|
|
Join us each Tuesday as Bob Ingersoll analyzes how the law
is portrayed in comics then explains how it would really work.
Current Installment >>
Installment Archives |
About Bob |
General Forum
THE LAW IS A ASS for 08/13/2002
DOCKET ENTRY
"The Law is a Ass" Installment # 157
Originally written as installment # 139 and published in Comics Buyer's Guide issue # 758, May 27, 1988 issue
Wonder where the CEOs of today -- the heads of Enron and Worldcom and Adelphia, and many, many more -- learned their squishy, questionable, me-first, winner-take-all ethics? Apparently, it was from reading the exploits of the heroes of the comics of yesterday.
******
THE LAW IS A ASS
Installment # 157
by
BOB INGERSOLL
I was reminded of a scene from the old TV show, The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis, where Maynard G. Krebs, Bob Denver's character, a prototypical beatnik of the late 50's and early 60's -- or, at least, what passed in Hollywood as a prototypical beatnik of the late 50's and 60's -- was watching a TV western movie with a baby on his lap. "Look, Baby," Maynard says, "someone's getting out of the train. If he looks at the clock he's a bad guy, but if he's wearing a white hat he's a good guy." The shot centered Maynard who sat in silence and looked at the TV nonplused. "Hmm," said Maynard trying to figure out what he had seen, "He looked at the clock and he's wearing a white hat. It must be one of those adult westerns."
What, you may wonder, does this piece of nostalgia have to do with "The Law Is a Ass"? Why, Action Comics Weekly # 601, of course. I don't need to tell you which of the six stories in said comic I'm talking about. We've been together for one hundred thirty-eight installments of this column so far, you should know me well enough to figure out which story I'm talking about.
That's right, the Green Lantern story.
We find Hal (Green Lantern) Jordan broke, unemployed, and living with his friend John Stewart. The trouble is John is a newly wed and doesn't want Hal living with him anymore. So John says, "Look, Hal, you're my best friend and I love you -- but you can't stay here forever." (The man's about as subtle as a gonged Gong Show act.) Hal, ever quick on the uptake, points out that he is broke and unemployed and that jobs are hard to find. Logical, how many employers do you think have jobs for a former test pilot turned charter pilot turned, insurance adjuster, turned toy salesman, turned independent trucker, turned test pilot?
John, however, wasn't talking about a job. Hal still has his power ring and, with the Guardians gone, the old rules about not using the ring for personal gain no longer apply. John points out a newspaper item about an abandoned diamond mind in South Africa. Hal protests, "You're not suggesting I steal?"
"You're not listening!" John replies, "The mine is closed! Whatever you find there is yours." So, Hal puts on his white hat, looks at the clock, goes out, and takes a diamond from this abandoned mine. Not a big one, he thinks, but I saw its size. I happen to know what a lousy engagement ring, which isn't even one carat, costs. GL's gem would have paid off the national debt of a small South American Country.
This must be one of those adult comic books. Super-heroes who are thieves.
Yes, I said thief. Don't believe John Stewart's rationalization, Hal's a thief.
Just so we have a common frame of reference, I'll read you pertinent parts of the Ohio Revised Code definition of theft, which is based upon the Model Penal Code definition of theft and is as close as a universal definition of theft as we're likely to get in this country. Theft is, "with purpose to deprive the owner of property... knowingly obtain[ing] or exert[ing] control over... the property... without the consent of the owner."
Does what Hal did fall into this definition? Is Spider-Man handy for trimming a Christmas tree? Let's examine theft element by element, so we can all see that what GL did was theft. But, let's not examine the statutory elements in their statutory order. Let's rearrange the order in a way carefully selected by me to make this easier. In the new order of things, theft is 1) knowingly obtaining or exerting control over property, 2) without the consent of the owner, and 3) with the intent to deprive the owner of the property.
First, Hal took a diamond. There's no question about that. We saw it in his hot little hand. That is "obtaining or exerting control over property." One down.
Hal didn't ask anyone if he could take the diamond. Indeed, he had to fight off the police in order to take it. That's "without the consent of the owner." Two down.
Hal cashed the diamond in, converted it into money to live off the proceeds. In fact, Hal even thought, "It was trickier than I would have imagined changing a diamond into legal tender -- but I did it." This proves not only that Hal was rather stupid -- how many fences did he think would handle a hot rock offered by someone in a Green Lantern costume? -- it also proves Hal's "purpose" was "to deprive the owner" of the diamond of said gem permanently. Three down. None to go.
Hal committed a theft.
Please don't fall for John Stewart's rationalization, "The mine's closed! Whatever you find there is yours." It is true that when the owner abandons property, he gives up his proprietary interest in it and the property cannot be stolen, because it has no owner. That's why bag people and newspaper reporters can rummage through other persons garbage without fear of being prosecuted for theft -- which is good; they should be so worried about catching every disease known to man, they wouldn't have time to worry about petty misdemeanors. However, just because the mine was closed, doesn't mean that it, or any diamond in it, was abandoned.
For a person to abandon property, he must make a clear manifestation that he has no further interest in the property and no longer wishes to possess it. Leaving it out with the coffee grounds for the bag persons and reporters is one good indication of abandonment. But simply not using property anymore -- even if it's for years -- isn't a manifestation of abandonment.
I have some size 34 pants in the back of my closet, I haven't fit in since my sophomore year in college. That doesn't mean that Green Lantern can use his power ring to take them from me. I still own them and haven't abandoned them. Someday I'll go on a diet, and maybe, just maybe...
My point is that, even if the diamond mine was closed, it, and the land on which it sat, belonged to someone. Maybe it belonged to some mining company. Maybe it had escheated to the South African government. But it belonged to someone. And I can guarantee you that said owner, whoever it was, had not given up the land or abandoned it. Not while it still had diamonds in it. After all, maybe those diamonds were too hard to get to now, but who knows what advances in mining techniques -- laser digging machines, hortas, or one billion kids with beach shovels and pails -- might come along and make those diamonds accessible? No, the owner hadn't abandoned the property. He still owned it and the diamonds in it. They weren't free for the taking.
I won't dignify John Stewart's other rationalization, "Besides stealing from South Africa might not be so bad..." with a long response. If a person can justify a theft, because he believes the owner is corrupt or immoral, there can be no order to society. Some people, no doubt, believe me immoral or corrupt, because in recent columns I've condemned attempts to control obscenity as being violations of the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech. Other people probably believe it of me for other reasons. Does that mean that these people have the right to break into my closet, go behind the size 34 pants, and steal the incredibly loud, extra wide, 100% polyester neck ties I've got hanging there? Of course not. Especially when I'd probably be willing to give them away to anyone demented enough to want or to wear the things!
No, what Hal did was commit a theft -- a theft which no rationalization can justify. Especially when it was so unnecessary a theft.
Hal is Green Lantern. He has a power ring. A marvelous implement capable of doing anything. Why did he need to steal a diamond?
He could have made cash. Okay, that would have been counterfeiting, and no better than stealing. He could have made gold. Okay, gold is yellow and he couldn't have done that either. He could have made emeralds. Okay, maybe the emeralds might have disappeared, if his ring ever lost its power charge so paying for something with such a gem could have been a fraud. GL still had options.
He could contract himself out as a maritime salvage company. Or, if that was too much like work -- Work! -- all GL had to do was fly down to Kentucky and ask someone to give him a lump of coal. I'm sure any number of coal mines would have been willing to give a super-hero a spare piece of bituminous in return for being able to call itself the "coal mine to the stars." Once Hal had the coal, he was set.
How? Remember, Hal lives on Earth DC, where every lump of coal is a mutant, which doesn't require millions a years of intense pressure to turn into a diamond. A couple of seconds in Superman's hands does the trick. Hal's ring could easily apply as much pressure to the coal as Superman's hands could. Presto! One large diamond guaranteed not to vanish into nothingness, even if the power ring loses its charge and punks out.
If this is the way Hal's going to use the power ring, now that the Guardians are gone and he doesn't have to live under their rules anymore, by committing theft offenses -- and useless theft offenses at that, maybe we should get someone else to be Green Lantern. Someone who understands the concepts of right and wrong and morality.
Someone like Maynard G. Krebs.
BOB INGERSOLL
<< 08/06/2002 | 08/13/2002 | 08/20/2002 >>
Discuss this installment with me in World Famous Comics' General Forum.
Recent Installments:
Current Installment >>
Installment Archives |
About Bob |
General Forum
|
|
|
Anything Goes Trivia
Last Kiss
