If Superman's Strength is 100

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So you started it with boasting about your eprowness. and now you are lying and you still have not poved your point and have ran from your origional claim, that they were murders.

Previously you said

Then you claiming manslaughter. Then were proven wrong about this.

Which is all of coarse after

"You should know better than to get into a debate with me T.I."

Like are you some perfected genius of Man of Steel and Captain America?

No you are not, and you should know better then to get into a debate with me about these movies.

Now you are claiming about me being "testy" when you beat your chest about how you thought you were superior to me by challenging you, about a argument you lost.

What are you going to say now?

I honestly don't think you understand the concepts going on here. It honestly seems so. Manslaughter IS MURDER. What are you not understanding about that? Just because you don't understand that or know that, isn't my problem. So when I make a statement like, Superman murdered people, and I'm referring to instances of negligence and manslaughter that is FACTUALLY CORRECT. 3rd degree MURDER is manslaughter. You keep acting like I'm changing my stance when I've done no such thing. I claimed Superman murdered people. That doesnt' mean only 1st or 2nd degree murder. I never once specified any such thing. I said murder. Manslaughter is murder. Simple

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
First off, I don't know why you keep belaboring the military point, it's a non issue. The smallville incident proves so.

Proves what? Who did he murder in Smallville

"At that point he wasn't jointly working for the military as he was later. In fact, they turned him over to Zod. So no, he doesn't get a "military" pass for that."

The pass was not up to you, the military was working with him to destroy a world ending force. There was no pass needed, he didn't murder anyone

"Further, even later, he never took a military pledge, nor was he assigned any rank. In order to receive protection from the military, you actually have to take oaths and be a part of its ranks. "

He didn't need protection from the military, or need to take a pledge he is Superman. Genius. If you watched the ending of the movie you would know that.

"He did no such thing.They merely partnered together to achieve a goal."

He actually did.

No different than other countries adding us in a war, doesn't mean they are subject to our justice system nor protected by our military justice system. You have to be a part of the system to receive protection from the system bud.

There is no system of protection needed for Superman, as he is the most powerful person on the planet. Or did you not get that?

"Even with military protection people are subject to court martialing. Happens all the time for crimes committed during war."

Semantics and useless information about nothing to do with the topic and goal post moving

(They can even be punished for war crimes committed in other countries. This whole notion that military can kill whoever they want under the guise of a war or mission is completely false.

No no and more wrong.

Just give up and take the Loss.

Back to the original claim

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
They've all murdered people.

Who did Cap or Superman Murder?

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
I honestly don't think you understand the concepts going on here. It honestly seems so. Manslaughter IS MURDER. What are you not understanding about that? Just because you don't understand that or know that, isn't my problem. So when I make a statement like, Superman murdered people, and I'm referring to instances of negligence and manslaughter that is FACTUALLY CORRECT. 3rd degree MURDER is manslaughter. You keep acting like I'm changing my stance when I've done no such thing. I claimed Superman murdered people. That doesnt' mean only 1st or 2nd degree murder. I never once specified any such thing. I said murder. Manslaughter is murder. Simple

" it's not manslaughter because he was protecting the Earth. It was 'collateral damage".

DT

incorrect, and I've given real life examples of people trying to do good and still being subject to murder. Concrete examples, that totally disprove your non theory. Not only is protecting the planet caveat non a viable defense nor was it ever stated to be one in the movie. As I stated, and correctly so, people on numerous occasions have been convicted of murder while trying to help or capture others. Nothing new for our justice system. Why are you not understanding these simple concepts?

Why are you not able to understand

"it's not manslaughter because he was protecting the Earth. It was 'collateral damage"."

After all you are the guy that tried to tell the whole forum Ozy beats WS.

And you really expect me to take you serious on this, when not only are you a complete bias person towards Cap and Superman, but now you are down right lying and misrepresenting characters? And then taunted me by saying

"and you should know better then to get into a debate with me about these movies."

Like who the **** do you think you are?

Ahhh the old protecting the earth defense. I'm sure I'd easily find that in civil codes or statues right? Surely it must be there. I mean, we see the defending the earth defense all the time in court and it works... Oh wait, there is no such thing in any statue, code, law or in the constitution. Yet, this is your 100% certain defense? Okay man.

DT Came up with that, and he is correct.

And now your immense bravado about being challenged and daring me to debate with you, and all this confidence is gone and your down to trying to argue the law with me and talk about civil codes and statues. IS this the GDF? Are you ****ing for real right now.

Your claims were all opinions and proved false and now your trying to be a e lawyer.

BTFO.

What on God's Green Earth are you talking about? I mean you're literally making no sense. You saying he's correct proves you are both incorrect. That is NOT a certifiable nor verifiable defense. There is no precedent for such a defense, let along a successful one using that. Yet here you go, yeah that is correct and would work. WTF. Jesus.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
What on God's Green Earth are you talking about? I mean you're literally making no sense. You saying he's correct proves you are both incorrect. That is NOT a certifiable nor verifiable defense. There is no precedent for such a defense, let along a successful one using that. Yet here you go, yeah that is correct and would work. WTF. Jesus.

This post says nothing about your original claim

Back your claim.

How did Superman or Cap murder anyone?

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
They've all murdered people.

Better yet, since you never proved Superman did, Prove Cap did now. Should be pretty easy for you since you are an "great debtor" but this time, prove it with screen feats not the law book.

Or did you not read the rules?

"The MVF Golden Rule:
What is seen on screen is canon in these forums. If your character you wish to use has feats/actions/handicaps that contradict what that character did on screen (movie canon), then it is a violation and is illegal. MOVIE FEATS ONLY!"

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi

Even with military protection people are subject to court martialing. Happens all the time for crimes committed during war. They can even be punished for war crimes committed in other countries. This whole notion that military can kill whoever they want under the guise of a war or mission is completely false.

And when was the last time the military went to court for all the collateral damage done when they invade a country?

And that's invading a country. Superman didn't invade anyone. He was defending the Planet.

KT don't get it, he came in acting large and in charge and ended up being embarrassed..again.

Also KT you keep ignoring that the Avenger fights have also been confirmed to have left civilian casualties.

Originally posted by Robtard
Being under military command and during a war doesn't give anyone carte blanche to blanket any and all kills as "collateral damage". There's a reason why we have the term "war crimes".

Anyone tried for War Crimes over collateral damage in a state sanctioned War?

War Crimes are thing like you going around purposefully torturing and killing civilians. Or for Raping prisoner e.t.c

Don't get me wrong, a lot of people have a big issue with collateral damage and it's a big recruitment factor for terrorist groups, but point is I personally can't think of anything Superman did that would be considered a War Crime. And the collateral damage in that instance might have been necessary to save the Earth.

Can't recall off the top of my head, there was something in 2007-8 concerning operations in Bagdad where some innocents where killed along with combatants and there was a an investigation and trial. Can't recall if anything came of that.

Not just that, if you bombed a building of no tactical purpose knowing that there were no combatants inside, only civilians, it could be classified as a war crime.

I didn't make the comment above to say MoS committed war crimes, just that collateral damage does have it's limits. eg if he purposely threw Zod into a schoolbus full of people, we really couldn't say "oh well, collateral damage".

Lol at the misdirection

Originally posted by Sin I AM
Well thor isn't a murdering emotional dick if that helps

Wrong as usual

YouTube video

Originally posted by Darth Thor
And when was the last time the military went to court for all the collateral damage done when they invade a country?

And that's invading a country. Superman didn't invade anyone. He was defending the Planet.

What are you talking about here? Superman was not in the military, nor was he sanctioned to do whatever he wanted. One could possible argue that by the end, they trusted him more, and would give him lots of leeway. No argument there. However, by the time of Smallville, absolutely not, for Christ sake they tried to kill him. Come on DP, you're better than this. Fact of the matter is, under the law, he could have unquestionably been convicted of some form of murder. Period end of story. That doesn't make him a murderer by any means. However, his actions likely led to deaths, injuries and destruction. Simple.

Originally posted by Robtard
Can't recall off the top of my head, there was something in 2007-8 concerning operations in Bagdad where some innocents where killed along with combatants and there was a an investigation and trial. Can't recall if anything came of that.

Not just that, if you bombed a building of no tactical purpose knowing that there were no combatants inside, only civilians, it could be classified as a war crime.

I didn't make the comment above to say MoS committed war crimes, just that collateral damage does have it's limits. eg if he purposely threw Zod into a schoolbus full of people, we really couldn't say "oh well, collateral damage".

Yeah true and if someone bombs a hospital there's usually an enquiry (although even then anyone rarely goes down for it surprisingly).

My point is it's very rare for someone to go down for collateral damage in a war zone, and that's when they're invading another country. Superman wasn't even invading anyone.

Also we know from his character he wasn't purposefully or trying to kill anyone (or getting them killed by his selfish immoral actions). He was actually attempting to save people. How many modern day wars can say that's honestly their sole motivation?

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
What are you talking about here? Superman was not in the military, nor was he sanctioned to do whatever he wanted. One could possible argue that by the end, they trusted him more, and would give him lots of leeway. No argument there. However, by the time of Smallville, absolutely not, for Christ sake they tried to kill him. Come on DP, you're better than this. Fact of the matter is, under the law, he could have unquestionably been convicted of some form of murder. Period end of story. That doesn't make him a murderer by any means. However, his actions likely led to deaths, injuries and destruction. Simple.

He's not part of the military, so it's a good job he was behaving much much better and more moral than the military usually does.

He was supporting the military who were themselves firing rockets into a civilian population to hit the Kryptonians.

Superman was trying to defend the Earth and he likely did save all of humanity, so there's really nothing to charge him for.

And again why is Superman on murder charges but not the Avengers?

When did I say the avengers couldn't be charged? That was the whole point of Civil War and why it was so believable. I could totally see countries calling for them to have restrictions.

Enough discussing legal issues since no one here is a blood sucking lawyer.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
They've all murdered people.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So name one person Superman or Cap murdered.