Issue 4 - Page 6

10th Feb 2017, 6:00 PM in The Collector's Impulse
Issue 4 - Page 6
Average Rating: 5 (2 votes)
<<First Latest>>

Author Notes:

Steven-Vincent 10th Feb 2017, 6:00 PM edit delete
Now Abby has something new to think about... Also, I liked the idea of Deena and Jackson ribbing her a little about learning to drive. It's not stated here, but of the three Abby is (by a few months) the youngest. Deena got her license last month and Jackson a little before that, so Abby is he last of the three to get her license.
Post a Comment


Fafhred 10th Feb 2017, 7:02 PM edit delete reply
With her young brother knowing her secret (and therefore being a security risk, damage done), would she not be better off coming clean with her parents so that they can help her cover it up?

This might also help in this specific situation, since her father could get information for her which she probably would not know how to find, or even that it exist at all.
Steven-Vincent 10th Feb 2017, 7:24 PM edit delete reply
Well it depends on what you mean by 'better'. What if she told her father and he forbade her to be a superhero?

However, Abby's secret is going to rear its head repeatedly so this topic is not going away. That's what Secret Identities are all about after all.
Fafhred 10th Feb 2017, 8:17 PM edit delete reply
Agrees, but Clark Kent's adoptive parents always knew who he was; that worked out for him.
Bruce Wayne's butler's also knew; there are others examples of superheroes with someone supporting them while knowing their identities.
Haegan2005 10th Feb 2017, 8:46 PM edit delete reply
This is true.

I think Abby will get someone else and it will be because she has no other option to do it. Like having to deal with the police.
Steven-Vincent 10th Feb 2017, 9:27 PM edit delete reply
Mr. and Mrs. Madison have larger roles to play in upcoming issues, so stay tuned.
Comic Fan 12th Feb 2017, 4:52 PM edit delete reply
I am neither advocating for nor against one of her parents finding out about her identity, but I do have an observation:

A parent could morally and legally deny superheroing to their minor child. But eventually, that child will grow into an adult and can make his or her own decisions; including that of becoming a cop, or a "civilian" crime fighter (aka, superhero).

Abbey is not likely to lose her powers from disuse; only from misuse, so she could probably wait it out until her 18th birthday. Physically, but maybe not mentally/emotionally.

Abbey's parents sound like they're rather pragmatic. Upon finding out about her extracurricular flights and knowing her passion and drive, either or both could decide to let her carry on since she's pretty much invulnerable and not likely to be maimed or killed.

The risk would be much lower than, say the risk that Bruce Wayne let Robin take on a daily basis.
BB 15th Feb 2017, 10:35 PM edit delete reply
As far as a parent legally denying an adolescent with powers the right to superhero, there are RW precedents for adolescents having rights to certain actions that a parent cannot deny, or that they could go to court to have the parent overruled, so it would depend entirely on superheroing laws in this world. As far as a moral right, that's a matter of opinion - at what age one ought to have the right of self-determination (aka "pursuit of happiness"). Modern western culture locks adolescents into the role of "child" far longer than most cultures have historically (ironic, since modern nutrition means they are on average biologically more mature than they used to be at the same age) and longer than many cultures around the world still do today.

Basically, morally it would be wrong for them to stop her for multiple reasons, it would be physically impossible for them to stop her if she chose to disobey, and whether it would be legally possible depends on the laws of the Libertylassverse. The real question is whether, if they chose to try to, would she "do as she's told" instead of what her heart tells her is right.

Robin: an unpowered, unarmored, essentially unarmed young child fighting gangs of heavily armed criminals and supers. Really, he would have about a 2% chance of making it though the first day alive. Any world that allows Robin will pretty much allow anything.
Steven-Vincent 17th Feb 2017, 12:14 AM edit delete reply
Technically there aren't many people and certainly not her parents that could physically stop Abby from being Liberty Lass.

But the question is whether Abby would listen if she were, say, 'grounded.'

We will get into some superhero laws in the 3rd story arc, and some of these questions may be answered, hopefully in an unexpected way.
Number 6 17th Feb 2017, 3:40 PM edit delete reply
Haha, "grounded", I see what you did there :)
Kludge's Defense Counsel 11th Feb 2017, 5:56 AM edit delete reply
I believe that some fair number of legal ethicists would argue that it is Kludge's position which is the correct one: that in order for the legal system to function optimally, every lawyer must argue his case to the full merits of his ability, regardless of whether the verdict he is arguing for is just - it is the right of the lawyer's client that the lawyer provide the best representation possible - justice is to be the goal of the system, not of the individual attorney, otherwise the attorney is not ethically doing their job. Sure, it is likely that Kludge's enthusiasm for winning a case is probably caused by his own desire for profit or his ego rather than an ethical desire to best represent his client, but that just means his motivation is slimy, it doesn't necessarily make his actions on behalf of his client (rather than on behalf of justice-best-served) unethical.
Of course, not all would take that position, I don't particularly care for it myself, but it's not entirely unreasonable either.
Steven-Vincent 11th Feb 2017, 9:12 AM edit delete reply
That is a fair point.

Not stated here is that neither Kludge nor Andrew Madison (Abby's dad) is a criminal attorney. They deal with civil cases. This is not to say that people on both sides don't have the right to a proper legal defense, but it's not quite the same thing as criminal law. Nobody goes to jail if Andrew Madison loses a case.

Andrew is talking about how if Daystar came to him and asked him to use the law to intimidate innocent people out of their homes, he would not take the case, whereas Kludge would (of course, Kludge does a lot more than that as we have seen). He's not talking about whether someone accused of mugging someone deserves representation.
Nef 12th Feb 2017, 3:55 AM edit delete reply
That right there is why I decided NOT to go to law school. I understand the principle, and agree with it, but somehow would be too much of a wimp to be able to defend a guilty party. It's like when I was in sales and had to sell something of low quality. That was not a good fit for me either.

Now I know that there are whole branches of work where a lawyer would never defend a guilty party, but back then I didn't know those existed. Of course, I've been fortunate that I managed to get a rewarding career doing something I believe in. I know others have not been so fortunate.
Deoxy 13th Feb 2017, 12:50 PM edit delete reply
"I understand the principle, and agree with it, but somehow would be too much of a wimp to be able to defend a guilty party."

The way to deal with this sentiment is to realize that you AREN'T defending a guilty party - you are defending unrelated INNOCENT parties by making the system actually do its job.

The price for that is that sometimes, guilty parties go free. It sucks, but there you go.

If we allow shortcuts when we "know" the guilty party is guilty, we will eventually be wrong in what we "know" and punish innocent people.
Nef 13th Feb 2017, 5:51 PM edit delete reply
Well, the good news is that I won't have to worry about any shortcuts because I never went to law school. I totally understand, as it would suck to be defended by someone who "knows" I'm guilty even when I'm not.

I'm glad there are good lawyers out there doing their lawyering for the greater good, but it's not a good career match for me (or rather, I'm not a good career match for it). That's all.
Guest 15th Feb 2017, 10:38 PM edit delete reply
"The price for that is that sometimes, guilty parties go free. It sucks, but there you go"

That's pretty easy to say flippantly when you're not the guilty party's next victim.

Steven-Vincent 16th Feb 2017, 10:08 PM edit delete reply
Again, Kludge and Papa Madison do not do criminal law. They do corporate law and civil, not criminal, suits. There is no 'guilty' in the strict sense in a civil suit. To quote Diffen, 'The object of civil law is the redress of wrongs by compelling compensation or restitution.'

What Mr. Madison is saying here is that as a lawyer, Kludge would attempt to compel compensation from someone who he knew did no wrong... such as suing a person for making an honest mistake. Or using loopholes in the law to drive private store-owners out of their life-long businesses.

(And as we know, Kludge goes well beyond lawsuits and even hires supervillains, though Andrew doesn't know that.)
Kludging up the System 16th Feb 2017, 10:28 PM edit delete reply
Based on real life, it's not even suing a person for making an honest mistake that is the real abuse of lawyers like Kludge (because you can rightly be legally liable even if it is a honest mistake) it's that the Kludges of the world abuse the system by suing you even if you have made *no mistake at all*. The trick is that the little guy can't even afford the cost to defend against a completely baseless and invalid suit by someone with the resources of Kludge and his company, and has to settle, or sell his property, or whatever Kludge wants despite the fact that Kludge's actions are groundless and the little guy would actually win easily if only he had the resources to take it to trial. That's the Kludge way of Lawyering.
Everybody Hates Kludge 17th Feb 2017, 2:23 PM edit delete reply
It works the other way around also: individuals with predatory lawyers prey on companies. Big Corporations settle frivilous suits out of court even though they could afford to litigate because the cost of litigation is more than the cost of the settlement, then they pass those costs on to you and I in the cost of products. (See also: "patent trolls")
On the other hand, Small business owners have no choice buy to pay off baseless suits out of fear that a jury of idiots will award millions to the baseless suit and take their life's savings. My sister's in-laws ran a small-time ice rink - they were sued by someone who fell on the ice because apparently ice is not supposed to be slippery?!?!? Despite the fact they had many signs posted "skate at own risk -danger, ice is slippery, etc". They had to settle and give this parasite and their Kludge-lawyer $50,000 for fear of losing their entire livelihood if a jury of idiots were to decide against them.

The system is broke, the Kludges of the world take advantage of it, and don't expect the legislatures to fix it: most legislators are lawyers too. Liberty lass, where are you when we need you in real life?
Steven-Vincent 17th Feb 2017, 6:28 PM edit delete reply
Yes and that is what Andrew is referring to.
Centcomm 11th Feb 2017, 6:05 AM edit delete reply
Nice work on the renders :D Love the page!
Steven-Vincent 11th Feb 2017, 9:13 AM edit delete reply
Thanks. Most of the credit goes to, well... I won't say the i-word. ;)
Nef 12th Feb 2017, 3:58 AM edit delete reply
Love her self-awareness on panel 3 :) She seems to admit that her becoming upset at her dad for reminding her to turn is a conscious choice.
Steven-Vincent 12th Feb 2017, 8:29 AM edit delete reply
There's a bit of me in this scene, in that I also got annoyed when my mother told me to do things in the car that I already knew.
Comic Fan 12th Feb 2017, 4:57 PM edit delete reply
Yep, I count myself in that group too. My mom used to watch me as I loaded my bicycle with newspapers for my morning route. I hated her standing there telling me how to do it with all manner of advice and I realize now, many years later, that gaining independence was a critical growth factor for me.
Fafhred 13th Feb 2017, 5:06 PM edit delete reply
It is so common that there is a name for it: back-seat driver xD
Post a Comment