Off My Mind: Should Heroes be Forced to Follow Civilian Laws?

Heroes are by nature outside our laws, when we accept a hero in a community(Like Gotham) we're say that our state(government) can't protect us sufficiently and we need an authority we grant the right to violence(which we grant to the military and police to protect us) against the threats the state can't handle. 
 
Are Superheroes above the damage they cause? I think the question must become are they being negligent in their attempt to protect people? Does Superman need to slam a Buick into Lex Luthor to stop him or would a fist work just as well? Heat Ray vision? If there's a viable alternative heroes would have to use it or they would be just chaotic tyrants, which is the premise of Kingdom Come no?

They should follow 'em...to some extand...
Vigilantism is a crime afterall :P

Hey, it gives construction workers a reason to keep their job. lol

I would imagine that heroes that have been effectively "deputized" (such as the Avengers) would no doubt have some of the exemptions extended to other branches of law enforcement, emergency management, military, etc, with the same understanding that they will make every reasonable effort to minimize collateral damage. It would be a another story for "freelance" (read: vigilante) heroes.
 
Another thing to consider would be the necessity for laws governing the behaviors and responsibilities of super-humans. For example, if I damage my neighbor's car through my own negligence, I am responsible for the damage. However, the laws governing this matter were written with the understanding that I can't accidentally knock my neighbor's car across town by not paying attention to where I'm swinging my arms.

This is why I was pro-registration during Civil War.

It's not the first time a superhero is involved in something like this - there was the daredevil's trial in the late 90s - and the srguments are the same every time, which doesn't make them less correct.
 
Superheroes might not violate the "spirit of the law" but, in certain states, they  ight still going against it. 99% of the time superheroes operate what the law defines as a "Citizen's Arrest", which is legal in many anglo-saxon countries, but not everywhere. At the same time they use alternate identities, which are illegal in certain states.
Superheroes might not be flagrantly against the law, but surely they are running on a dangerous line.
 
As for the collateral damage issue... well this is an entire different can of worms. Sometimes property damage seem unavoidable, others it's just gratuitos. On one hand we're talking about people who can benchpress a tank, run fast enough to cause a sonic boom or survive a nuclear blast, as the DCAU pointed out for many of them the world is simply too brittle, too slow or too crowded to move without caqusing damage. On the aother hand this same argument can be used against the superheroes, if they are so amazingly superior, why they can't control themselves better, or do more?

I've got to ask, who here was alive when this issue was printed?

this could be one of the greatest questions you've asked across comicdom. 
 and one not addressed efficiently enough no matter where you turn for publishers. 
 
My answer would be no.
Force might work on the first level, but it ends up causing even more work to 'enforce'. 
The smarter strategy is going to be to try to recruit and analyze where force is required later and then if need be utilize it. Kind of a like a Sun Tzu approach to the whole situation from a 'war' standpoint. 
 
Realistically however, law enforcement and heroism REALLY doesn't mix as much as we've been 'read to believe'. Given todays media environment and what's obviously existed in the 'underground' of information gathering you couldn't have a hero today who wasn't branded a problem to society based on ANY legal system and government hiding behind it.

No one is above the law.

Except Judge Dredd, he IS the law. 

"Of course they should follow the law, no-one is above the law and a lot of heroes know and respect that. "

Yes, they should be responsible for their actions, but without any stupidity like in civil war. But I think that Bucky should be forgiven because he was brainwashed while killing people at war and later.

Superheroes fight Super-villains, because nobody else can. It's not like "oh, the NYPD would have stopped Juggernaut's rampage through the city, but then Spider-man swooped in and destroyed several blocks in a super-powered fight. What a jerk".
 And no, forcing super-heroes to work for the government is not a solution. Slavery is abolished, and I for one do not want it back. Everyone has a right to chose their profession.
So what I'm saying is, if you want to put superheroes on trial for friggin' property damage when they risk their lives to save us from super-villains...go ahead. But don't expect them to stick their necks out for you then.
Expect the Fantastic Four family to spend the night in front of the TV with a big bowl of popcorn while Dr.Doom takes over the world. Expect Batman to spend the evening hanging out with a supermodel in his big mansion while the Joker poisons the water supply of Gotham.

If superheroes have to follow civilian laws, then they wouldn't be able to even fight crime! In some issues, the threat is too great for the city or state police to handle! The superheroes have to be able to stop the villians! Really it's the villians fault's for starting the fight and they pay for it by going to jail!

I don't see how they could operate if they actually obeyed the law.

No, no one should have to obey the law. They break it, the Punisher kills them. Simple as that.

Yes and and no. Should depend on the story. Thats my answer for everything lol. Some characters, stories, writers work better in either context on a deep or superficial level. As a joined universe as a whole, well, depends. Ideally case by case situation. Some stories can avoid and ignore, other stories can delve into more detail. Generally though they shouldn't be above the (or a) law. 

hmmm

I don't know if they should, but Jenny Sparks would probably laugh her ass off, then ask whether you're being serious, then laugh some more and leave.

Depending on the book and character, it may bother me to see a hero break a kid's bike, while I may not flinch if another hero causes terrible mayhem and death. It's difficult to give a definitive, blanket answer.

I think one of the reasons the X-Men are my favourite corner of the Marvel U is that, more than anyone else, they've had to deal with public opinion, "real world" concerns and accountability on a regular basis. And they never, ever get a free pass.

Well, you have to understand....heroes are not perfect. They can't save everyone from random accident. Yes, they are supposed to serve and protect...but there are moments when a hero can't save a person from..for example: a pole that is about to fall on a person's head. It is not easy.

I say blame the villains.  There wouldn't be so much destruction if they weren't starting a ruckus everywhere they went, necessitating the intervention of heroes.  Make them foot the bill if it's proven that they started it and the hero wasn't being stupid.

Absolutely! Do you have any idea how many times I've wondered who's going to pay for the window that Spider-Man smashed through or the car Superman sneezed on? The big cop out that comic creators seem to come up with is equating superheroes with forces of nature, which makes sense conceptually. But as soon as a nine year old girl gets killed then it's kind of hard to pass of any hero as an act of god (even Thor). And this is what really pissed my off about the Superhuman Registration Act. Tony was right! He had a system in place that would create a widespread network of accountable superheros! There was no reason for Cap to get all Civil War on everybody. Tony's system actually worked and heroes and villains alike would be held accountable for their actions.

Depends on the severity of their actions weighed against the benefit gained by taking them.  In example,  lose one or one hundred.

I believe if anything, they should obey the law more than the average man.  they all have great power, and with great power comes great responsibility, they have to be more than just crime fighters or villain stoppers, they have to be an idea, an idea that justice will prevail, and example that no one is above the law, they have too much power to be running rogue, if they start to think of themselves as above the law they could develop god complexes, they could become corrupt and more frightening, their ideals can become corrupt.  If a hero kills someone, they have to be held accountable just as if a citizen or cop would.

vigilantism is against the law.  Assault is against the law.  Lol speeding is against the law and I really doubt that Batman keeps the batmobile at 45 

I agree with the Superhuman Registration Act, so no I don't believe they should be exempt from the laws. No one is ASKING them in most cases to save them. If they are willing to put their lives on the line to save the world and other then they should be willing to put everything on the line, other wise they are just being selfish, basically saying "Yeah i'll help, until it effects my social life then its a no go".

depends on the story. if its realistic, yes superheroes or vigilantes should be treated as outlaws, but if its unrealistic, much like civil war, they are like us marshalls in costumes.

Any laws that they work outside of should be worked out in advance, but Superman is clearly going to break a lot of stuff when he's fighting evil aliens.  I don't think that he should be held accountable, and I don't think Metropolis would hold him accountable.

Most superheroes are acting on behalf of the people of whatever city they operate in. Most of the time they are trying to uphold the law when the police can't. In a way they are police officers and wards of the state. 
 
Its really the failing of the (fictional) governments for not publicly recognizing the efforts of citizens to protect themselves and their fellow citizens. They are only vigilantes because of the failing of the city/state to reconize their contributions. 
 
So no they are not be above the law but they should be party to it.

" Of course they should follow the law, no-one is above the law and a lot of heroes know and respect that. "

I think most heroes at least attempt to follow the law, and that's the way it should be.  Most law enforcement understand what the heroes are putting on the line, and turn a blind eye when laws are bent. 
Still, I always find it somewhat troubling when comics depict destruction of property with no mention of the hero "covering it" or there being some kind of superhero insurance that covers it.

okay right, i could just imagine the punisher and ghost rider obeying the law, come on

isn't it safe to asume that some heroes are above the law? legally speaking i mean,  some crimes, like murder, is when a human being kills another human, therefor, superman could not be charged with murder, or any other alien, now if there are any special laws that cover aliens as well i wouldn't know..

As far as the death of Captain Stacy, I think that falls under Good Samaritan Laws. Spiderman's qualifications and good intentions to prevent further harm protects him from being found culpable. A real world example is if you have CPR training and break someone's ribs while performing CPR. Technically, breaking someone's ribs is assault, but your training and intent protect you, in the eyes of the law, so that person can't sue you.  I'm pretty sure the villain would be found culpable, his actions forced the hero's if the hero caused the damage. 
 
Think of it this way for the real world: a former Marine is among a group of people taken hostage by an armed gunman. The Marine sees an opening and tackles the gunman, and in the struggle, another hostage gets shot. Is it the Marine's fault, or the hostage takers?

Superheroes that completely follow the law would make a dull comic.

I always thought it was stupid that they charged Green Arrow with killing Prometheus, even though that took place in another dimension and therefore outside of the jurisdiction of Star City.   

Depends on what universe and what law. The DCU has defended the right for superheroes to operate with a secret identity, as per Ostrander's Suicide Squad. This obviously covers operating with a mask, and would seem to igve the OK to vigilantism, but less obviously, it allows a superhero to give testimony in court under their alias.
 
Just  a small bit of the DCU. I'm sure there are more bits and pieces that say superheroism is legal, to an extent.

Yes and No.

I believe one of the biggest reasons for a secret identity is to avoid liability for super heroic actions. They realize that they will have to use very rough treatment and sometimes even extra judicious punishment (even the nice superheroes trap people in other dimensions)  that could never fit into the law. Also, other than Batman, none of them could afford to cover the accidental property damage from these encounters. At the same time, I believe most super heroes do what they do because they have a general respect for right and wrong so they follow the law whenever they can and unless they are ridiculously powerful like a Thor or Silver Surfer they need to be sure that law enforcement sees them as useful to maintain their social contract of turning a blind eye.

" Of course they should follow the law, no-one is above the law and a lot of heroes know and respect that. "