Said this before - which never prevents long-winded me from sayin' it again! - the "conflict" in Civil War doesn't seem to be one worth having... IMHO.
Basically, Cap's side is the "pro-vigilante" side. You can dress it up, you can finesse it, but what Cap is saying is that anyone... ANYONE... who puts on a mask has a right to obey what laws he or she chooses, to disregard what laws he or she chooses, to use whatever level of force he or she is comfortable with, whenever and wherever he is comfortable using it, all the while being answerable to NO ONE.
In real life...*S*... it wouldn't have taken literal decades for a "Nitro" incident. We would have had one a LONG time before now. Shoot, we would have had DOZENS of them before now. Even in the controlled, fictional confines of the Marvel Universe, we HAVE had other incidents - we just weren't (generally) shown the consequences. When you think of ALL the battles that have been fought... buildings trashed, cars thrown, ammo expended, ray blasts hurled, etc.. do you really believe there have been no meaningful "civilian" casualties before now?
So I think the whole thing is a "cheat". What makes it interesting, to the extent that it is interesting, is seeing heroes in serious conflict (instead of the traditional one-book "Heroes meet, have disagreement, have cool fight for fanboy enjoyment, then make up" stuff we generally see). But that is, for me, tainted, by the weird concept of Cap and company taking an explicit stand in favor of vigilante action.
I mean... since when does Captain America toss a SHIELD agent into high speed traffic, causing a multicar crash in which regular, nonpower police have GOT to be seriously injured, so he can defend the right to... what.... stand outside the law and do whatever the !@$@# he wants? YIKES!
Shadow
PS _ A few pages back, EVIL does a MUCH more eloquent and thorough job of covering the same points. OOPS. He also raises the gun control analogy, which is a great one, if a dangerously senstive one...but he is dead on. Imagine someone saying "I have the right to carry a flamethrower. Everywhere. And a tank. And to fly my own fighter jet. And more than that - to USE any of these when and if I see fit. In any way I see fit. Anonymously." Er...think that MIGHT give a LOT of rational people pause? Hmmm? Are we REALLY to believe the pro and anti registration forces are on EQUAL moral footing here?
