Originally posted by Khellendros
Uhhh, the fact that he carries it around in his day to day life makes it more common equipment, not less.
Day to day life? i doubt that... and beast uses one more than kurt does... since the formation of the x.s.e. nightcrawler rarely if ever uses an image inducer...
Yes. It is. And saying that Beast has one is no good. We have Beast as well. So my plan (And it's a good one) is that somebody shoots omething from atop a roof. 'Cap' runs up and the two have a mock fight. In the end, Cap drags an unconcious... someone...lol... down and says 'it's ok folks, I got him. It will be all right.' Now I'm not sure if the shooting bit is concidered aggresive, I'll modify my plan if it is.
Now. I've given this plan like, 3 times. SOMEONE RESPOND!!!!
Originally posted by long pig
I think vanella is thinking this is being held in the real world, he might be right. Lady hasnt been around much to answer questions.usually she answers them really quick.
If we have to have it in the real world, none of our powers will work, itll be punisher shooting everyone!
Did you just call me a guy? I think that it is in the real world, because if it were in the comic world, then we could just have allies come and kill all of you. The comic book world is controlled completely by the writers. The real world is not. Unless you personally knew Captain America, and had interacted with him before, you would be very skeptic about if he was real or a fraud, and would most likely think he was a fraud.
In all of the x-men comics that i have read. (I've read alot, because my bro collects them). I've seen beast and nightcrawler use image inducer using them in day to day life, but not in missions. This is a mission, so they will not have them. This could take place in the comic or real world, but I have to say, in my opinion, if I saw a superhero, I would just laugh and continue what i was doing.
Originally posted by long pig
if i figured out i was being mind controlled, id punch the nearest person. its a risk thats too large to take.
lol......... you freakin' violent sociopath
Originally posted by long pig
of course im right, i use 90% of my brain.
yes............ i thought you debated like someone who had 10% of their brain removed
Originally posted by long pig
allowing one type of violence and prohibiting another would only happend in a biased argument, i dont think the thread starter is biased.
and you're a suck up............ lol
Originally posted by life is cruell
if you did use 90% of your brain then you would have serious psychic powers
more like serious mental problems........✅
Originally posted by long pig
If you say it violently, then yes. 🙂
but if you speak softly it's non-violent........ just like gentle mind persuasion through telepathy........ i already covered this
Originally posted by Scoobless
in those terms telepathy has to be taken the same way as speech..... speech can be violent, or it can be soothing....... same with mutie freaks and their freakishly mutie telepathyno one would ever get arrested for consoling another person...... unless the police officer is corrupt......... which they almost certainly would be.......... hmmm.......... lol
Originally posted by illadelph12
So not only is she going to invade their minds, but she's going to pretend to be their conscience? That would cause psychic trauma. When people hear voices in their heads that aren't their own it causes harm. Ever heard of schizophrenia?
yes i have, no you haven't..... who said that? who said THAT?....AAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHH
Originally posted by Khellendros
Riiight, and then he shatters his own skeleton, while all the people he shot who had healing factors get up and kick the lump of flesh who shot them.
Skeleton wouldn't shatter if he uses his sword and shield on them rather than fists 😛
and that skeleton breaking thing was only a theory anyway....... just a guess of his....... no proof or medical diagnosis to back it up
Originally posted by long pig
Taskmaster is a weak character, hell his main villian is a normal human lady! a no name! and he wasnt even good enough to kill her in his own series!
he had one series........ he doesn't have a "main villain"...... unless you mean "main enemy".......... in which case it would be the Avengers
and she wasn't a "no name" it was Sunset Bain........ she's been responsible for Iron Man taking a beating on many occasions
........ man......... having to respond to three pages of thread at once isn't easy to keep track of....... i probably missed some stuff out..... but knowing me i probably said all the right things in a way that even someone who is missing 10% of their brain could understand....... right piggy?
😎
Originally posted by laydiiplayette
In all of the x-men comics that i have read. (I've read alot, because my bro collects them). I've seen beast and nightcrawler use image inducer using them in day to day life, but not in missions. This is a mission, so they will not have them. This could take place in the comic or real world, but I have to say, in my opinion, if I saw a superhero, I would just laugh and continue what i was doing.
cool....... now how about a ruling on the telepathy V's violence debate
🙂
Originally posted by laydiiplayette
In all of the x-men comics that i have read. (I've read alot, because my bro collects them). I've seen beast and nightcrawler use image inducer using them in day to day life, but not in missions. This is a mission, so they will not have them. This could take place in the comic or real world, but I have to say, in my opinion, if I saw a superhero, I would just laugh and continue what i was doing.
I wholeheartedly disagree. Just because they do not use it regularly on missions does not mean it is not on there person. I can list comics in which Nightcrawler was using the image inducer and then a hostile situation occurs and he simply turned it off and engaged in combat. And there are other occasions where it was even used as an offensive implement to deceive enemies. I'll list book numbers if necessary.
As for telepathy, controlling someones mind or intruding in someone's mind and implanting false images without permission is a hostile act. It infringes upon one's free will and is a form of incapacitation and, to a degree, molestation. You should have to make the rioters disperse of their own free will. That's the whole point.
Originally posted by illadelph12
As for telepathy, controlling someones mind or intruding in someone's mind and implanting false images without permission is a hostile act. It infringes upon one's free will and is a form of incapacitation and, to a degree, molestation.
no more than any advertising campaign by any major (or minor) company........ which is completely legal
Originally posted by Scoobless
no more than any advertising campaign by any major (or minor) company........ which is completely legal
No, it's completely different. In advertising, you still have free choice and are not having your person or mind manipulated directly. You still take in and process external stimuli, and then form your own decision based on your free will. McDonald's doesn't control your mind and make you eat Big Mac's, they display it in an appealing manner to stimulate your desire for it on a television and in paper adds for you to observe, and then you make your own decision.
They don't circumvent your free will by mentally projecting hunger into your mind and say:
"Eat Filet-O-Fish now. Me so Hungry. Me so Hungry."
You choose to eat that crap.
in x-men classic nightcrawler had it on during a fighgt. he was fighting a shape shifter and his opponent turned into this big green monster thing and then nightcrawler modified his image inducer to make it look like he was an even bigger monster than his opponent. they were fighting the shiar and nightcrawler was figting some guy called hobgoblin i think it was but he was green
Originally posted by Lord-of-Dreams
Yes. It is. And saying that Beast has one is no good. We have Beast as well. So my plan (And it's a good one) is that somebody shoots omething from atop a roof. 'Cap' runs up and the two have a mock fight. In the end, Cap drags an unconcious... someone...lol... down and says 'it's ok folks, I got him. It will be all right.' Now I'm not sure if the shooting bit is concidered aggresive, I'll modify my plan if it is.
Now. I've given this plan like, 3 times. SOMEONE RESPOND!!!!
here's a response....... a fight between the riot calmers is still violence.... 😛 ........ nowhere was it stipulated that violence was only banned against the crowd
💃
but you have no choice over whether or not you see advertising..... if you don't know where it is, you see it and your brain is forced to process what you have seen........ that is mental intrusion ..... and it's completely legal
Scoob, come on now bruh. You and I both know you have 100% choice when it comes not only to observing advertisement, but also whether or not you allow it to sway your judgement. You can simply not watch TV, change the channel, not read the ad in the newspaper or magazine. It's all your choice. The simple fact that you choose not to buy every item that is advertised shows that choice. Unless, of course, you, as a male, buy Victoria's Secret and Maxipads simply because they have commercials.
There's a big difference between advertisement and psychic manipulation and suggestion. Like hypnotic suggestion. Hypnotizing someone against their free will is a hostile action.
Taking away a person's free will is a hostile action.
Placing ads in a magazines of some dude's dancing and rapping about cheeseburgers to make them appealing to consumers is not hostile.
Stupid, but not hostile.