The legality of superhero movies

[WolfThomas]

So yeah, him and this Russian guy come up with this plan for the arc reactor, which could potentially revolutionise the world of technology; think of all the stuff that would be possible with such a small, powerful reactor. The Russian guy suggests selling it, as you would expect someone to do when they've created something amazing and want to simultaneously distribute it and live like kings. But Mr. Stark doesn't think this is diabolical enough, so he has the Russian guy deported to the USSR. I don't know if you've read up on your history, but the USSR wasn't big on people who'd spent ten years developing technologies for the Americans. So Mr. Stark then keeps the true plans for the arc reactor secret, presumably so that he can create a dynasty through having a monopoly over the technology while the Russian guy rots in a Siberian gulag.

Yeah that something I noticed the first time I watched it, but it's makes sense given what happened in Captain America. The arc reactor technology appears to be similar to that of the tesseract/cosmic-cube powered weapons, and is possibly a human attempt to reverse engineer/replicate it. Howard Stark would know how close the world came to being obliterated because of the tesseract and might have been reluctant to see a similar technology fall into the wrong hands.

The Cube and reactor designs might have also been SSR/S.H.I.E.L.D. (founded by Stark) property and Vanko's father may have been less than legal in his attempts to make a profit from it. Deporting Vanko may have been the only option at the time. He seemed to want to keep it in his family not because of the potential profits but more the burden and responsibility of using the technology to protect the earth when the time comes from external threats. We never really see his point of view except briefly on the recordings.

Also the real idiots are the Russians who never got Vanko's father to try and replicate any of the stuff he must have seen.

Creating and using unlicensened weaponry containing high explosives in itself is a felony. And he was doing it after having quit as a weapons designer for the U.S. so it was illegal.

The suit isn't a weapon, it's a high tech prosthesis, and those aren't blasters, they're flight stabilizers. And those tanks missiles and shoulder guns are...hmmm got me there.

 

[boyvirgo666]

He didnt make them while committing a crime. i know about this law but it doesnt apply here. It -might- have applied though when he broke into a warzone.

Creating and using unlicensened weaponry containing high explosives in itself is a felony. And he was doing it after having quit as a weapons designer for the U.S. so it was illegal.

Nothing he had seemed to have high explosives. Even those darts werent explosive from the looks of it. Also just because he quit doesnt mean his contract was gone nor his permits.

 

[Kyrian007]

He didnt make them while committing a crime. i know about this law but it doesnt apply here. It -might- have applied though when he broke into a warzone.

Creating and using unlicensened weaponry containing high explosives in itself is a felony. And he was doing it after having quit as a weapons designer for the U.S. so it was illegal.

Nothing he had seemed to have high explosives. Even those darts werent explosive from the looks of it. Also just because he quit doesnt mean his contract was gone nor his permits.

He fragged a tank with a missile. That takes high explosives. Felony, seized assets, easily possible no matter what type of "permit" he has. It is a huge suspension of disbelief to imagine that the Government would hand out a permit to develop AND manufacture armed mobile battlesuits in an area zoned as residential. And not revoke those "permits" the very second he stops selling weapons.

 

[jawakiller]

Real life example:

Ever try and take a man's gun? Shit goes down and somebody winds up dead...

Legality means jack-shit.

 

[WanderingFool]

The real problem most governments would have regarding superpowers is how to take them away. Stark can make another Iron Man suit, and his first is undoubtedly safeguarded against theft. Then, not only is the government left with a useless metal suit, but they have an angry supergenius with backup suits just ready to take his baby back. Oh, and then maybe become a major problem. Never make a superhero into a supervillain. It's bad for business (unless you're in construction, then it's great!).

Thats my thoughts. If they could take the suit using some obscure law, Tony would just make it "Not Work". Leaving them with scrap. Plus, whats to say Tony wont just up and go to another country that would welcome him (and his weapon construction genius) with open arms. And than what will the US do? Launch an invasion of said country to bring one man back? There may be some stupid people in Washington, but there is no... okay, nvm, but the point is is that while the US government could sure as hel find a way to take the suit from Tony, its only able to be used by Tony (well, there is also Brody, but forget him for now).

He fragged a tank with a missile. That takes high explosives.

Actually, that "missile" could very well have just been designed to be a device that creats small amount of focused, non-explosion, heat. He could have aimed it at the tank's shell magazine, causing the tank rounds to explode.

Felony, seized assets, easily possible no matter what type of "permit" he has. It is a huge suspension of disbelief to imagine that the Government would hand out a permit to develop AND manufacture armed mobile battlesuits in an area zoned as residential. And not revoke those "permits" the very second he stops selling weapons.

Oh... and the obvious, "this is the Marvel universe government, which is ran by incompetent morons. Thus why they need superheros to begin with." comment.

 

[Savagezion]

To keep on the Iron Man topic:

Well, the canon for the Avengers now has Tony Stark being born to at least a 50 year old. All through Captain America this bothered me. It is 1943 and we will give the movies the benfit of the doubt and say that Howard stark is only 20. (Although he looks about 30) Tony Stark is in his mid-late 30s in the Iron Man movies which take place today. So counting backwards (2008) makes him born in 1978 if he is merely 30. That is 35 more years onto Howard Stark we said was 20. SO Tony was born when Howard Stark was 55 and that is me stretching as hard as I can to make it work. Honestly, Howard Stark looks 28-30 and Tony IS 35-38. But if you tack those on, Howard is like 70 years old when Tony is born.

 

[WolfThomas]

Well, the canon for the Avengers now has Tony Stark being born to at least a 50 year old. All through Captain America this bothered me. It is 1943 and we will give the movies the benfit of the doubt and say that Howard stark is only 20. (Although he looks about 30) Tony Stark is in his mid-late 30s in the Iron Man movies which take place today. So counting backwards (2008) makes him born in 1978 if he is merely 30. That is 35 more years onto Howard Stark we said was 20. SO Tony was born when Howard Stark was 55 and that is me stretching as hard as I can to make it work. Honestly, Howard Stark looks 28-30 and Tony IS 35-38. But if you tack those on, Howard is like 70 years old when Tony is born.

Well male fertility doesn't decline as sharply as female's and Howard was rich, smart and charming so it's not impossible for him to marry a much younger women when 55-70. That or he was using an experimental infinity formula (possibly derived from Captain's blood) like Nick Fury has in the comics to keep himself young.

 

[rekabdarb]

You are not allowed to posses unregistered weapons, if the government deems it a weapon(which the Iron Man suit obviously was) then yes they can take all of his shit away, and not just one suit but all of them and the entire project data.
In reality Stark would be cleaned out, then charged with god knows howmany violations of federal law and all that money would be just enough to keep him out of jail.

But Supermans disguise is always a hilarious one, I guess people in that world are just really bad with faces

Super man is psychic. He doesn't even realize it, but he is. Whenever he changes, he makes everyone else see something different. Also he wears clothes 2 sizes 2 big and changes his voice.

 

[Bravo 21]

What I want to know is how superpowered aliens like Superman come to concern themselves with petty laws. Aren't they more or less above humanity's jurisdiction? You don't need to drop anyone in jail, Supes. Just hurl them into the goddamn sun...

As i recall, Collegehumour made a short about this, where for reasons unexplained, superman makes his way into the dark knight, and promptly throws the joker into orbit, here is the video

 

[vxicepickxv]

He didnt make them while committing a crime. i know about this law but it doesnt apply here. It -might- have applied though when he broke into a warzone.

Creating and using unlicensened weaponry containing high explosives in itself is a felony. And he was doing it after having quit as a weapons designer for the U.S. so it was illegal.

Individuals can get their own class VI demolitions and explosives licenses. They don't need to be part of a company.

Of course, if you did want to nail him on something, I would go with violation of international airspace, unlawful entry into a no-fly zone. Now he's a criminal. Now that he's a criminal, the US Government can legally seize all of his assets.

 

[Anthony Wells]

But just imagine them TRYING to take his stuff...he wouldnt want to hurt innocents but...honestly do you think they could do a single thing to actually stop him if he got in one of his suits?

 

[boyvirgo666]

I was watching Iron Man 2 and I'm one of those anal retentive idiots that looks at how that would work in real life. Now avoiding the 'the government will do whatever they want regardless of the law' thing I'd like to see people opinions on the Senate Arm's Hearing.

The summary with spoilers:
The Senate wants to take the Iron Man suit, Tony Stark will not give them up. Now i know that legally they cannot take the suit unless there is a law making the suit itself illegal in some way(which woudnt be easy to pass unless they were mass developed). Anyone else see moments like this and have to laugh at the rather silly points in movies? I like to talk about those moments.

So what do you guys think about the Senate stealing Iron man?

bonus question: anyone got any other movies they can pick apart for the fun of it?

Iron man has cutting edge particle lazer technologies.....And fucking mini missiles. WHich I'm sure are illegal to own. While the government can't ask for the suit, they can demand it be dismantled, the ammunition production halted, and said ammo destroyed/handed over.

Ok yeah this one i can agree with. A forced Dismantling is much more sane.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

I think it's hardly a case of big government and more a case of good strategy. Still, I find it hard to believe that he didn't break some kind of law. We may have the second amendment in the states but it only goes so far. After a certain grade of weapon it's illegal for a civilian to own it, and despite what Stark industries typically makes Tony is still a civillian and the Iron Man suit is far beyond what would be considered a weapon which can be legally owned by a civilian. Plus there's the whole vigilante thing though frankly, like in the case of Batman, who's gonna stop him?

The army in the hearing were using this exact argument of the suit being an illegal weapon, and Tonies defence was that it wasn't technically a weapon, it was a suit, so he could legally own it. I remember that being a major part of the Armies reasoning for confiscating his suit, but Tony managed to successfully claim his Iron Man suit to not be a weapon, so he kept it.

 

[fulano]

The government was within its full rights to seize Stark's suit. Why? because Tony Stark is personally staging illegal armed interventions on foreign soil using a cutting edge piece of weapons' technology. That's why.

It's like complaining that the government just took your nuke away.

 

[Nieroshai]

I feel the Christopher Nolan Batman movies portray a fairly realistic depiction of "don't ask, don't tell" in relation to vigilante-types. He's cleaning up the streets. What he's doing is illegal, but when the city and police department are corrupt enough, you can let that slide just a little bit. And then at the end of The Dark Knight they start hunting Batman, anyway.

What I want to know is how superpowered aliens like Superman come to concern themselves with petty laws. Aren't they more or less above humanity's jurisdiction? You don't need to drop anyone in jail, Supes. Just hurl them into the goddamn sun...

Granting, of course, that Superman was raised human by loving, down-to-earth adoptive parents who respected the law. You seem to take Clark Kent out of the equation when describing Superman. Just like every time Frank Miller has tried to do DC instead of his own stuff.

 

[CODE-D]

Thor has a big ass hammer that weighs a ton and commands lightning, bruce banner changes into a green hulking mass and can revert back to human form and cyclops shoots force(lasers) out of his skull.

Marvel is silly.

All I need is batman anyway.

 

[Veylon]

Plus, whats to say Tony wont just up and go to another country that would welcome him (and his weapon construction genius) with open arms.

I would love to see a superhero, or any character for that matter, use that threat. It's a pretty obvious and simple one, yet they all act as if the U.S. is the only country in the world.

In fact, they could segue straight from the hearing room to Tony unpacking his bags in Paris or wherever and complaining about the food.

 

[maxcarrion]

lol, if Tony Start has just moved from the US to Paris why on earth would he be complaining about the food? "What is this? where is the grissle and pink slime in this meat? What is this strange "flavorsome" sensation in my mouth?"

As a little sidenote I'm imagining Spiderman moving to Paris and realising his mistake as he can now only fight crime within 10 yards of the eiffel tower as there aren't enough skyscrapers