a mind controller is “stop using your willpower to fight the mind control”.
when they were investigating the supposed murder of a handler and his doll, one of the ones said they love their handler because they are programmed to. I think Rico was the only one not programmed that way.
Schlock Mercenaries had something along those lines.
Paraphrased.
Hacker: I just program them to have a bunch of memories of me helping them. Repairs, stuff like that.
Guy: Doesn’t that bother them?
Hacker: Let’s check. HEY! Combat bot (that I hacked an hour ago) does knowing that bother you?
Combat Bot: No, mistress. It does not.
Hacker: Why?
Combat Bot: Because you have done so very much for me.
That reminds me of a T-shirt I saw:
“I used to care about things, but I’ve got a prescription for that now.”
I’ve found that the reason for the weakness of mind control in media is that people don’t like the idea that your own mind, the essence of who you are, can be wrestled away from you. So either it’s underpowered and can be beat by LASER WILLPOWER, or it’s all-consuming in its ability to wreck stories.
Oh, but i think that that example would be a very poor one. You’re talking about most physically strongest person in Marvel Universe (i believe) vs average MindController.
Personally, i count “Mindcontrolling” as a one of the best power, especially in right hands. It is one of the most subtle power, and the more proficient one gets with it, the more scary stuff one could do with it, while with Hulk strength, one can only… well.. smash things. Or, not smash them (jk) >_>
Well then Cyclops vs. Spider-Man then. Spidey is one of the weakest strong guys out there and Cyclops would have exactly the same chance against him.
I’d say that has more to do with Cykes dependence on that one power. Spidey isn’t JUST stronger, he’s got a host of other powers. A good example of someone who doesn’t rely on their obvious flashy power would be Gambit.He’s got a power that like Cykes is really only useful for blowing things up, but in combat he doesn’t just stand there trying to blow people up, he’s usually running and jumping and such and using the cards or w/e he’s got as a distraction. If you took away Gambits explosive power he’d still be a fair fighter, take away Cykes, and Cyke would prolly be dead in a minute.
I think DaveB means that Spidey is one of the weakest strong guys, and Cyclops would still never-ever-ever be able to beat him at arm wrestling, even if he used both hands and was standing.
The reason mind control is portrayed as weak is because of the reasons mentioned by MrInsecure. Mind control, when applied as something irresistible, is a terrifying concept, and is really hard to write without becoming instantly the most OP thing. It’s why they have people left and right being able to resist it or it having limitations on it’s use. In the rock-paper-scissors of hero powers, the only counter to mind control would be other people with mind powers, which means either every team has a psychic member, or mind control can be resisted through strong willpower, which they can give to basically all heroes on the basis that they are heroes.
+1
Might want to watch out for “Ghost in the shell” then. In that story, people’s brains could be hacked, literally. You could be left conscious of your actions but forced to sign your kids away to an orphanage for “medical experiments,” and since it was “you” who signed the form, and it was your ID, the kidnapping is LEGAL. Or worse, there have been people who were so badly hacked, their entire personality was wiped, and they were engaged in criminal activity, including murder, but when arrested and questioned, could not say why, AND THERE WAS NO WAY TO RESTORE THEM! The only counter-measure was to get implants with EXTRAORDINARY encryption protection, but if you didn’t constantly upgrade, sooner or later a hacker could bypass your defenses.
really in this instance I wouldn’t say that V mindcontrolled anyone. It would be more apt to say he geared their emotions (i.e. anger/rage) to extreme levels, so much so that most of them didn’t care about consquences of their action until later; sort of like dabblers atraction. That is an ability that is very hard to counter. Unfortunately, it is gonna be hard to convict anyone involved because how do you prove someone guilty and admit that such control of your own team or individual innocent.
depends on what you’re controlling. I’d think a telepath who could figure out how to temporarily disable the friend/foe/stranger aspect of the brain (oddly enough a true disorder usually from an injury. a person can lose the ability to recognize the face of a loved one, but recognize their voice.)
“would be a dangerous opponent” forgot to finish my sentence lol
Yup. Clever usage. Or, to counter soldiers or item using supers, disable object recognition and association, for whatever class of item they are trying to turn against you.
“My god, what I am doing with this … whatever it is in my hand? I need a weapon!” Dropping it, and picking up a big stick, to take a swing at his opponent. The discarded gun lying, now forgotten, at his feet.
One of the subsequent reasons why Prof. Xavier, for example, is loathe to do any “psychic surgery” on people is because the mind is so complex. If he wanted to alter the “friend/foe recognition” factors to make a friend appear as a foe, he’d not only have to “flip the switch” on visual memories, but also on hearing, smelling, touching (& even in some cases, tasting) memories as well. Even so, there may be a lot of different memories about that friend that aren’t tied strictly with sensual information…Such as knowing when that friend did a favor without being seen or heard doing it. A lot of the “friend/foe” recognition factors are tied up with pure emotional content. It would take a lot of hard work to find & alter ALL of the various factors that make someone an actual friend…Any effort less than that would result in a lot of personal confusion & maybe hesitation. Instead of getting a “kill on sight” effect, there would be a certain level of ambiguous hesitation.
Tampering with emotions is much more powerful than pure intellectual tampering, simply because the emotion can override the intellect…Once the intellect regains control, there will be regrets, but the action will still be done.
You are perfectly right. Note though that the brain does have ways to tie all those associations into a discreet whole. So it would not be necessary to track down each sense separately, for example. Merely to fiddle with the particular association you are after.
Take arachnophobia, for example, those sufferers are afraid of spiders. We have a distinct association of the package of things which make up a spider. One of which is the shape of them. But, we need not disable ‘spider shape recognition’, separately to ‘scuttling movement recognition’.
Because both pathways go to a part of the brain which analyses such input, and determines ‘does this amount to being a spider’. That is the part you can mess with to easily make spiders (or whatever) unrecognisable.
A similar technique could be used (on a different part of the brain) to turn an arachnophobe into an arachnophile.
I was initially describing the level of mind-interference needed to flip the “friend/foe” identification. What you just described merely disassociates “bad” into “neutral.” Actually reversing friendship/loyalty into murderous hatred is a lot more involved than that.
Rant warning!
Mind control can’t be used anywhere near its potential in stories, because it is so effective at wrecking plots and even characters. That undermines the whole notion of character’s personality and independent will. Motivation and goals define a character, and a powerful mind controller can redefine those, essentially REWRITING A CHARACTER. It is my belief that mind control is among the most difficult super powers to write right because it affects one of the most important story resources: character goals.
Beyond that, TOO many heroes seem to come with free Heroic Willpower. Resistance to mind control seems to be something that very strongly defines character’s heroism. How can a character be a hero, if he commits a heinous deed, mind control or not? Incidentally, I’m vehemently (hah) against idea that mind control resistance comes free with other superpowers.
In my limited experience, a potent mind controller only appears if his power is central to the plot. Such stories are usually about cleverly subverting the dangerous power or very bleak.
Though a truly goody goody two shoes type hero I guess has already shown massive control of all the emotions and drives that usually lead people to start sliding down slippery moral slopes. (you could say they are already proficient at resisting their own subconscious and hormonal brands of mind control) Their mind is hardened against certain paths. Of course maybe that makes them brittle in a way. Like once you do get them to do something against their nature they would be “broken” the moment they realized it. Might even make them easier to control after that point.
In defense of the xmen, and other teams that have had a telepath, they should have a much higher defense against mind control, if only because the aforementioned psychic member would/could have helped them develop resistance to mind control.
I agree. The folks who should have resistance are those who’s core character supports it, not just the fact that they are good, upright people. Here I am thinking of Sherlock Holmes as an example. He is not a telepath, but I see him as having the mental discipline to be able to spot even a subtle intrusion, and the force of will to be able to fight a stronger one.
Spider Man has his spidey sense to warn of a sneak take over attempt. But nothing special to prevent a brute force attack. Although it is justifiable to say that he may be able to hold it off a bit longer than others might, if he has warning and they do not.
Magneto has his helmet to protect him, precisely because his power set does not protect him from his arch nemesis, Professor X. That is a fair compromise. When it is convenient to the plot, he has his helmet. And a clever ploy can be used to take it away at a critical moment.
But he does not get an automatic resistance, just because he is the big bad. Nor should the good guys, just because they are the protagonists. They should be forced to find some way to avoid the attack, or counter it. Or suffer the consequences.
Spidey also literally has a faster mental ‘clock speed’ than anyone seeking to intrude on his mind telepathically. He processes information fast enough to perceive combat in bullet-time. Someone reading his thoughts had best be able to think several times faster than a normal human just to keep up with his mind when it’s focusing, otherwise they won’t even be able to really interface with his thoughts in any significant way.
I had not thought of his set as including that, but it is logical enough, and I agree with your conclusions, stemming from that.
I always thought that was because minds are a lot more complicated than punching something. Dragon Ball Z has a decent comparison for it when Ginyu takes over Goku’s body. He succeeds, but Ginyu doesn’t know how Goku’s body works, so he can’t use it very well. I figured mind control had much the same problem- you don’t know exactly how the other person thinks. Imagine someone taking over Sydney’s brain who wasn’t ADHD. Would they be able to deal with the way her brain processes information? Especially in the middle of the fight, with a bunch of other people to keep track of? It seems like mind control might be like hacking an operating system you weren’t familiar with. Or at least someone whose files have a weird arrangement.
Mid battle mind control is probably really hard for that reason. As a side note, the Xmen at least have a decent excuse for all having Heroic Willpower- they’ve spent years training with the most powerful telepath in the whole world. Hell, if I were writing the X-men and I needed someone to resist mind control, I’d explain it as Prof. X hardening their brain against those kind of attacks.
Interesting thinking. The last paragraph being a strong counter-argument, that I would happily go along with. To a point of course, that being granting resistance, rather than immunity. Beast should be the one who has the best defence, resulting from that training. Being the most cerebral of the non-telepaths on the team.
Not that I am implying that only smart characters should gain resistance mind. A good case can be made for a very primitive mind, which is too animalistic for the mind-controller to cope with. This presuming that the controller is not adept at controlling animal minds as well as human, of course.
It would certainly be the “Hulk defence” I would offer if trying to justify him resisting mental control. That and his over-the-top anger just never letting any other thought get in the way. They can establish control, but simply find they cannot do anything with it, once they have it.
Rather like putting reins on a Tyrannosaurus. Sure. Now see if he goes where you want him to.
By putting on reins no.
By making him think the nest best meal is over the next hill, yes.
By making him think ther you are on his back but only to rid him of parasites, yes!
What do you think marketing is?
How do you think people get stuck with stuff they don’t need?
How do think you can make people go to a war that will kill more that the “perceived” enemy could ever?
Mind control is as effective as the more subtle it is!
Sorry about the errors, my keyboard is not cooperating.
Without want to sound paranoid:
When you think you’re free, they got you!
It’s when you know how much freedom you’ve lost, that’s when you’ve won that mental battle. As the saying goes, “Free your mind & your @$$ will soon follow.”
+++++++++++++1
In a serial story the teams telepath put triggers and traps in his good childhood buddy’s, he was also sort of de facto group leader, mind that sort of half shut down his conscious mind in response to a telepaths touch inside his mind while sort of leaving his reflexes and ability to think intact. It was complex and I didn’t really understand it except when actually reading the explanation but basically he could still access enough skills to fight even though consciously he didn’t remember how… He also forgot to tell his buddy he did that so later they had words.
Anyway, if you trust your team mentalist he can booby trap or build defenses in your mind. Which is beyond mere “hardening” so that only a mentalist greater than or at least equal having a good day could get through.
Well used (and subtle) mind control is probably a second from top tier power. Behind those that obviously just break things all over like super speed, time control, matter creation etc. But it takes a lot more thought and talent than portrayed in most comics.
A smart mind controller can do so without the person ever realizing they are mind controlled. Thus subverting the whole need for ‘overcoming willpower.’
Babylon 5 did that pretty well.
How exactly would that work?
How can you force someone to do something they otherwise wouldn’t, without them noticing?
By giving subtle pushes, that tip the individual to a course the controller would prefer. This is easiest if they are actively controlling them. But planting post-hypnotic type suggestions, triggered by appropriate situations, can do the same.
* Dampen any feelings of ‘that individual is my enemy’
* Enhance any positive thoughts about the controller to ‘I am liking this person more and more, I think he is a friend’
* If deciding whether to take an action the controller specifically wants, give the pleasure centres a good stroking
* Conversely giving anxious, uncomfortable or otherwise negative emotional sensations if considering detrimental actions.
Things like this will keep the individual thinking and behaving like they normally do. For instance none of those will force them to do something totally out of character. They might just make what would be considered as poor judgement calls initially.
Gradually the choices might build up, and eventually result in the person’s character, or allegiance, shifting to supporting the mind controller blatantly. But an outside observer, or even the person being controlled wondering how they got there, might not spot the control. Because it was all subtle tweaking. Not blunt force zombie-like control.
(Emperor) Palpatine used these techniques on Anakin Skywalker. Anakin had far more raw power than him, but Palpatine used subtle techniques to avoid raising his suspicions. Plus he was experienced and Anakin was young and naive.
By the time he had grown into his power, and ascended to becoming Darth Vader, he was well and truly a pawn in the control of the mastermind. Without realising it.
There’s also The Reapers from Mass Effect. At first, you would get headaches, then hear buzzing. Then there’s audio and visual hallucinations. Then come the nightmares. Then you start doubting your senses. Your thoughts become The Reaper’s thoughts. Eventually you become an extension of The Reaper, happily selling out your species to extinction, then discarded and left to rot. The scariest part, not only is there no immunity, but even DEAD Reapers can “Indoctrinate” you.
In a web series I just read, a (we will call her a wizard) set up the stones of her castle to radiate deathly energy.
Why?
To keep spiders and rats away.
The fact that normal people (who aren’t told it is a form of pest control) go crazy after spending a few weeks there was an unintentional side-effect. Oops.
I would rate mind control in the top tier personally. Each of the above examples will win if they get a drop on the mind controller. But a mind controller need not stand out as being a threat. So it is just as possible that they will get the opening gambit. At which point, the time lord is their puppet and the mind controller now has both mind control and time travel at his disposal.
Oh. Another reason that I respect Arianna is that she’s essentially doing mass mind control without any superpowers (or is she? Dun-dun-DUNNN!). I respect non-supers who manage to work alongside supers as equals.
so you’re basically saying you like the press corps, and the marketing teams of all the advertising agencies… that’s basically the definition of what they do for a living.
My comment was in the context of Grrlpower universe. Arianna is (probably) non-super who has to compete against supers with mind control powers.
In the Worm universe, it was possible for a hero to be assigned a ‘Thinker 1’ (the lowest possible) classification just for being cunning. Read: Getting a team out of ‘impossible’ situations.
Examples based on guesses:
Hulk would be a ‘Breaker 8’ He breaks stuff with his fists.
Cyclops (x-men) would be a ‘Blaster 3’ He lazors holes in things.
So a 1 is nothing compared to supers with the actual power, but it does mean that you have far better than average ability. HALO might fall into this Thinker 1 category, even though her powers do not include enhanced intelligence.
Unless… One of the orbs gives her passive stat boosts.
“Put them all away or let them all but V go” is a false dichotomy. Instead, come up with some sort of probationary check-in. Those who get through it have their records cleared. Those who violate probation get charged. Any that already have records go away anyway.
I really wish there was a ‘like’ feature, if only for this comment alone. A very nice and clean way to deal with the ‘all or nothing’ problem.
Yeah, the actual solution will wind up being basically this, but Arianna is being hyperbolic on this page.
So, basically… “DON’T do it again!”
More like: “We are provisionally giving you the benefit of the doubt. But this is unprecedented in society. If you had lost your volition due to temporary insanity we would either put you in a psyche ward for observation, or set you free, if you were deemed no future threat to society. But we have no case histories or examples to guide us here.
So we will give you all suspended sentences, to be quashed completely, in due course, if our trust in you is justified.”
Law courts have been flexible, at various points in history. Accepting different means of sentencing, if the opportunity arose. For instance offering a choice between prison time or service in the military has often happened.
Of course, it does not always work out well. I mean, look what happened when they shipped all those criminals off to Australia. They ended up running the place! ;-)
I don’t know about being placed in a psyche ward but maybe someone with the right skill set should analyse their minds a bit to see if everything is alright after being mentally coerced like that. Both sides of the battle really.
Good point. Agreed.
Agreed
Arianna will need to be on the Media’s backs to make sure they get the scheme right. There are certain factions who would love to run a story about “90% of ARC’s arrests overturned!” with the spin that they’re too trigger-happy.
+1
Although Maxima is showing no signs of arresting without evidence. So we need not be worried.
As it is on this page, Maxima isn’t actually arresting anybody. But she IS using the “just cause” part of the Due Process of Law to have them “taken downtown” for holding, pending further investigation.
Gonna toot my own horn for a moment:
From page 2 of the previous page’s comments:
…called it! (of course, I probably messed up the how-to-quote function, but…)
Nicely called :)
I could see Sydney walking up to them and start rambling off strange and embarrassing combo words until one asks what she’s doing. She then states that she’s deciding their “affiliated” names to be placed on the Arc official website as their official super hero/villain names for public record. They argue saying they should be able to choose their names but then she states they would have to come to the Arc headquarters to fill out the paperwork for officially licensed names or else Arc will just go with whatever they want.
personally, i LOVE the PR side of this comic, its something that usually just gets glossed over….. or the press hates you, no one ever addresses the possibility of good press for heroes and what it could do for them. the fact that you are tackling that monster is awesome.
I would personally love to see a villain that uses PR as an angle of attack- not through mind control, but by deliberately orchestrating scenarios to undermine the credibility of ARC-SWAT and make it harder for them to operate without public resistance.
In other words, take them from being the Justice League to being The Boys, in the eyes of the public, and people won’t help so much in their investigating.
You mean like terror organizations have since the free press has been a thing, using churches, hospitals, schools and the like so when they get attacked in retaliation for their crimes they can turn to the skeptical local population and play the victim and say “see the blew up your !” without mentioning WHY it was targetted?
“see the (insert bugaboo here) blew up your (insert semipublic useful edifice here)”
No, I literally mean a villain who tries to sew chaos purely through manipulation of ARC-SWAT’s public image. Real life police get in trouble all the time for shady investigation tactics, civil rights violations and disregard for the public safety- imagine how bad “excessive force” can get when Maxima is around, or what kind of search-and-seizure problems you can have when literal mind readers get involved.
It probably wouldn’t take much effort at all to spin a Maxima “I did what I had to do” moment into the Ferguson riots writ large, particularly not for someone with a bit of super-genius or a supernaturally compelling voice.
Back in the Silver Age DC books, Lex Luthor did just that very thing against Superman. Deliberately setting up situations that draws Superman’s attention, which would turn out to be something perfectly legal after Supe busted it up. Then make sure it made all of the media…
I think that Arianna is working her PR voodoo on Sydney, otherwise she has no real reason to vent to a newb. Now, if she was venting with Max, who is a peer, then I would be more able to believe that Arianna is really stressed.
Sydney was still in the training aspect. PR is one of the things she was supposed to learn about. They kind of got headbutted into combat
More like, Arianna was just venting in general, and Sydney responded, and than they were talking
The fact that she is venting to Sydney is reason enough for me to see she is stressed, no PR voodoo needed. If anything, venting to Max, someone who not only cares little about PR, but also likes to push her buttons, would likely increase her blood pressure to near fatal levels. :p
Everyone but Sydney is busy doing clean-up or being hauled away or arguing. That makes her Arianna’s wall to talk to while Ari tries to clear her own head about how to handle this mess. Sydney’s remarks really come down to saying “I’m listening and being sympathetic.”
Yeah man modern firearms will function with wet ammo, but having a weapon submerged in water is a different story altogether.
Keeping things lubricated while wet is a bitch, and most modern firearms are designed with very low tolerances for obstruction around the components, this makes them more accurate as the gun itself doesn’t move around on you but it makes then require continuous cleaning and maintenance to work properly. If your firearm gets a bit wet it’s alright, you just need to wipe it down and dry it off to avoid corrosion. Then you need to reapply whatever lubricant you are using as the lubricant protects the components from corrosion and the water, but gets slowly washed off by water.
Oddly weapons in the AK family don’t reallh have a problem with this as the parts are so loosely fit together that the gun will work even if unlubricated and portly maintained.
No wonder they are so popular with revolutionaries and rebels! Many will not be properly trained or disciplined to provide proper care for their weapons. So that makes those ideal weapons for them.
I had not realised that aspect before. I guess I attributed their world-wide popularity just to the cheapness, ease of use and ready availability, due to a policy of propagation to rebels during the cold war. Beautiful irony that what might be considered to be sloppy production standards, by some, actually has a significant combat benefit.
Also cheaper and easier to replace when the user does finally break it. It’s not that sloppy in fit and finish but it is definitely soldier-proof. The huge left-hand lever that is the safety is hard to miss even without training. And the magazine release is mounted front-center and wraps your hand around the magazine so you can yank it out if it sticks. Kalashnikov was a Sargent. He knew soldiers.
Russian ones in particular. They had a lot of low-end cannon fodder in the army, at the time he was doing his service. Low pay, poor morale and lax discipline. So, yea, it does all make sense.
Mind you, I am looking at a similar example of Soviet era engineering ingenuity, right next to me. It is a metal fireplace, called a ‘petchka’. The ones in more northern, former Soviet countries, tend to have highly decorative patterns on them. But the ones locally only come in one colour. Ford’s favourite, black.
An Aga is a distant, very expensive, posh relative. Petchkas have to be cheap because they are ubiquitous amongst the poor rural communities. Those which are too far outside the cities to get gas piped to them. As such, they also have to be foolproof, resistant to manhandling, easy to service and highly durable.
The temperatures often (every year) get down to -30 here. And I am not even in the mountains, it gets way worse there. So if they failed, people would die. People who have to improvise indoors fires often end up with carbon monoxide poisoning, due to inadequate ventilation.
Every feature on it is there because it has to be, to work. And each has been honed to perfection. The glass door on the front has rugged safety glass in it. Of a standardised one-size fits all. That size being chosen for the optimum compromise between visibility and strength.
I have only once heard of somebody breaking the glass. And I know they get a pounding! What with logs being bumped into them, the doors being slammed shut in haste, and a furnace burning right next to them.
Plus that door has a tiny gap at the top. Deliberately engineered into it. Which immediately draws attention if the smoke is not going up the chimney. It does not just sit in the box, building up carbon monoxide. You see the small puffs of smoke. Enough to irritate the eyes. Not so much as to endanger you, on it’s own, if you are asleep.
Plus other features, but I fear a wall of text, so will stop. However, I will say, that they deserve to be on display in any engineering museum!
I had to look up some illustrations because I never knew what they were called. But I have seen them before in movies and documentaries about Russia and other points East. Thanks for the info.
The AK safety is on the RIGHT side. I can’t believe nobody noticed that clunker. Me included.
One Arc reputation hanging by a thread as ordered by Mister Vehemence. Even the ones who came to do legitimate evil can just lawyer up at this point. The American justice system as powerful a villian as any of them.
Well, yeah, you have to process them, and offer them medical aid, but most of them are going to walk.
But I really sympathize with Arianna here. I hate that she staged a bank robbery (that’s SO illegal), but she’s right about fear mongering. That’s the very same phrase I’ve been using to describe how Maxima had acted during the powers demonstration. I mean, damn!
She did explain how it’s techniqually not illegal, because the bank hired the robbers as a trial
I’m pretty sure there is no legal clause that allows hired robbers to carry live ammo, and FIRE IT AGAINST CIVILIANS. If that little piece of information gets out Arianna is done for.
Or the bullet that wasn’t caught that splintered wood next to someones face. The spall from that could easily take an eye or leave scars.
Or bullet fragments can kill. One of the hostages in the Sydney incident was killed that way.
Not to mention they didn’t anticipate that Sydney was there in the first place. That’s a variable that you can’t plan around.
Never mind the elephant in the room that is that a staged bank robbery like that is clearly a conspiracy to dupe the public. That’s beyond unethical.
I’m wondering what the legal definition of ‘dupe’ is.
The staged robbery was both legal and ethical, from the bank’s perspective, as they had agreed to a ‘security test’. However it was, conversely, illegal and unethical from the perspective of the customers. They had not agreed to participate in the robbery, were put in fear of their lives and could suffer lifelong PTSD or even have a heart attack, on the spot.
Putting that to one side though, there was no ‘duping’ of the public at large. Security tests (including simulated bank robberies) happen all the time and are perfectly legal (with the caveat made in the first paragraph). Likewise security reasons often require that secrecy is maintained over such tests. This is a normal accepted feature of our society, so is not unethical.
Importantly Maxima was not in the loop over the robbery. Thus the element, which was newsworthy, was how a government employed super would respond in the event of witnessing a major crime. And Maxima conducted herself well, as witnessed by various members of the public.
This was a fair test of her abilities, effectiveness and character. All of which she passed with flying colours. And was newsworthy. The difference between being a genuine robbery and a security test becomes irrelevant when asking the question ‘can a super cop operate effectively in a robbery’, under the circumstances we saw.
As such it is wholly ethical to allow that to be reported. Even whilst keeping the security details confidential.
I do like Suzie’s sidelong look in the last panel. Looking forward to finding out if it was connected to Klingon kisses or Ari’s comment about how her day hasn’t gone ‘how she wanted it’. Mayhaps Suzie’s fledgling reporter senses are tingling in that some of the events of the day had been staged by Ari.
I think your last is the most likely. But it could also be her heart throbbing, thanks to the Klingon kiss! She is checking Arianna out, in her mirror. Maybe she is hoping for another wrestling match.
*wanders off to fill a pit with mud*
Jello, dude, jello. We want to see the action in detail
You can fire guns underwater too, although its not what you’d call effective more than a few feet away. You can see the bullet from the semi-auto is already tumbling within a foot and a half is is basically useless by maybe 4 feet. For some reason the revolver has better stability and effective range, up to maybe 7-8 feet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OubvTOHWTms
The AK-47 fires fine but only manages 5-6 feet of total travel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cp5gdUHFGIQ
Subsonic (air speed) ammunition travels better (marginally so) in water and thru air/water transition.
Riffle, supersonic, most handguns, subsonic.
welcome to the real world ariahnna
most of the time life throws us curved balls
…but, as defined by the mathematics of geometry, aren’t ALL balls supposed to be curved?…
;)
Some are just wrinkled.
What you’re referring to is only the flexible “container,” not the thing inside of it…
;)
Or ‘Deflategate’ (sorry)
Wich geometry?
Pentagramic?
I am personally an Arianna fan. XP
The Super that received the George Washington Carver maneuver will probably be checked REALLY close for possible involvement with some unsolved Murders, he just had that whole I’m an assassin vibe and Power Set going.
He’s actually one of the few who almost certainly won’t get off. They can show he was protected from the Aggro Aura by Sydney’s shield and still attempted to murder her.
He’s also impossible to imprison though, teleporter and all that.
There’s no evidence there was any violence-inducing field active until Vehemence explicitly activated it to awaken all those who were drugged or otherwise unconscious to cause them all to fight. The field was clearly an area affect that got everyone who didn’t have shielding from it and none of the protagonists are shown behaving outwardly violent or just driven to fight not even Sydney during the times she dropped her shield to let in fresh air. So no one actually has any freedom to make a successful claim they were incited by his powers since that would require actual proof that he did, and unless Vehemence actually said ‘oh yeah I used my powers to manipulate them’ they have the burden of proving themselves innocent due to mind control since the legal presumption would be that they were acting on their own free will without proof to the contrary.
We argued this point quite extensively over the last couple of comics. You might want to check back through those. You are not alone in your viewpoint though. But there are a lot of points to suggest that it may have been used. Notably, until Halo pushed a button on her true sight orb, she could not detect the aura.
So there is no way to prove that it was not operational, prior to that point. Plus the guy who used it was present from the outset. He has the means, motive and opportunity to do it. Making that a very hard issue to wave away in court.
Certainly, if I were on the jury, I would not find most of them guilty. Bear in mind that the above guys are claiming that they could not control their own actions. The hairdressers behaviour has been entirely consistent with that.
Plus, as soon as the aggro aura was disabled they came to the help of the heroes. Yet they were fighting them prior to Halo discovering the aggro field. Strongly implying that it was operational, even when she could not detect it.
Actually there’s no way to prove it was operational, in fact the general actions of those involved disproves the idea any such field was active since we’ve seen the actual field generates random violent action. Your argument is in the range of the ‘Spiritual Defense’ realm from the Salem Witch Trials, where because the girls claimed spirits said it was so the judges deemed it must be true simply because they couldn’t disprove it which just doesn’t cut it in a real trial.
So trying to go ‘well you can’t prove it wasn’t active then’ just isn’t going to cut it, because if you can’t prove it was active then you can’t prove your defense since courts operate (usually) on proof or a preponderance of evidence that something is true. There is no proof any such field was active throughout the fight, the only proof we have was that the only active violence-encouraging field was long after the fight was going on and set off at the point where Vehemence was strangling Maxima. The evidence is quite clear that no such field was making anyone fight or coerced anyone into the battle, everyone went along due to their own free will.
You chose your Salem witch analogy thinking that it is a good one, because ‘claiming that the devil made me do it’ is a ludicrous defence that any modern person would laugh at. Yet we have credible evidence to show that they were probably suffering from ergot poisoning. A mind-altering effect you get when crops are improperly stored in damp conditions.
So their clam was actually valid. They had lost their volition to an outside source. Had the people trying them been more sympathetic to their claims, and less inclined to burn people, they might have forgiven those who were rendered temporarily insane! Even if they had to justify it with exorcisms to ensure that they were free of ‘satanic influence’.
As to your argument as to the strength of the field, I suggest you search for Observer’s excellent counter to that, on the previous page of comments. Just search for the following text:
Your final paragraph does not match how the law works. In such cases the defence need merely show that peoples’ behaviour has inexplicably changed from the norm. There are various examples of that.
The defence need do no more than that. Because they are innocent until proven guilty. So it falls to the prosecution to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the aggro aura was not in use. There is insufficient evidence for them to do so. *
* To convince me. Or Maxima, going by what we can see in panels 1 & 2 above. And Arianna is clearly in no doubt either.
Yorp, I have to disagree with you here. As was pointed out on the next page, coercion is a positive defense. It is not sufficient to say “I was coerced,” it must be proven, Even if the possibility of coercion is accepted, it is the defense’s responsibility to prove that the coercion was not only present, but of sufficient power to have removed all responsibility from the defendant.
I was basing my argument on the advice we received yesterday from a lawyer. Which I felt to be sufficient. But if you feel that your own legal training is adequate to contest his opinion, then we have contradictory legal advice.
In which case I have to judge the merits of the contradictory advice before proceeding.
The most obvious way for me to do so is to consider a hypothetical example. The clearest means of coercion that springs to mind is claiming that a man with a gun forced me to do an action. Obviously if he were clearly visible, then there would be no dispute. So the man must be one who is out of sight.
So a man with a sniper rifle has accosted me. Told me to rob a bank, with a fake gun he provides. Warning me that he will shoot me, from a concealed position, if I fail to do so. I recall cases like this (possibly from movies, but I am overdue to go to bed).
Is it reasonable for a citizen, mounting his defence, to have to prove that? I do not feel that it is. Searching for eye witnesses, checking closed circuit TV, and other resource intensive activities would be beyond the means of an individual.
That is the degree of activity that it would take the state to finance. However, it is also reasonable to say that the defendant should not be allowed to make such a claim spuriously, in the hope of wasting police and state resources to no avail.
So I do find it fair that the defendant would have to show that their behaviour was uncharacteristic. Proving that they were a normal citizen, going about their day-to-day life, with no indication of pre-planning a robbery.
Is it fair that the only way that the defence could prove their case, as you state, is to find the gunman, or CCTV of him holding a gun to the defendants head? No. Said gunman could easily have surveyed for CCTV prior to the incident. And has since made his escape, in any event.
Would it be fair is to shift the burden to the prosecution, at this point (having established that the defendant has no history of criminal activity, nor was there any other indication of pre-planning of a bank robbery found)?
I think so, yes. The state could survey the CCTV on approaches to the alleged abduction point, eliminating the various suspects who might match the description of the alleged gunman. If they were able to prove that no such person was at or near the places claimed, beyond reasonable doubt, then the claims would be disproved.
Whilst I accept that the burden of proof for a coercion defence must be shared, I think your interpretation, of that, is sufficiently harsher, than the version passed on from the other lawyer, that I find his more credible.
Especially as the most fundamental tenant of law is that the defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Yours turns that upside down completely. It is not a sharing of the burden, as he stated.
I do not think the defendant would be able to prove coercion to the standard you require, unless the situation was so obvious that the question would not arise in the first place. *
* Mind you, in our case, I think they might be able to. But that is not the issue. The judge and jury could not proceed to the meat of the case, if the prosecution and defence were making contradictory claims about the pertinent case law. That would need resolving fist.
But I mean… they showed up. Are you next going to tell me that instead of letting Vekter do the legwork as he indicated, Vehemence personally tracked down every one of these supers while at low power levels and mind controlled every single one of them to force them to come to the fight?
As a juror I would never allow for the total innocence of anyone there. Even if you immediately surrender, it’s very illegal to show up at a bank with assault rifles and bags with dollar signs on.
Vehemence never clearly indicated that Vekter did the “legwork”. He just convinced Vekter that it was his idea and that he was the leader. V actually said he made some calls others like the Barberian indicated that some of those that were called managed to pull others in. It was all kind of vague but sounded like there was a loosey goosey “network” of supers starting to form out there on the internet and when possible in person. (when you are different there is some instinct to seek others out maybe?).
Since it was all vague (you noticed some of them were a little lost on why they were their or how it all got to this?) and there was a need to transport them all at once so they wouldn’t blunder into the enemy and get picked off piecemeal it is mostly likely that Opal transported them individually to a central meeting place where they were given The Speech by Vekter giving them a better idea of what was going on and what was desired before, if they agreed, they were shipped off all together to the parking lot in order to attack simultaneously. This staging area bit makes the most sense.
At this staging area meeting Vehemence would then have his chance to pump them up a little with his aura to incline them to agree with Vekter’s speech. This is not necessarily what happened but it COULD have. Or Vekter speechifying and V working the crowd could just be that convincing without further interference from powers. But this scenario would give the defendants lawyers something to work with anyway. If they want to work the “under the influence without our consent” angle.
+1
Oops, that was meant to signify approval for Observer‘s post, if that was not clear.
Okay. Wow. I’m sorry, I really didn’t expect you sink so low, Yorp. So, tell me- your lawyer: was he American? Was he instructing you about how American law is applied to American citizens? More specifically, was he instructing you about how American criminal law is applied to American citizens? Was he citing precedents? Did he charge you an exhorbitant hourly fee?
I ask because your apparent argument, now, is based on a presumption of higher authority which only applies if every single one of the answers to my questions above is “yes”.
As it happens, I am not a lawyer and have never claimed to be; that said, I do have some training in the American judicial system- enough to know, for example, that the “I committed a violent crime because I was threatened with violence” argument falls apart under almost all scrutiny- it’s why gangsters cannot successfully argue that they only committed their crimes to prevent their boss from killing them/their loved ones; even if it is true, it’s impossible to prove.
In cases where mental coercion is posited in America, the burden of proof does shift entirely to the defendant; the prosecution has already successfully proven that a criminal act was committed and the defense has conceded that point. It then becomes the responsibility of the defense to prove that beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant was not responsible for his or her actions.
I would have gone more with a comparison to drugging someone to have sex with you then this coercion by gun thing Yorp came up with. In the first the victims mind has been altered or dulled and in the second you are fully in control of yourself but like anybody don’t want to die.
If you know the drug exists and has similar but more pronounced effects at higher dosages but don’t have the technology to detect that drug after the fact (or in this case during the incident either) accept by being on hand to actively monitor the effects of the drug AND you know the victim was in contact with someone who both had that drug available to use and a motive to want to use it on the victim doesn’t this give that victims lawyer SOMETHING to work with? If I ever get drugged with something difficult to detect afterwards by someone with EVERY reason to want me drugged I sure hope my lawyer will have some chance of helping me. But people get screwed over all the time (literally) so maybe that’s just wishful thinking. TT
Sorry, you appear to have the wrong end fo the stick. I was not being underhanded. The opinion had been sought against me! And it did correct a mis-apprehension that I had of the American Legal system. It was sought to deal with this specific point of law, for this particular situation (including the super power element), under American criminal law.*
I had assumed that you had seen the comment, but were proffering your own opinion of the law. This is perfectly acceptable, and normal legal practice. Much of law is down to one’s interpretation of a point of law. And two qualified individuals can have polar opinions, sometimes.
I really was not intending to be sneaky or underhanded. However, from your reply, I can see that you must have missed the comment. Which is understandable, as it was at the end of a very long chain. That starts here:
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/1597/comment-page-2#comment-288921
To get to the legal opinion, search for the post beginning:
Please note that I immediately conceded my ignorance, on that exception to the general rule, and have incorporated it into all my arguments since.
In the interests of fairness, I should point out that although I accepted the opinion offered by the lawyer (as relayed by Zu Long) I drew some different conclusions as to the implementation/implications of it, to that made by Zu Long.
Please note though that the issue we are debating on the point of law does differ to what you have just repeated. According to that opinion, the burden of proof does not shift solely to the defendant. But it is instead shared. With the defence having a specific requirement only. The remainder falling on the prosecution, as is normal.
* Of course it would be a hugely funny irony, if it turned out that Texan law was completely different for this point.
Okay- first off. Important to read that entire post- Zu Long also states that he is not a lawyer and, further, that he was speaking to a lawyer in a non-legal capacity. This is important because it means that the lawyer is really doing the same thing that we are all doing- going based on gut instinct flavored by his experience. Note, also, that Zu Long does not specify whether his lawyer-friend is a civil lawyer, a criminal lawyer, an estate lawyer, or even a practicing lawyer. To put it bluntly, not all law is the same- in fact, laws very widely from state to state depending on what statutes are being questioned.
That said, I have not said or implied anything that substantially changed either of the arguments you cited. There have, in fact, been a number of arguments- some of which you yourself have given- which could easily be used to dispute the efficacy of a mind-control defense. My main point- as it has been from the beginning- is that a mind-control defense is unlikely in the current legal climate to gain much traction, especially as mind control cannot be definitively proven.
“What?” you say, “but Halo can see the aura!”
Did Halo see the aura before the fight took place? No. Furthermore, her ability to see the aura is not (I assume) reproducible by anyone who is not Halo and, therefore, would be inadmissible.
“Well,” you say, “what if their behavior has substantially changed?”
Great. Evidence of character is normally not permissible in criminal trials. Historically, this has been used to prevent the prosecution from using prior criminal offenses from prejudicing the jury, but it could also be used to prevent the defense from using it in the same way. Opening the door to let it in, on the other hand, means that you also have to accept it when that evidence does show clear examples of motive and propensity for violence- and if the group is being tried as a group, rather than as individuals, than all the prosecution has to do is show that somebody in the group could have acted without mind control and it calls into question the entire group’s defense.
In short, coercion is rarely even attempted as a defense because it shifts the burden of proof to the defense- and defense attorney’s know that it’s an uphill struggle against nearly insurmountable odds.
There is a quite long blog regarding superpowers and the law- Law and the Multiverse– which delves in detail into how superpowers would likely be interpreted in American Courts; the same group of lawyers and law scholars also published The Law of Superheroes, which provides a more succinct look at many of the issues we’ve been debating. I highly recommend reading these sources to get a firm sense of what the law could and could not do in prosecuting potential victims of mind control.
As a final sop: I will admit that if mind control could be proven to the standard required by the courts, and if they could also prove that there were no lingering effects, then those who did so would be entirely justified in demanding that their records be expunged. A failure to prove both of those things, however, could wind up very badly for them.
Imagine, if you will, that Comb-man the Barberian successfully proves to the satisfaction of the court that he was mind controlled. Can he prove that the mind control was temporary and that no lingering suggestions were left in his head? Because I see that defense working a great deal like an insanity plea, where instead of getting jail time and a guilty record, the accused ends up with required therapy and a history of mental susceptibility that follows him around for the rest of his life…
@Observer
I probably would have chosen that one, myself, but it doesn’t really work. The problem is that the use of date-rape drugs is a criminal act- and evidence of it is used to show guilt, not innocence. In fact, it is the absence of date-rape drugs which provides a not-guilty verdict, something which is much easier for the defense to procure. The presence of date-rape drugs must be proven not only to be there in fact, but also to be administered in a way so as to deny the victim choice- which is much, much more difficult (and, likely, the reason so many rapists get away with it).
From whisakedjak: “My main point- as it has been from the beginning- is that a mind-control defense is unlikely in the current legal climate to gain much traction, especially as mind control cannot be definitively proven.”
Mind control HAS been proven, even in this real world we live in. Search on the CIA Project known as MKULTRA. It was proven to have occurred, but because it was the CIA, they only got a legalized “slap on the wrist” with the promise to “never do it again” as a result.
Grumble. Hate the limited nesting protocols…
@MidnightDStroyer:
I won’t claim to be totally familiar with MKUltra- basically, all I know comes from popular culture, wikipedia, and Queensryche- but, from what I understand, reading between the lines, there has been no substantial proof of successful mind control on subjects that weren’t already susceptible. In fact, I haven’t even seen substantial proof of success on subjects who were susceptible.
Now, that may be because the vast majority of files were destroyed, but, as we’ve been trying to establish continuously for the last several hundred thousand words (figure is estimate, only), a lack of evidence does not constitute evidence in any way.
@ whisakedjak
OK, what I am looking for is a Federal version (given ARC’s nature it would have to be Federal right?) of this below:
“But what you may not know is that, in some cases, you MAY be able to beat charges for a crime you committed under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The legal defenses of involuntary intoxication and voluntary intoxication can help you do this.
Of course it’s not true that no one can be punished for a crime they committed while drunk or high. But the California involuntary intoxication defense says that no one can be found guilty of a crime they committed while under the influence of drugs or alcohol that they did not choose to consume.”
From https://www.shouselaw.com/voluntary-involuntary-intoxication.html
You seem to have done some research into this so maybe you recognize this as having a Federal equivalent? I’ll try to look for something Federal later but I’m a bit low on time and I wanted to make sure I got this idea across before everybody stops hanging about checking comments here.
So some American criminal courts do recognize evidence of intoxication as proof of innocence. (for the sake of my argument lets temporarily assume there is some Federal recognition of this sort of defense… Sorry… ) There is video taped and testimonial evidence of the arresting officers and everybody else completely leaving there known behavior patterns to attack anybody on sight. There is a fledgling agent of the law’s testimony that she saw the aura that acted upon them and I’m sure her superiors will give her credibility support in this. Maybe Dabbs can also testify if she was actively resisting the aura which Dave says is easier if you are aware of it so Dabbler may be able to also testify to its existence. If the court acknowledges Vehemence’s ability to do this at the end of the fight then he now has established ability to influence people in this manner. It won’t be hard to establish that he had motive to influence them to a lesser degree of this same method earlier in the day.
Yeah, by no means a slam dunk or anything but it seems that if Federal law has an equivalent or enough precedent that goes this same direction as this then it certainly sounds like they have hope depending on what testimony they can get out of all present and any experts they can bring to bear.
As the above page goes on to say:
“You do need to produce some evidence that you were not acting consciously because you were under the influence of drugs or alcohol involuntarily. Once you’ve done that, though, it’s the prosecution that bears the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that you were acting consciously when you committed the crime.”
Proving that someone could and did simply flip a switch and intoxicate your mind via some odd energy wave at one point in the day would go a long way towards proving he might have done so to a lesser extent earlier that same day when you were all hanging out with him in the same room. And the fact that it is the very agents of the law that arrested you helping to make the case that such mental influence exists can only help.
Sorry again I jumped the gun before I have anything Federal on this but who knows if you will even see this let alone the one I might make whenever I get around to doing a more thorough search.
@Observer
Actually, I would doubt that there would be a federal equivalent; if such a case were tried in federal court, what seems most likely is that lawyers would seek to use state law to establish precedent and rely on the jury to come up with the final decision. In any case, this particular event probably wouldn’t be tried in Federal court as there are no federal crimes (forgery, kidnapping, treason) being tried here.
I am not saying that there is no case for coercion; I’m saying that proving it to the satisfaction of the court would probably be very difficult, especially given that there is no positive evidence. What exists is, at best, circumstantial.
@ whisakedjak
I think that here at the dawn of complete public acknowledgement of supers and all the ramifications of their existence courts may have to grant a little leeway while scientists and their new school of partners in arms magic users/scholars rush to catch up with the creation of tests and identification of evidence that courts can point to as fairly solid proof.
I imagine for a while here things will go back to the way they were before the police had the ready ability to test suspects and victims for drugs/alcohol in their bloodstreams and check DNA found at the scene of the crime against a suspects/victims DNA. Where witness testimony, motivation, opportunity and past behavior of the suspect or victim is all there is to establish that any power was used. At this early point most authorities would have no way to test for the past use of a power in the area let alone an officially recognized test. Some of the magic types may be able to check for things but how can the court trust something that science can’t explain? That most of the human magic users can’t explain? (Dabbler as an advanced being of both science and magic might do better but she doesn’t want us advancing unnaturally.)
I think in a lot of cases it will just be the ARC agents’ and eye witnesses’ words that some power use happened that will be the only evidence that they did. If the courts don’t except that a person has and used such powers unless they have some rock solid proof then a lot of mentalists and other supervillains with powers that are hard to come up with “positive” evidence for will have free reign even if what they did was caught on video during this early period.
Think of all the super criminals whose powers would make it so that they would have to be witnessed by the right agent of ARC actually committing the crime in order to have any chance of making an arrest stick. (and maybe not even then)
Gathering a large amount of circumstantial evidence (and taking the word of an agent like Sydney saying they can see a thing etc… ) may be the only way to combat some super crimes.
Or they can just let folks with such powers run a muck I guess.
@ Observer
I’ve kind of resisted putting down what I think is the most likely course of action- I did mention it over on page three, but I’m not making a big deal over it. I suspect what will probably happen, due to the difficulty of securing evidence for either side, is that the DA and the defense attorneys will seek to have their clients plea to a lesser charge. Neither side would want this to go to trial, as the odds are not a slam-dunk in either direction, as evidenced by the insanely long posts throughout the last two pages.
Where this really becomes unfair is here: assuming each defendant has their case considered separately from their fellow defendants, each time one of the others pleads guilty will strengthen the case for the DA- and the pleas are nearly certain to go through before any trials even begin. Prisoner’s dilemma, much?
Well, at least ARC will have huge incentive to develop more ways to test for this sort of tampering in the future. It would be nice to get a true psychic type super on the team (though with only one some sub teams won’t be able to have him on hand to eye witness things). I sure hope a yet to be shown psychic type super or a magic user specializing in that end of things is available to ARCLIGHT or it represents a serious weakness of the entirety of ARCHON.
Not only does the entire SWAT team have no mentalist types but only two members can resist such, only one completely, and Sydney has no resistance when the shield is down. If they come up against an evil psychic it looks like, till we learn of more personnel, the team can probably be walked right through in the field and then maaaaybe the base easily compromised and perhaps also walked right through. You would think Dabbler would have warded the heck out of the base no matter what her feelings on people getting her stuff…
As long as we have spent this long introducing everything it might be nice to get a little peek or two at ARCLIGHT moving in to do their job, some glimpses of them interviewing somebody, checking for tampering (if they can… ) etc… Just this once. Then we will have a good idea of their personnel and methods so we will never have to see it in such detail again. But I suspect mutiny from some of the more action oriented audience if we went that route. *sigh*
Whoo, it is official. Under Klingon tradition, Arianna and Suzi News are an item!
Yeah but it’s nothing serious until one of the breaks a clavicle.
I have done that. And I had a great time, for the rest of day and the evening. Refusing to interrupt the enjoyment, to go to hospital, until festivities had run their course. Despite the broken bone sticking a good couple of inches above my shoulder height!
You are so right. Nothing says, “I am having a seriously good time” more than that.
nah, it just says that you were mind controlled to STAY at the event, either by someone else AT that event, or by someone mind controlling you BEFORE the event in enough of a fashion to make you want to ignore your good common sense to leave and go to a hospital for treatment…
Yes. Me.
Self-hypnosis is a useful technique for overcoming pain, and staving yourself from sliding into shock. I can still remember the feeling of blood withdrawing from my extremities and the skin going plaid and clammy. Plus the accompanying light headedness that warns of more to come. Until I did that.
You can also use it to drown out that niggling voice whining on about hospital.
Just the occasional reminder *that* it’s a thing.
I *think* the font I used for Max’s gravelly voice might not be the best for the size it appears in the comic.
Sorry, my Grammar Nazi senses were tingling. Love the comic, keep it up.
That’s not grammar it’s typos or auto-correct errors.
yeah, another Font-o-phobe saying one font is “better” than another font… :D it’s like the difference between an “enologist” and an “alcoholic” they both drink massive amounts of alcohol but one is socially acceptable but the other isn’t…
You are going to get a slap if you call your grandma a Nazi again!
Although we have had a commentator here who… mmm… ok forget I said that. You probably should look in on granny Hess though, she must be getting on a bit, and it is winter! Nice to know her senses are still keen at her age mind.
Vehemence wound his toys up and let them loose to watch the fun and add V energy to him. He could have juntas easily taken themon himself to begin with,but he liked the idea of chaos and to see what the ARCSquad’s powers were. The super villains were coerced into fighting and are legally innocent. It’s the old “The devil made me do it” defense.
It’s a good defense. Reasonable doubt – that’s all that’s needed. And there’s definitely reasonable doubt for EVERYONE except for Vehemence.
It takes actual proof of coercion to make an effective defense, you can’t just claim it and have it be a slam-dunk ‘oh well you said you were mind controlled, case dismissed!’. The prosecution goes ‘you attacked this group of government law enforcement agents at a restaurant here are the charges for that’, at which point you have to prove a defense that the charges are unwarranted. ‘He was mind-controlling us’ isn’t likely to rise to the level of reasonable doubt, not without a really gullible jury if all the defense is able to do is go ‘well he had a power that inspired everyone into mindless violence while active so I’m sure he must have had a subtle mind control power to make everyone come to this fight as well’ rather than present something on the actual proof end that he has such an ability.
+1
This is very much true. Also, see my comment earlier on this page and my lengthy ramble on the next page.
All that would be needed to convince the jury would be playing the videos showing the news crews fighting each other under V’s aggro aura. If that isn’t viable as reasonable doubt then everyone on the news crews needs to also be criminally charged with assault.
+1
Add to that:
1) The police were attacking each other too.
2) Archon will confirm that the aggro field does exist and was used (even if they request permission from the courts to keep the source secret). They will also confirm that super powers can be used in weakened versions. They do it themselves with many powers. (MEANS)
3) Vehemence can conjure up any power he feels like on demand. See his ‘ka-pants’ power for one example. (MEANS)
4) Vehemence was present from the outset. (OPPORTUNITY)
5) Vehemence boasted about feeding off of aggression. He gets more powerful, when he makes people aggressive. And has been seen to do that.(MOTIVE)
No, all that does is prove that mental coercion is a possible reason for irrational behavior. Given that not all of the attackers acted irrationally, that would be a hard sell to any jury provided the prosecution isn’t unconscious and drooling.
Thank you for conceding that doubt does exist, and that it is possible*
The contention is that the defendants are being influenced sufficiently that they have lost volition and were forced into being aggressive. Of which one, unusually pacifistic individual, has managed to overcome the aggressive tendencies. And several others broke free, but only with the aid of a force field cutting off the effect.
Yet, somehow you are offering as proof that this is not the case, the fact that most of them were behaving aggressively? If they are telling the truth then of course they were being aggressive! I am afraid your argument just does not make sense to disprove their claim.
You claim they are all anarchists, out to kill the police. One was a pacifist. Others turned to aid the police. Clearly that claim is discredited. It is the exceptions to the rule that show something was odd. You have failed to explain those exceptions, whereas we have.
Plausible doubt has been shown by the points I raise in my prior post. This is elevated to reasonable doubt by the presence of a pacifist hairdresser acting uncharacteristically aggressive. Further supported by formerly aggressive individuals reverting to peaceful behaviour, when broken free from the effect.
Most of the rest were unconscious when the force field cut off the effect (or were knocked out by the drugs kicking in again), so could not exhibit any change in behaviour, when liberated.
* I am not trying to exceed your statement and imply that possible = reasonable. But merely to point out that you are no longer saying that it is impossible.
I suppose it is possible that I have, at some point, made the contention that something was impossible; I find it unlikely and, I admit, I don’t feel like going back through the roughly 9 Robert-Jordan-epics worth of comments to find it if I did, but the usual contention I make is that I find something exceedingly unlikely. Further, I generally try to back that up with information that I have some form of knowledge of, or else I say that it is my opinion.
Now, I will point this out, by way of extending a point: many people have suggested that because both Budget Halo and Comb-man the Barberian started questioning their participation in the evening’s festivities, that it is evidence of mind control. Even if I were to accept that as true, I would also then have to accept that their ability to question (and also to thereafter resist) only proves that any mental control could not have been strong enough to fully absolve the participants of responsibility.
Only if they were still being subject to the mind control. They were not. Halo had blocked the effect with her force field in one instance. And in the other Hex had flown far enough away that she probably was out of the effect.
And the proof that both Comb-man and Hex were out of the area of effect is provided… where, exactly?
That’s the question that the prosecution is going to lead with and, frankly, given that Sydney didn’t even discover the existence of a “Aggro-Aura” until late into the fight is going to substantially limit her credibility, here.
I have never proposed that the hairdresser was outside of the radius. I contest that, as a pacifist he may simply have been better able to resist than an average person, or one who was significantly more aggressive than average. *
The agro aura has a definable radius. Halo saw it. If she can compare the edges (as best she can recall, or if she can find some way of looking it up again), then she can testify as to it’s extent, at that time.
Anybody outside the effect would have a harder time justifying any illegal actions. Whereas if Hex was beyond it, at the time she ceased merely evading, and turned to run, then we will have our proof. **
I will not be trying to match the locations myself though, as many of the trees and car parks in that area are generic. Such is the nature of these out of town complexes. And as verified by moving the previous scene, from the cratered car park, to the (presumably nearby) unblemished one above. There is little that could be used to determine one from another (for us as readers).
* Note that this theory holds together well. But I will post that separately, as the comment got too big with that in.
** Obviously she would not be looking to match the thought bubble, but that too would be confirmed, for us.
/continued
* Individuals who have gotten through Archon selection and training are likely to be people who are not unduly inclined to aggression (and Halo is an obvious anomaly that I will not pretend to deny). Although those, who might have issues, will have had training to help them contain it.
Plus Archon personnel were placed under strict orders to avoid lethal attacks where possible. And police training heavily emphasises the limitation to reasonable force only. So, the Archon side the equation, is that they would be less inclined to unprofessional attacks, even if very angry .
Whereas, if Vehemence’s comments can be taken at face value, and most of the villains (except the hairdresser), are indeed malcontents, anarchists and other anti-government types. In which case, they would be very much at the opposite end of the spectrum.
They would have extreme vulnerability to anger pushing them over the edge.
Finally, the pacifist hairdresser would have resistance. Peer pressure may be pushing him to carry on hanging around with his anarchist friends. But the anger is only enough to cloud his judgement in this area. But is not enough to push him into fighting, once he is reminded of common sense.
Showing videos that Vehemence may have somehow caused everyone to start mindlessly fighting one another isn’t going to prove anything with regards to trying to prove he could subtly mind control people into doing things against their desire like show up at a restaurant and attack a bunch of law enforcement personnel. If anything it would prove he CAN’T engage in such subtle control since we don’t see anyone displaying anything but undirected, out-of-control aggression. You’d have to be a seriously gullible jury or hate the military or something to go for letting someone off for some unproven and unprovable mental coercion.
So you think that Maxima cannot use her blast at less than nuke strength? That a flyer cannot fly less than full speed? That Dabbler cannot vary the dial on her (ALMOST IDENTICAL) mental powers?
You underestimate the defence if you think that with the abundance of examples of super powers being used, at less than maximum strength, that they cannot show a jury that such is anything less than common, easy to learn and wholly within credibility that an intelligent super villain can ‘pull his punch’ with his core power.
It could be a dry well. Indeed, if it’s a bottomless well, it would be dry. It would also be moot.
You can’t store something in a bottomless well, because you could never get it back
Sure you can! You just need to have an endless line attached to pull it up with.
Ooh ooh, welcome back! I missed you. Well, I have been away a while myself on holidays. So ahem, if you have been here all the time…
Hi, I’m back!
XD I’ve been here, but I haven’t been posting much. Crazy busy with going back to school, don’t always have time to read the comments.
that retrieval line itself doesn’t need to be endless.. there is nothing stating that the items stored there HAVE to be stored at the “BOTTOM”…
Actually, assuming a few things, a bottomless well would work just fine.
Assmptions: (1)a well is a tube drilled into the ground with water in it.
(2) We have some way of protecting the water from forces outside of the well.
A bottomless well would just be a tube drilled straight through the earth until you have a hole on either side (doesn’t even have to be perfectly through the middle, it would still work as long as you have two openings and a straight tube). Pour some water in and after some sloshing back and forth it will eventually settle in the approximate middle of the tube (the place where there is the most mass around it). Drop in your bucket (really long rope) and pull up your water.
No no, it would have to encircle a structure, such as a castle, to be a moat!
If it wasn’t a dry well you could be storing alcohol in it. And a bottomless well could still have every top in your wardrobe…
In. Not at the bottom.
I still say its fairly easily provable that up till the end they were NOT forced to fight. Especially if the cameras caught all that crap. The sudden HUGE change in who was fighting, how they were fighting, and everything else should show that clearly the aura wasnt active previously. The way everyone just STOPPED the exact instant the aura got blocked shows it has no long term effect. If they want to claim vehemence forced them to fight with spooky mind control powers, they have to prove it somehow.
The fly in the ointment might be how much of an ass vehemence wants to be. He could easily say, “Oh yeah, I TOTALLY mind controlled them into fighting the entire time. heh heh.” And watch as 30 super powered villains get set free, or he could do the opposite. “First of all, I didnt meet most of them face to face till after they all agreed to get together to fight, so no mind control possible there. Secondly,my aggro aura is VERY draining, I need lots of power to use it, and as miss scoville forced me to show, once it stopped forcing literally everyone around me to fight, I had to drop it because it was draining me big time. Thirdly, if I had mind control powers on tap, do you REALLY think I would still be here and not have walked away from the fight?”
Best Comment Yet. I vote for the second path. He could totally pull that off.
You touch on a very good point there.
Just because you are under the “influence” of someone else does not mean that they have taken away your ability for rational though and free will. Even if V did have an aura or some such up during the initial battle royal there are so many things speaking against it being tuned far enough up to “override” the individual “priorities” of all those affected.
Long term effect is not necessary. Vehemence could have been maintaining the aura, targeting the ‘villains’, from the beginning. He certainly was present from the outset.
The only one who will not be able to claim he was being affected is Shadow Boxer, because he was inside Halo’s field and still choosing to try to murder her. So your argument works well to ensure he will fry.
But the rest could have been under his influence continuously, right up until Halo cut the aura off.
That is assuming Vehemence can actively pick targets instead of it being an all hitting area of effect kind of deal, which is how it was shown in the comic.
Hairdresser guy is another case to show they were not under influence during the fighting, if he was he would not have taken the opportunity to surrender.
Many powers in fantasy and super hero games are targettable area of effect powers. You choose a centre point and everyone in a certain radius from there is affected. That is just one way it can be thought of, but works well here.
Another way is to assume that it radiates out from him. In which case the nearest to him get affected. As he was standing the far side of the ‘villains’ (seen very clearly in the first aerial shot, when Maxima flew out of the restaurant), they would be the ones bearing the brunt of the aggro aura.
Or it can be that he picks targets specifically. “All of the anarchists”, “Just Hex”, “Everybody”. His powers are clearly extremely adaptable, on demand. So which particular one he uses is not that important. There are a number of ways that he can affect one group of people and not another.
The same applies if it is just the degree of the power he affects. It may be that everybody is affected it to some degree, but he can crank up the intensity a group that he focusses on, in particular.
Turning to the hairdresser, from his manner, he was clearly a pacifist. He was relieved at not having to fight (and was clearly unsure about even the etiquette involved in a fight, so he was waaay outside of his comfort zone).
A pacifist is (if you give follow my line of reasoning) Vehemence’s nemesis. Somebody who has a degree of resistance to the aggro aura, because it is contrary to his nature. Although it was not enough initially.
The loss of volition was sufficient for him to engage the police, along side people obviously intending to kill him. However, after he was spoken to, his very pacifist nature, meant that it was absurdly easy to talk him back down from that point.
The hairdresser is the cornerstone of the defences argument. His behaviour is inexplicable, unless there is something like the aggro aura affecting him.
Seriously it is the most sensible explanation for his his behaviour. I am not just saying that to argue a point. I cannot see a convincing argument to explain what he was doing trying to kill cops one moment, then being relieved that it was not necessary, a moment later.*
* Let us agree to assume that Archon interview him, and find that he is as he appears to be. Ie a normal (albeit with super powers) hairdresser. Who does not have a hobby of killing cops. And is of sound mind. **
** Because ‘he is insane’ is an equally valid, real-world, explanation for such behaviour. But we must factor in that this is a story in a super hero genre, and DaveB is showing us the pertinent clues that we can pick up on. And that would just be a very unsatisfying option.
Besides which he is coming across as a nice, sympathetic character. Who is not wearing his underpants on his head, sticking a pencil in each ear, and saying “wibble”. I do not think Dave would be underplaying it, if he were insane!
It would be if people had been aware of all these powers long enough to have a good read on them. Maybe. A little. (supers… are like snowflakes… ) But they really don’t have much of a clue other than what specialists like ARC themselves tell them. (and ARC doesn’t know much about V besides what Dabbs can extrapolate from herself and Malumi demons) Basically in this case they don’t know if V has either A) Other powers LIKE this one or B) This exact power but it has a “dimmer switch” allowing him to use it subtly (either earlier in the fight or more likely at the original meeting) when he is low on juice.
“fly in the ointment”
IF I were Vehemence this might be something he could bargain with for whatever it is he thinks he can reasonably get out of them with a deal.
Oh good, legal problems, the joys of our system…
One question about panel one. The guy speaking to Max is ‘Boilerplate’ and the last time they met she nearly took his arm off. https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/1395.
1) How was he able to help in the big V takedown with a dislocated arm? It looks pretty good now.
2) Why doesn’t he get a Who’s Who mention, but Suzie who did not speak does?
1) he has superpowers. For all we know he has enhanced regeneration as part of his kit.
2) Only (officially) named characters appear in “who’s who”.
Actually Maxima dislocated his shoulder. As far as we know, she didn’t break anything
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/1395
It’s painfull, but doesn’t stop movement after popping it back in it’s socket.
If anything, it’d be the backslap she gave him after that that’d be a problem
1) Was he able to help in the big V takedown? I didn’t notice him there, blue hair got a panel or two but I didn’t see this dude.
2) I’m sure someone will one day make a Bropower comic which finally does right by all the interchangeable superpowered punchy dudes running around, but this one isn’t that. This one is about the ladies.
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/1583 Panel 5, on the other side of Sydney’s head from Amorphous.
https://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/1590 Panel 1, right in front off blue haired guy.
Doesn’t show much of how he helps or how much he helps but he is there helping.
We sailors have a saying: “Waterproof” means that once the water gets in, it can’t get out again.
…which is why sailors are so concerned about the “natural waterproofing” of their lungs…There’s oxygen diffused in water, but lungs can’t handle it that way.
I am actually thinking they are going to see how many of them they can recruit. I am sure they would love to have an on site Hair Dresser that can also help if the main office is attacked.
I would love to see him set up shop in the Arc shopping maul. It would be a nice way to show that most supers do not go around committing or fighting crime. And it would be a perfect slice of life to have him gossiping with the girls, as he does their hair. Plus it would be a nice contact point for them to get feedback for how things are going for supers in a normal life. Will he be feeling persecuted, for example.
Plus I like him. It is funny how he was relieved that he was not obliged to fight!
How about this: incarcerate the diehards, show leniency to those who helped at the end, fine everyone else, and make them sign away all merchandising rights. Oh and recruit the hairdresser.
Archon could totes use a super-barber. It can’t be easy to maintain these hairstyles.
Amen, at least contract his keister to come in for appointments and hair emergencies, that or get him to set up shop in Archon tower.
I didn’t know about the usage of calling a bucket for ammo a well as Uhl pointed out, but even without that, I think Sydney is missing the point in her hair splitting. Wells aren’t just someplace where a finite amount of water sits. They can run out in draught and whatnot, but they also refill (I guess from ground seepage or down to the water table). So the metaphor is actually about a place you can keep drawing whatever from. The most common image is water (but as pointed out, oil too), but the point of the metaphor is to replace literal water with whatever you want to pull out (or don’t want others- the media- to be able to continually pull out). The bottomless part just means that they can keep pulling as much as they want without having to wait for a refill.
2 comments on all this: Vehemence’s aggro aura seems to only incite violence. It doesn’t care who fights who, it just creates violence to up his power levels. Whether or not he was behind Opal and Ball-Bearing Boy getting all these punks together to attack ARC, all the “villains” chose to come of their own free will. Like getting invited to a rave or a flash mob. The guy’s argument that Halo said the aura made them do it is him trying to dodge responsibility for his decisions.
2: Don’t forget that in this world ARC is a part of the military and a federal level organisation. Attacking them lands you in military court, not civilian, with possible terrorist or patriot act charges.
We have loads of military who read this comic, I would be interested to get corroboration on that point. Should any of them have been in a position to know that, anyhow.
My understanding is that the military courts only have jurisdiction over military personnel. Civilians, even if they committed crimes against military personnel, still get tried by the regular legal system.* I certainly cannot remember any instance of seeing a verdict brought, against a civilian, in a military court.
* This excluding provision which might be made, under martial law, in war time, of course.
Terrorist trials in civilian court.
Special military terrorist tribunals.
For this bunch being declared terrorists would most likely land them in a civilian Federal court.
Thanks for that.
Disclaimer: I make the following comments to explain my thoughts only. Not to make judgement, nor provoke. And I could see myself falling into the same moral trap, had I been part of the administration, at the time the decisions were made.
I hope I would not, but I can see why the decisions were made. They had tough choices and came to equally tough conclusions. I am glad I was not in their shoes.
Actually I blanked out Guantanamo bay. I guess because I know that is a wrangle that was worked to both bypass international treaties on war criminals and the other legal alternative, namely domestic courts. It is such a perversion of justice that there was no thought association that would bring it to mind.
On your hidden comment. Couldn’t agree more. May have been a hard call. But that didn’t make it any more of a wrong call.
They actually got lucky with Indefinite Detention because under the Rules of War they were Illegal Combatants and could have been summarily tried and Executed.
The trouble with that is that many of them were civilians, never having had military training or affiliation previously, were detained in foreign countries, which were not in a state of war, and were kidnapped, without due process of extradition.
So, on various counts, they would not fall subject to the Rules of War. And it is just as well that they were not summarily executed, given how many have been shown to be not guilty!
That said, I appreciate there are counter arguments, which some folks may choose to raise. But Guantanamo Bay is being wound down. It may even be handed back to Cuba, if the reconciliation negotiations go that way.
As it is not particularly pertinent to the current issue in the comic (these being domestic criminals and not international terrorists), I suggest that we take the counter arguments as having been aired, unspoken, and that we agree to disagree.
I appreciate if anybody feels strongly enough that they choose to ignore this proposal. But I will bow out myself, regardless.
This is an issue where harmony is probably best served by consigning it to the history books.
The problem with “being declared a terrorist” has is that it’s been so broadly defined that literally anyone & everyone could be declared a terrorist…Including those very same people who defined it.
When people start speaking in Rules of War and such always makes me laugh…
Particularly when they try to use political correctness when addressing war…
MidnightDStroyer you are completely right.
You may go into a war with a sense of righteousness but, if you get really good at it you do became a mass murderer by definition, i.e, you murder in mass, doesn’t matter if back home everybody thinks you’re a hero.
Last war that I think could be broadly described as one side good, the other bad, was WW2.
Most wars, since dawn of time, fight for resources or basic stupidity!
Considering the hairdresser guy didn’t fight, its clear the aggro aura wasn’t up then.
Surely this means he’s the only innocent one here?
Actually, it only “proves” that the aggro aura, if present at all, wasn’t tuned up to such a level as to override your basic will. They may be able to argue that they went further than what they normally would do, but the choice of doing it in the first place was still their own to make.
I don’t know I’ve seen people do pretty wildly different things from what they normally would when on alcohol. Now if you somehow unknowingly slipped them the alcohol without them knowing it would be like this.
Easily provable with alcohol and drugs testing. Archon are immediately aware that these individuals are making a ‘of not sound mind’ defence. That should automatically trigger them to conduct such testing. We should assume that they get top-quality police training, and will not forget such a basic procedure.
Huh? I was comparing V’s weakened aura to the taking of a drug like alcohol? You can’t test for V’s aura’s influence after the fact. Well, not till Dabbs or someone figures it out yet. The test hasn’t been made.
With alcohol they can blame you for what you did because you decided to loose control by taking alcohol. (so I guess you are responsible for knowing what kind of Hyde you change into and taking steps… ) But if you are drugged without knowing it or against your will its another story. Its more like date rape drugs leading to sex or truth serums making you more likely to spill state secrets in which cases you are not responsible for the sex or treason and instead the person who forced or tricked you into taking them is the only criminal present.
It was a comparison. I wasn’t actually talking about alcohol or drug usage in the comic. Sorry for the confusion I guess.
Cool. Unintentional or not though, you had stumbled across a valid point. The police must do the tests I said. Otherwise the prosecution can wave away anomalous behaviour by claiming that they were drunk, or on drugs, and that Archon were incompetent in not checking for it.
Which would put Archon in a very bad light, and seriously undermine any argument that the hairdresser was influenced by the aura. If he was just drunk then that does explain it.
But I do note your comparisons, as a separate issue, and agree with them wholeheartedly.
It shows that the aggro aura did not totally subvert the willpower of everybody, all the time. But even if you have your judgement impaired, then you are not deemed to be fully compos mentis. Although it is possible that charges of ‘diminished responsibility’ might stick.
But the fact that police officers were attacking each other, under it’s influence, is a powerful argument that it’s effects can be considered too powerful to overcome, for some people. In which case, legally speaking, such individuals cannot be held to account for their actions. They were not acting under their own volition.
Or it proves that his idea of conflict may be all philosophical. He could be a pacifist that just came because there was some money to be made if he showed up and had powers.
Hah. What if they find out V handled this like a talent search audition for a reality show about supers?
EXCEPT:
take a look at what Dabbler did to Jabberwocky. She said that the effect lingered a long time. The supers up for criminal charges could simply state a similar thing had been done to them, so the fact that there was also (later) a rage aura with a definite beginning after the fight started, is simply moot.
Garn – this was a reply to Adrastos42, but the comment got orphaned somehow.
Happens
This “I was mind-controlled” idea has been floated in the comments for a while, and now becomes canon, but I’m not sure what reason there is to believe it. Yes,he had that aggro field, but that was late in the battle and only displayed after he powered up a lot. Also, everyone seemed to act mindlessly under its influence, which is not how they acted earlier.
When Vehemence talked about about setting the whole thing up, my recollection is that he sounded like he had just manipulated people, the way anyone might – he even talked about letting what’s-his-name think he’d come up with the idea himself.
Is there any in-comic foundation for the mind control theory?
We know he HAS acces to mind altering powers though, and canuse them to influence people into violence/aggression. It’s very possible that he used that to convince people to go in the first place. And there’s no way you can prove that he didn’t.
Making Vekter think it’s his idea would be easy by just influencing him into wanting violence, and than just ‘happening to mention’ targets/suggesting to ‘help’ him
The only thing we know is, when he has enough power, that he can create a mindless aggression field that causes everyone to fight whoever is the closest target that doesn’t have some kind of protection like Halo or Dabbler.
People are using too broad a definition of mind control it seems, trying to expand a limited ability that’s technically mind control and warp it into something expansive and subtle to absolve the bad guys of their crimes (other than Vehemence for obvious reasons and the guy that attacked Halo in her force field since obviously anyone who’d attack her clearly deserves death in the eyes of fans) even when they clearly are acting of their own free will.
You mistake our intent. I have no desire to see villains go free. However I can see an injustice could be perpetrated. If they were not acting under their own volition, then they are innocent. We speak as to the facts we see, which support that. And are not distorting things in an attempt to pervert the course of justice.
Should your arguments be of good enough quality, to convince us that there is no injustice, you would assuage our fears, and we would agree. To date, you have failed to do that.
Please do not mistake our motives.
Yea, I’m just here playing devil’s advocate. I love a good discussion
Mostly because “reasonable doubt”, but we do have one known instance of “I don’t even know what I’m doing here in the first place”
Meh, I have said the exact same thing after getting my ass kicked in call of duty multiplayer. Doesnt mean I was mind controlled into doing it. She just got stepped on like a freaking bug after showing herself utterly worthless in attacking maxima. Anyone would doubt their reasons for being there after that.
There are actually at least 2 instances. Both Hex and the Hairstylist guy had said, at least to themselves, why are they even here.
It’s still a very viable defense, and he’s already admitted that he manipulated the villains as well to get into this fight in the first place. It could just be that he did some power which was ‘not quite an aggro field’.
And honestly, in a criminal case, it would be more than enough to show reasonable doubt.
Right, manipulated as in ‘I talked them into it’, not ‘I mind-controlled them to make them do my bidding’. The guy’s power is centered around drawing power from violence and we’ve not seen anything subtle about it.
Ok, as you are fixated on that, let me try a different angle. The effects that we see (and Halo can with her orb) when mind powers is used can give us an indication of their complexity, when we study them.
Dabbler’s sleep spell is pretty simple. Both in use and the graphic (“Sava Lava Cuti”). It is a basic effect, with a simple purpose. As you are implying this the aggro aura is. The extreme subtlety of the “can’t see me” aura, used by Arc Light, has a significantly more intricate representation.
Now take a look at just how complex the aggro aura actually is.
Think of it this way… Dabbler’s hypnoboobs and beholder spell operate under similar principles. Dabbler has to actively push the later but the former is a side effect of her being around. Hypnoboobs is low cost, easy to use, and very effective. I would bet a malum or a malum-like super would have a comparable equivalent.
I find it funny that I had a character in a superpower game, Heroes Unlimited if I recall, where is job was pr and government handler. Finding ways to spin destruction and devastation was fun.
“Don’t think of it as a giant smoking crater where City Hall used to be. Think of it as a place for a brand new city park with a nice round lake in the middle!”
yep, that there is a FREE “urban renewal” project that’s finished Phase One: Remove the OLD… now you get to go to Phase TWO: REBUILD THE NEW!” it’s MUCH cheaper than having to go to bid for hiring some contractor construction/demolition company and sheesh! just think of all those building permits, and zoning exceptions that you would have gone through to get this far!… yep, much easier this way, ain’t it? :D
He he.
If they can’t prove to what degree the bad guys were mind controlled or just manipulated, maybe they will just get super-power community service.
That speedster would be great at picking up litter along the highway.
Or encouraging them to sign up in the Archon Reserves. Give the supers a reason to feel (and act) like they are the good guys, and most of them will play the part. Mr. Nose-Boop and friends are easily lead.
I can definitely see Hex being talked into joining Archon.
Also the guy who got his arm dislocated who helped with Vehemence. Not so much blue boy though – he’s just too dumb and easily manpulated.
Superpowered, dumb and easily manipulated are exactly who you want to make sure you have as low level team members. If they are not lead along by the good guys, then they will be lead along by the bad guys.
Oh, right…Just give him a pointy stick & let him run out on the open highway. Nice person to pick for a job like that!
:P
Dave,
For the past month or so I have been unable to zoom in properly on your comic when using Chrome. Now when I zoom (crtl+) everything on the page except the image of the comic gets bigger. I still love your work, but it’s harder for me to see the details or read the smaller word bubbles now.
I suspect that it is some other problem on your system, as I use Chrome, and have to zoom to 150% or I cannot make it out. I have no problems at all.
I just confirmed by zooming in all the way on the comic itself, just to make sure. Sorry that I can’t offer any suggestions on what the issue might actually be though, as I have not come across that before.
Of course you can store the ammunition in the well. The Russian army has been using non-resealable zinc-plated ammo boxes since the end of the 19th century at least (google “патронная цинка” for images), and it’s basically just a big tin can. Only it’s made of zinc (later, zinc-coated steel) and contains bullets instead of spam. It’s sealed at the factory, and until you open it, naturally it’s waterproof. During the WWII, it was rather common for partisans to trall rivers for ammo boxes that the Red Army dumped while retreating, or even for the Soviet Army itself, at the latter stages of the war, to recover that ammo after retaking the territory.
The re-sealing ammo containers appear to be NATO invention, although that I can’t confirm or refute this.
Well, won’t say I called it, because I thought it would be eminently logical considering the way the comic has been going that they would have this defence, and I’d have been dissapointed if it was not the case.
Totally called it though.
He he. Funnily put.
I like the wheels churning in the reporter’s head in that final frame… this could go one of 2 ways, depending on how smart Suzie is… Either she can sell out ARC with her coverage and try for a pulitzer, or she can help Arrianna spin this for minimal PR damage in exchange for exclusive coverage of ARChon..,.
Either way, she wins.
Just hoping ARC doesn’t go the ’embedded journalist’ route, though I don’t see why they wouldn’t try to.
‘We’ll allow you access, as long as its understood you will let us vet your articles before they are released? We know this can be seen as restricting the press, and we won’t force you to.. but if you aren’t comfortable with this, I’m sure we can find other news outlets that are.. and then they would be getting the access to these stories instead of your network’
It’d be a sweet gig for Suzie if she got it, not to mention all the Klingon sex she could ever want.
I would not want to see her embedded. I would want her to be given preferential access though. I love her to bits, and I bet she has a massive following herself. She is the intern turned top war correspondent in one day!
Plus Arianna will have to offer her some inducement to avoid any repercussions from attacking her. Hiro and Stalwart are not going to be suing each other. But Arianna was attacking a civilian (regardless that she was being attacked in return).
Ok, Suzie is not likely to try it on, as she will want to maintain a good relationship with Archon. But Arianna is smart enough, and a PR person to boot, not to leave it to chance.
Plus Suzie and Sydney have a strong connection. They were both present at the moment that they went from their normal, mundane, lives, to being propelled to the tops of their suddenly new profession, and being in the spotlight of world-wide media coverage.
Suzie is as much a news story as Sydney. Even other networks will be clamouring to interview her.
Suzie was right there at the start. She is the only reporter who got Max to speak unscripted. (Barring her demonstration at the news conference.) She was cheering the other members of ArcSWAT at the demonstration. And talking to Sydney, who is now a bonafide hero. Her pro-hero stance, although slanted, is not going to harm things because it is obvious. Arianna couldn’t have a better ally in the press if she had planted her.
i think that was what DLKMusic was alluding to, that if Arianna DOESN’T play nice with her, then she COULD turn her biggest ally/pro-supers newshound into one of her worst antagonists on the news front… and that would be … not good… to say the least…
…not good…. You have a gift for the understatement, lol
With the caveat of “I Am Not A Lawyer”:
I would contend that the point at which these guys were no longer responsible for their actions was the point at which they could no longer distinguish ally from adversary. While I suppose it could be argued that the threshold might be higher, say, at the point where they continued to attack despite having endured a level of punishment that diminished their capacity for harm by 50%, it does not matter in this case, as most of them dropped from well above 50% to unconscious (or nearly there) through a single strike.
The basis for culpability for these guys is not solely the fact that they participated in the fight, but the fact that they first gathered and then traveled to do so, as a group, and then engaged in violence. This is equivalent to the difference between first and second degree murder, or between murder and manslaughter, and analogous to the difference between possession-of-a-controlled-substance and possession-with-intent-to-sell (except that the delineation here is actually clearer than the arbitrary threshold of quantity).
Even then, many of the didn’t join the fray immediately. A few of them stood back and threw ranged attacks from the sidelines. Death Toll actually waited until most of the attacking party had already fallen; had he walked away at that point instead of engaging, he would have had the argument of having followed the others merely to observe. The fact is that he did wait before engaging, and that he then engaged in monologuing prior to engaging in violence. This is not the behavior of someone who is compelled to engage in mindless violence, and puts paid to any argument that others might make with regard to compulsion. Other members of the attacking party actually started the process of evacuation, a willful attempt to escape, once things weren’t going their way, and nearly succeeded. This also is not the act of someone who is compelled to engage in mindless violence, and further confounds any argument that compulsion was their only impetus.
In the end, they should all indeed be arrested, charged with conspiracy-to-commit in addition to assault-and-battery and resisting arrest, with additional charges on an individual basis for unique acts they may have committed or devices they may have used. They should be tried as a group (with those who plead out and _possibly_ Vehemence as the only exceptions), but with verdicts for at least some charges to be determined on an individual basis, and sentences also handed down on an individual basis.
Oddly Americans have the right to public assembly and are even free to protest. So even if they conspired to travel to this location, and join in an anarchist demonstration, against the oppressive formation of a super-police state, they are legally entitled to do so.
Maxima is awaiting evidence as to whether they did more than that. Until we have that, speculation is moot. And she is perfectly correct in not charging them until there is proof. If such is forthcoming. If the claims made by the two guys above (and the thought bubble of Hex) are true, then there will not be any evidence of criminal intent.
Once assembled the agro aura could have been used against them. Turning them from peaceful anarchists, to cop hating ones, willing to kill. We know that Vehemence was weak to start, so it is no stretch to see why many may have been holding back and less aggressive to begin with.
I agree that V could have used a weaker (not able to create the level of rage displayed later?) at the start when all the supers where at the restaurant and the first jump in would easily be someone that got his version of xurials vamping trick used on jaber, but something kept them from infighting until it was pumped up other than lack of time, that was obviously themselves as DT was overly desperate for them to attack and trigger his power but recognized he needed to be attacked first. I would rate this a mitigating circumstance granting reduced guilt and sentence but not absolution for crimes done.
As Arianna pointed out, this isn’t just a matter of the law, there is also PR here, which is just as important, if not moreso than strict Adherence to Criminal procedure.
You can make a strong case against certain individuals in the attack (Vehemence and Deathtoll being on the top of that list), but to let the bulk of them walk, if handled right, would be the best thing they could do for public relations. Most of these Supers have no criminal record, and were up to this point normal everyday people to those that knew them, and for the most part, really aren’t a threat to society as a whole. The last thing Archon needs is a “Gestapo” tag, and a little lenience here will go a long way to keep that from happening. PROVIDED Arianna spins it right (with hopefully a little help from Suzie).
Caveat of my own, I’m not a Lawyer either, but I would like to think I have a fair amount of common sense.
Yay Barberian!
I move to have his name officially changed to Comb-man the Barberian.
No, he does not get a say, nor is he allowed to object. We have, after all, a P.R. department and he doesn’t, even if our P.R. department was just recently given a black eye (literally).
“Comb-man the Barberian”…LOL
I saw that in a previous comment, but it was already a looong nested thread, so I’ll give you the +1 for it here.
:)
Maybe just ‘Comb the Barberian’
I feel like it’s better that way
It’s easier to write that way, but it lacks the appropriate synchronicity with popular culture.
As for someone or something giving them a prior compulsion or geas to come and participate, that falls into more general mind-control, but anything lasting would leave traces that could be identified by someone who knows what to look for… and clearly Dabbler knows what to look for.
Under those circumstances, I would argue then that such influence actually changes their identity, and that the person they became after the compulsion or geas was applied is still culpable for their actions; the difference is that the source of the compulsion or geas is responsible in addition, not in place of, those who committed the acts. On the other hand, if the effects of such external control could be identified and removed, then the affected individual would become a different person from the one who committed the acts. Then and only then could they be absolved of culpability.
As long as no one is sentenced to death or mutilation (and mutilation is not a permitted sentence in the U.S.), all someone who was externally controlled would lose, if that control is removed and they revert to being someone who is not culpable, is time. Again, this likely falls to Dabbler to resolve, but I suspect that at her hands, such resolution would be relatively swift, so that anyone who is indeed under such control could be absolved well prior to facing trial.
You make interesting arguments. Clearly they relate only to situations where complete control has been taken over individuals. The grey ground where judgement is impaired, such as with drink and alcohol, is another matter.
But you make a thoughtful proposition, that would bear examination by a society thrust into issues of mind control and similar.
Certainly, legally speaking, nobody is held accountable for actions that they take whilst they are not acting under their own volition.
Actually, that’s not strictly true- you bring up the example of intoxication; someone who is under the influence of drugs or alcohol is considered responsible for their actions, even if they are significantly impaired. On the other hand, they may get a bye if it can be proven that they did not voluntarily submit to the mind-altering substance(s) they were impaired by. Note, though, that the burden of proof in that case really is on the defense and not the prosecution…
Actually I was excluding drink and alcohol from my statement. But agree that those taking such are held accountable. On the grounds that they did so knowingly. Hence if it is given to them superstitiously they are deemed innocent. Their volition had been subverted, without their knowledge.
Clearly the legal point we were enlightened with in the discussions under the previous comic would come into play in such instances. The defence would need provide reasonable proof that the defendant would not normally consent to such.
If they had a past history of refusing any drinks or drugs, under similar circumstances, say at parties, this would stand them in good stead. Once they have done that to the degree that the jury would find reasonable, it would then be up to the prosecution to offer proof, beyond reasonable doubt, to the contrary.
If the individual had a past history of drink and drugs abuse, then they have a very poor case, and had better get a good lawyer, if they really were slipped a mickey.
Actually, a person under the influence of alcohol or drugs is only considered responsible for certain actions, while they are considered legally incapable of being responsible for others. In many states, a certain level of intoxication is considered to be lacking capacity for consent. Thus, they could engage in the actions for which consent is theoretically supposed to be required, could potentially use force to impose such activities on another… but if that other is not also intoxicated, the person who is is legally the victim.
I’m fairly certain that if I were to get myself drunk off my butt and then force myself on my roommate (who is not a drinker), she would not be found guilty of rape and my diminished responsibility (so that I could avoid being charged) would hold just about as much water as a mug knit out of wire screens. Maybe that’s just in Nevada, though.
More like Spin Level: Cult Leader, good luck Arianna, yer gonna need it.
Also, it keeps bugging me, why are Max’s speech bubbles different from everybody else’s? Is it because of her busted nose or is it a artistic decision on Dave’s part? To make less “human”?
Vehemence spent several minutes trying to crush Maxima’s throat. She’s gone hoarse from it, which is why her speech font is different.
She got strangled by V, so she’s hoarse. He says it’ll clear up in a panel or two.
Arianna saves the day by arresting herself along with the enemy supers.
She’s not getting out of it that easy.
I wonder if this is the setup for ARC-Light to have its moment in the spotlight. It isn’t exactly “Mind Control Juice in the Water Supply”, but this would seem like an ideal time for us to cut back to them.
Going by DaveB‘s comments above, I suspect that he is simply addressing the glaring issues, then will move things more to the day to day life of the protagonists. Leaving us to be aware that the above issues are being dealt with, in the background.
Although it is interesting discussing such issues, I do not see too much fun to be had following the court-room stuff, or investigations by Arc-Light, into the circumstances. There are a heck of a lot more exiting things that super spies can get up to.
We do know that Dave is not planning on focusing on Arc-Light, from a comment that he made. As in there could be crossover if one of the protagonists needs to assist them for some reason. So we would be able to get a view into their operations, from her view point. But only for as long as that individual is with them.
The good news is that Dave also mentioned that he was toying with an Arc-light spin-off, someday. So you may well see more of Jonathan Creek. Hopefully under a different non-copyright, name, of course.
I think the clean up and legal stuff will be going on for a long time. Surely there will be moments where someone just got back from helping with an investigation or later on testifying and we may get some highlights and jokes from quick flashbacks ever so often. Sydney on the stand would be interesting…
…Hopefully, they won’t keep her on the stand so long that her meds wear off again, while she’s giving testimony. Stuff like this really tend to drag out f–o–r–e–v–e–r–
Or she tries to give an improvised “demonstration” to illustrate her point and takes out some railing or a table.