Is Super-Heroism Possible?

[sabetoonth]

know your role jabroni

 

[Thundarr]

I thought I'd bump this thread because it's a pretty interesting topic.

 

[Thundarr]

I've noticed that it has been mentioned several times on this thread that superpowers or not, a masked vigilante would likely patrol the streets and do very little crime fighting. I think these posters are of the thought process that the masked vigilantes would only go after the violent criminals (muggers and rapists and such).

Depending on where you live, where you decide to patrol, and what crimes you're willing to fight, you could have a very busy life as a superhero. For example, I live in Vancouver BC, Canada. Our downtown east side is one of the worst criminally infested places in North America, statistically speaking. While violent rapes and muggings might not be daily occurances there, there are various other crimes taking place constantly. The corner of Main Street and East Hastings is a virtual supermarket for cheap illegal narcotics (primarile crack cocaine and crystal meth, though others are likely available as well). The police seem to be capable of doing very little to clean this area up. I've often thought that if you really wanted to put a dent in the local drug trade, what you would need to do is set up an M-60 on a rooftop across the street and then straif the entire corner at its busiest time (around midnight).
Of course, to be more of a Batman type, rather than gunning them all down you could beat the ever loving tar out of them. Not necessarily on that street corner, but there are plenty of dealers scattered throughout that neighborhood that could use a good pounding. Let the word out that someone's gunning for the local drug pushers. Make them scared to leave their roach motels at night. Then maybe you'll notice a difference in the neighborhood.

 

[Mysterioman]

I think X-Men Noir and Mark of Cain proves that you do not need superpowers to pull off heroics. Take Nightcrawler for example. An acrobatic with an intimidating devil mask. Storm was a thief who was very agile and dual wielded knifes. Wolverine did not really have claws, but had inserts that he carried around. Colossus was giant and very tough, and so on.

 

[Thundarr]

There are real life superheroes. Check out www.reallifesuperheroes.org.

 

[Robin's Holyisms]

Is it possible or not?

Well there is a guy who runs an unnamed comic book store by day. But at night he becomes the superhero known as Phoenix Jones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Jones

 

[X-Woman]

What an interesting thread. I read practically the whole thing. It's a fascinating topic, and I wanted to share some thoughts.

Some posters here were saying that if someone had a superpower, he would use it for evil purposes. I think that sometimes that's true, but not always. Some people get the warm fuzzies when they do good deeds, like rescuing others from danger, or defeating crooks. It's an ego booster. That's why some people really do try to be superheroes. They wear a costume, looking for crime, and sometimes they get beat up, but they still keep on with it. It's because doing good deeds can be gratifying.

As far as whether or not superheroism is possible, I would say it's not, unless a person genuinely has superpowers. But since superpowers are hard to come by, I'll talk about non-powered superheroes; there's a lot of them around. But non-powered superheroes usually have something else that makes up for the lack of superpowers. It's usually a super-budget. Batman's money lets him create super technology. Same for Iron Man, and even The Green Hornet. These guys have a lot of money. They are also incredibly smart.

Trouble is, in the real world, the kind of people who have the budget needed to be a superhero don't have the personality to do it. Can you picture Bill Gates going out and pummeling people with his bare hands? Neither can I. How about Donald Trump? No way he would be out fighting crime. It would mess up his hair.

The kind of people who have the budget to be a superhero are more likely to have bodyguards to protect them from trouble than they are to go out and look for it. People who are worth a ton of money aren't likely to put themselves in danger.

Some non-powered superheroes, with or without a budget, rely a lot on martial arts. But I think that the effectiveness of martial arts is greatly exaggerated. I just can't picture one guy by himself taking on a dozen opponents at once. And what happens, by the way, when the bad guys know martial arts, too?

The only person I can think of who might have been capable of superheroism on some level is Howard Hughes. He had the budget, the brains, and the daring. Other than that, I can't think of any human being who could do it. I know that there are many noble individuals who try, but I don't think any of them have genuinely succeeded at anything beyond putting together a costume and getting their nose broken, like Phoenix Jones (I've seen him on CNN).

 

[Thundarr]

Judging from what I've read online about real life superheroes, they seem to be a strange blend of The Salvation Army, The Guardian Angels, and Mexican Luchadores. They dress up in colourful tights and masks (like the Mexican Luchadores). Then they go out and hand food, warm clothing, blankets, and such out to the homeless (like the Salvation Army). And they patrol their neighborhoods and run off the drug dealers and crack****es (like The Guardian Angels). Or at the very least, observe and report (like security guards).


So is superheroism possible? Yes. Is it a good idea? Only if you've developed your very own Justice League/Avengers/Mystery Men type super team. Otherwise you're very likely to get your ass kicked, if not killed.

 

[X-Woman]

I think it would be hard for a normal human being to be a superhero, although I do think it's possible for a normal human to be a supervillain. I say this because there's someone who I feel really qualifies as a supervillain. Osama bin Laden.

On 9/11/2001, when the Twin Towers were attacked, a lot of people I knew said that it was "like something out of a movie." In other words, it was spectacular enough, and sensational enough, to go beyond what normally happens in the real world. It was like something that only happens in a work of fiction, or in someone's imagination. It was effectively a supercrime. A super act of violence. A super act of villainy.

And anyone responsible for an act of super-villainy qualifies as a supervillain. Supervillains stage supercrimes. Osama bin Laden did it.

And the reason he hasn't been caught is because we don't have a superhero to do it!!!!

 

[Thundarr]

I think it would be hard for a normal human being to be a superhero, although I do think it's possible for a normal human to be a supervillain. I say this because there's someone who I feel really qualifies as a supervillain. Osama bin Laden.

On 9/11/2001, when the Twin Towers were attacked, a lot of people I knew said that it was "like something out of a movie." In other words, it was spectacular enough, and sensational enough, to go beyond what normally happens in the real world. It was like something that only happens in a work of fiction, or in someone's imagination. It was effectively a supercrime. A super act of violence. A super act of villainy.

And anyone responsible for an act of super-villainy qualifies as a supervillain. Supervillains stage supercrimes. Osama bin Laden did it.

And the reason he hasn't been caught is because we don't have a superhero to do it!!!!

Being a villain is easy. Being a hero is tough. That's why there are so few of them out there. And I don't just mean the ones in flashy tights and masks. Police officers and fire fighters are often over worked and under paid, and there are too few people willing to face a loaded gun or run into a burning building to relieve them.

If I had the financial means, and cart blanche to use any means necessary, I could find Bin Ladin within a year. You just have to be willing to endure a lot of collateral damage.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

Costumed vigilantism is so impractical for the aimed goal that you'd have a hard time doing much of anything with it. Take, for instance, Batman's extensive investigative and forensic knowledge. In the comics, both of these things are treated like magic, as if there are people out there who, if they mull over a crime scene long enough, will pull an assailants name out of their a**. That's not really have forensics and investigations work. How many "sworn statements" do you think Batman would get from credible eye witnesses while conducting an investigation? Would Batman be able to send DNA and blood samples off to be tested just like the cops would've done? You know what happens when you take a DNA sample home and put it under a microscope? You say to yourself "huh? so that's what DNA looks like up close". Batman's little lab, as it's depicted in the movies and comics would literally tell him nothing. You can only match things like hair, blood and semen if you have that sample on file, or if you already had an idea of who the culprit was. Forensic scientists never look at a sample of semen and go "Oh yeah, this is John's semen! Hey someone go find John!".

Fighting would be another overrated aspect of Batman's abilities. In the real world fighting is certainly an excellent way to improve your reflexes, but without an equalizer (i.e. like a gun) you'd be at a consistent disadvantage with street fights, especially with more than one attacker. However as The Question smartly pointed out, you'd probably rarely be in a scenario where fighting hand to hand would be essential. Guns are quicker at resolving disputes anyways. Furthermore, fighting is incredibly physically tasking, and if it was as common as it's depicted in the comic world, our hypothetical superhero would suffer burnout in a rather short period of time.

The other problem really is finding crime to fight. I live in a pretty ghettofied area and not much happens on the streets. A little under a block from my house someone was shot fairly recently, next door we had a very minor breaking and entering, and once I had some crack addict shouting obscenities on my porch. Outside of the crack addict, the other two crimes I know about through hearsay. In the comics, all this 'crime' creates this bleak, uncaring world, where little John Blake can't walk home without Joker stealing his report card (that really happened). In the real world crime doesn't have the profound ripple effects, and generally if you keep your head straight in a neighborhood like mine the locals won't bother you. Serial Killers in the real world are far more rare than comics lead the reader to believe, they also are much stupider. Even the mafia, which you'd think would be a more credible target, is nothing like what is depicted in the comics.

For the most part criminals are not truly "evil" individuals, who if left unchecked would form a Legion of Doom. Even Batman Begins line about Bruce understanding that crime has a lot of gray areas underscored the fact that the comic book movie still included all the cartoonish, mustache twirling villains you need to give the superhero a target. Those kinds of people don't exist in great number, and a lot of people with wacky personalities don't pose an overwhelming danger to society. Charlie Sheen reminds me a bit of a Batman-ish villain.

 

[Endeavor]

Charlie Sheen reminds me a bit of a Batman-ish villain.

LOL!!

Well thought-out post. And that last line.. Classic! hahaha

 

[dusk20]

Costumed vigilantism is so impractical for the aimed goal that you'd have a hard time doing much of anything with it. Take, for instance, Batman's extensive investigative and forensic knowledge. In the comics, both of these things are treated like magic, as if there are people out there who, if they mull over a crime scene long enough, will pull an assailants name out of their a**. That's not really have forensics and investigations work. How many "sworn statements" do you think Batman would get from credible eye witnesses while conducting an investigation? Would Batman be able to send DNA and blood samples off to be tested just like the cops would've done? You know what happens when you take a DNA sample home and put it under a microscope? You say to yourself "huh? so that's what DNA looks like up close". Batman's little lab, as it's depicted in the movies and comics would literally tell him nothing. You can only match things like hair, blood and semen if you have that sample on file, or if you already had an idea of who the culprit was. Forensic scientists never look at a sample of semen and go "Oh yeah, this is John's semen! Hey someone go find John!".

Fighting would be another overrated aspect of Batman's abilities. In the real world fighting is certainly an excellent way to improve your reflexes, but without an equalizer (i.e. like a gun) you'd be at a consistent disadvantage with street fights, especially with more than one attacker. However as The Question smartly pointed out, you'd probably rarely be in a scenario where fighting hand to hand would be essential. Guns are quicker at resolving disputes anyways. Furthermore, fighting is incredibly physically tasking, and if it was as common as it's depicted in the comic world, our hypothetical superhero would suffer burnout in a rather short period of time.

The other problem really is finding crime to fight. I live in a pretty ghettofied area and not much happens on the streets. A little under a block from my house someone was shot fairly recently, next door we had a very minor breaking and entering, and once I had some crack addict shouting obscenities on my porch. Outside of the crack addict, the other two crimes I know about through hearsay. In the comics, all this 'crime' creates this bleak, uncaring world, where little John Blake can't walk home without Joker stealing his report card (that really happened). In the real world crime doesn't have the profound ripple effects, and generally if you keep your head straight in a neighborhood like mine the locals won't bother you. Serial Killers in the real world are far more rare than comics lead the reader to believe, they also are much stupider. Even the mafia, which you'd think would be a more credible target, is nothing like what is depicted in the comics.

For the most part criminals are not truly "evil" individuals, who if left unchecked would form a Legion of Doom. Even Batman Begins line about Bruce understanding that crime has a lot of gray areas underscored the fact that the comic book movie still included all the cartoonish, mustache twirling villains you need to give the superhero a target. Those kinds of people don't exist in great number, and a lot of people with wacky personalities don't pose an overwhelming danger to society. Charlie Sheen reminds me a bit of a Batman-ish villain.

Some very interesting points you make.

Not much crime around my area, but there is a drug dealer who lives near my area. Which also happens to be near a school. I've seen the prick dealing out of his house while school is letting out....not good.

So far no one has done anything about it, however, given the right person/s, I'm sure vigilantism would be very helpful to the area in taking care of this guy.

 

[TheFast]

I heard Phoenix Jones got his nose broken by a bunch of guys. I've also heard that he has about eight friends..

 

[Thundarr]

Boy, you've made some really good points. I want to touch on everything you've said, so I'm gonna break things up point by point as best I can. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, just clarifying a few things.

Costumed vigilantism is so impractical for the aimed goal that you'd have a hard time doing much of anything with it. Take, for instance, Batman's extensive investigative and forensic knowledge. In the comics, both of these things are treated like magic, as if there are people out there who, if they mull over a crime scene long enough, will pull an assailants name out of their a**. That's not really how forensics and investigations work.

True, that's not how forensic science works. However it is, more or less, how criminal profiling works. Now it's rarely as cut and dried as it appears on Criminal Minds, and you're right that a profiler can't necessarily look at a crime scene and pull a suspect's name out of thin air. But he can usually get a good idea on the "unsub's" (to use a phrase from Criminal Minds) mental state. Also, blood splatter analysis does paint a fairly accurate picture as to what happened at a violent crime scene. Again, it's rarely as cut and dried as it looks on Dexter, but it does work. Just watch the special features of season one of Dexter if you don't believe me.

Point is, with the right training, you can get a fairly accurate picture of the type of person a criminal is just by examining the crime scene.

How many "sworn statements" do you think Batman would get from credible eye witnesses while conducting an investigation?

It's been a while since I've really read a Batman comic, but from what I recall he doesn't really use "witness statements" in his investigations much. Or if he does, he "borrows" them from the police. Typically, I believe he hunts down known associates of whomever he's after and beats information out of them (something that would make the information inadmisable in court if the police were to use those tactics).

Would Batman be able to send DNA and blood samples off to be tested just like the cops would've done? You know what happens when you take a DNA sample home and put it under a microscope? You say to yourself "huh? so that's what DNA looks like up close". Batman's little lab, as it's depicted in the movies and comics would literally tell him nothing.

That's very true. Although, in Dark Knight Bruce Wayne's lab was very state of the art. In the older comics, Batman's lab is little more than a work bench with a microscope, a bunsen burner, and a bunch of test tubes, beakers, and petrie dishes. However, the newer comics may (and likely have) depicted a fully functional forensics lab complete with all the bells and whistles seen on CSI. Granted, the "forensic science" on CSI is more science fiction than actual science (you can't put a drop of blood into a machine and get a DNA analysis on a computer screen 30 seconds later, it takes a month just to find out if the donor was male or female). The actual science of CSI is often correct, they just speed up the process about a thousand times.

You can only match things like hair, blood and semen if you have that sample on file, or if you already had an idea of who the culprit was. Forensic scientists never look at a sample of semen and go "Oh yeah, this is John's semen! Hey someone go find John!".

That is very true. However, convicted sex offenders are required by law to submit DNA samples for the sex offender database. So if John had been convicted of rape (even statutory rape when he was a teen), they would no it was his semen and go pick him up.

Fighting would be another overrated aspect of Batman's abilities. In the real world fighting is certainly an excellent way to improve your reflexes, but without an equalizer (i.e. like a gun) you'd be at a consistent disadvantage with street fights, especially with more than one attacker. However as The Question smartly pointed out, you'd probably rarely be in a scenario where fighting hand to hand would be essential. Guns are quicker at resolving disputes anyways. Furthermore, fighting is incredibly physicallyy tasking, and if it was as common as it's depicted in the comic world, our hypothetical superhero would suffer burnout in a rather short period of time.

Another good point. Which is why I stated that a super team would be more effective than a lone wolf. In the comics, Batman often goes it alone and kicks butt. In the real world, he'd have to have Huntress, Batgirl, Batwoman, Nightwing, and Robin with him at all times in order to keep from getting killed.

The other problem really is finding crime to fight. I live in a pretty ghettofied area and not much happens on the streets. A little under a block from my house someone was shot fairly recently, next door we had a very minor breaking and entering, and once I had some crack addict shouting obscenities on my porch. Outside of the crack addict, the other two crimes I know about through hearsay. In the comics, all this 'crime' creates this bleak, uncaring world, where little John Blake can't walk home without Joker stealing his report card (that really happened). In the real world crime doesn't have the profound ripple effects, and generally if you keep your head straight in a neighborhood like mine the locals won't bother you.

It's like that in most any major city I think. You rarely have crimes on as grand a scale as in the comics. But just because the crimes are small, doesn't mean a caped vigilante won't do anything about them. Remember Frank Miller's recent Batman & Robin series, where he retells the introduction of Robin as Batman's sidekick. Green Lantern comes to Gotham and tries to convince Batman to be less brutal on the criminals he fights.

GL: You gotta tone it down. You're giving the rest of us a bad name. You're putting more criminals into the emergency room than in the court room.

BM: You guys can handle the alien invasions and monster robots. I'll take care of the street level scum.

GL: But people are afraid of you.

BM: Good! I want people to be afraid of me. Why the hell do you think I dress like a damned bat?

Serial Killers in the real world are far more rare than comics lead the reader to believe, they also are much stupider. Even the mafia, which you'd think would be a more credible target, is nothing like what is depicted in the comics.

That's true about the mafia. However, according to John Douglas (the former FBI agent who pretty much created criminal profiling) there are on average 100 serial killers active in the United States at any one time. It's just they're often not publicized in the media. Sometimes the local police don't even know they have a serial killer on their hands until he gets caught.

For the most part criminals are not truly "evil" individuals, who if left unchecked would form a Legion of Doom. Even Batman Begins line about Bruce understanding that crime has a lot of gray areas underscored the fact that the comic book movie still included all the cartoonish, mustache twirling villains you need to give the superhero as a target. Those kinds of people don't exist in great number, and a lot of people with wacky personalities don't pose an overwhelming danger to society.

This I totally agree with.

Charlie Sheen reminds me a bit of a Batman-ish villain.

That is f'n hilarious!

 

[Thundarr]

Bump

 

[Thundarr]

There's this show on Space, the Canadian Sci-Fi network, called Fanboy Confidential. I don't know if it's available in The States. Anyway, last week's episode was about real life superheroes. Turns out there's a real life superhero right here in Vancouver, BC. He goes by the name of "Thanatos", and he patroles the downtown east side. Most of what he does is hand out bottles of water, food, clothing, etc. Whatever "crimefighting" he does is reduced to "observe & report", like a security guard.

Unfortunately, whatever good he does goes largely unnoticed by others outside his own community. I think a "Watchmen-like" group of masked superheroes would make far more of a difference. They could help far more of the homeless, and be far more agressive in their crime fighting.

 

[Thundarr]

Bump.

 

[Thundarr]

What an interesting thread. I read practically the whole thing. It's a fascinating topic, and I wanted to share some thoughts.

Some posters here were saying that if someone had a superpower, he would use it for evil purposes. I think that sometimes that's true, but not always. Some people get the warm fuzzies when they do good deeds, like rescuing others from danger, or defeating crooks. It's an ego booster. That's why some people really do try to be superheroes. They wear a costume, looking for crime, and sometimes they get beat up, but they still keep on with it. It's because doing good deeds can be gratifying.

As far as whether or not superheroism is possible, I would say it's not, unless a person genuinely has superpowers. But since superpowers are hard to come by, I'll talk about non-powered superheroes; there's a lot of them around. But non-powered superheroes usually have something else that makes up for the lack of superpowers. It's usually a super-budget. Batman's money lets him create super technology. Same for Iron Man, and even The Green Hornet. These guys have a lot of money. They are also incredibly smart.

Trouble is, in the real world, the kind of people who have the budget needed to be a superhero don't have the personality to do it. Can you picture Bill Gates going out and pummeling people with his bare hands? Neither can I. How about Donald Trump? No way he would be out fighting crime. It would mess up his hair.

The kind of people who have the budget to be a superhero are more likely to have bodyguards to protect them from trouble than they are to go out and look for it. People who are worth a ton of money aren't likely to put themselves in danger.

Some non-powered superheroes, with or without a budget, rely a lot on martial arts. But I think that the effectiveness of martial arts is greatly exaggerated. I just can't picture one guy by himself taking on a dozen opponents at once. And what happens, by the way, when the bad guys know martial arts, too?

The only person I can think of who might have been capable of superheroism on some level is Howard Hughes. He had the budget, the brains, and the daring. Other than that, I can't think of any human being who could do it. I know that there are many noble individuals who try, but I don't think any of them have genuinely succeeded at anything beyond putting together a costume and getting their nose broken, like Phoenix Jones (I've seen him on CNN).

Good points. Although there are likely a lot of Hollywood stars that probably have/had the budget and skills to become real life superheroes. Bruce Lee would have made a great superhero. Chuck Norris has more money than God after his acting career, and could make a totally kick ass superhero. Same with Steven Seagal.

Bruce can't become a superhero due to him being dead, except maybe in the comics. But Chuck & Steve? That could work. Only question would be, "Would they want to?"

 

[X-Woman]

Bruce Lee would have made a great superhero.

Bruce Lee, absolutely. I think he really was a superhero. He had the martial arts skills to qualify. There's other martial arts masters around, but no one defied the laws of physics like Bruce Lee. If anybody ever had superpowers, it was him. He was one extraordinary dude.

 

[Thundarr]

Bruce Lee, absolutely. I think he really was a superhero. He had the martial arts skills to qualify. There's other martial arts masters around, but no one defied the laws of physics like Bruce Lee. If anybody ever had superpowers, it was him. He was one extraordinary dude.

Agreed, 100%. He also had the financial ability to become a superhero, thanks to his success in Asian cinema. He was pretty close to being a genius, creating his own Martial Art form, Jeet Kun Do, by taking the best parts of the various forms of kung fu, as well as karate, muay-tai, and tae kwan do, and throwing out the crap.

 

[Silentguardian]

Awesome as it would be to be a superhero, I don't think it's possible, unless you go for a Rorschach approach.

 

[Thundarr]

Awesome as it would be to be a superhero, I don't think it's possible, unless you go for a Rorschach approach.

That seems to be the general consensus here on this thread. I'd go a step farther and say that a real life superhero wouldn't be able to put much of a dent in the criminal activity unless he were a part of a team like The Watchmen.

 

[BattleCat]

Good points. Although there are likely a lot of Hollywood stars that probably have/had the budget and skills to become real life superheroes. Bruce Lee would have made a great superhero. Chuck Norris has more money than God after his acting career, and could make a totally kick ass superhero. Same with Steven Seagal.

Bruce can't become a superhero due to him being dead, except maybe in the comics. But Chuck & Steve? That could work. Only question would be, "Would they want to?"[/QUOTE]
lol, Chuck and Steve would suck as superheroes. They'd die pretty fast.

 

[Thundarr]

Good points. Although there are likely a lot of Hollywood stars that probably have/had the budget and skills to become real life superheroes. Bruce Lee would have made a great superhero. Chuck Norris has more money than God after his acting career, and could make a totally kick ass superhero. Same with Steven Seagal.

Bruce can't become a superhero due to him being dead, except maybe in the comics. But Chuck & Steve? That could work. Only question would be, "Would they want to?"[/QUOTE]
lol, Chuck and Steve would suck as superheroes. They'd die pretty fast.

I'd like to see how you'd fare in a fight with either one of them.