A message from our CEO about the future of Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange. Read now.

New answers tagged

1

It's up to you as the author to define whether there is some forensic way to prove a demonic possession after it has run its course. If demonic possession alters the outward appearance of a person (slit pupils, longer nails, pointy teeth) during it, then security cameras might be an option. Blood spilled during possession might have different qualities. ...


0

However, humans that have been killed while being possessed also burn to ash, leaving behind only a blackened stain on the ground What about parts of humans? Whereas humans leave DNA evidence behind at a crime scene, this DNA is from dead tissue, so would it not burn to ash? Therefore the existence of traces of ash is evidence that the person was possessed ...


3

The answer is no, unless you want your story to be extremely boring. (It further does not make sense that there would be a method if no one has survived possession before, since who could know of such a method?) A better method is for Phoenix Wright to establish the demon as a better suspect than your client. For example, by showing the demon has a motive ...


4

1) Too many people throw trash from flying carpets It is bad enough that car drivers throw trash out their windows at roadside; imagine millions of carpet flyers getting rid of trash by throwing it over the side. This accumulates in gardens and on rooftops as well as in streets and parks. It can also prove a safety hazard - getting hit by a half-empty ...


2

The magic used to power them is unethical. e.g. it was discovered it draws from the souls of babies or something. Or else the left-over faerie dust emitted from the things as they are flying is causing untold damage to the atmosphere, or falling on the people below and is detrimental to their mental health.


1

Safety isn't the problem, privacy is. But the influential people who fear being spied upon by flying-carpet riders don't want to expose their true concern, so they quietly arrange a safety worry campaign. As you note, the fatality numbers don't seem to add up to a real threat. (Or it could be like automobiles in the real world, responsible for actually ...


4

They weren't deliberately banned but rather they fell down a crack in the legislation that means they're not covered by other regulations. They're not aircraft because they're too low and too slow. They're not automobiles because they fly. They could be classed as helicopters but they don't pass the rules regarding rotor safety. If you think that's ...


2

Safety belts aren't a safety feature in an open transport. For the same reasons we don't have safety belts on motorbikes. Pretty much the only thing worse than getting thrown from your bike when it crashes, is being tied to it as it hurls along the ground at 100km/h. So I assume they would be banned because they aren't safe, and no amount of safety belts is ...


3

Health hazard. There are other things which did their jobs very well but were banned because they were health hazards. Carbon tetrachloride was a phenomenal stain remover and good for other things, but caused liver toxicity. Benzene was a useful gasoline additive but caused cancer. Flying carpets are useful and fun but with repeated use they cause ...


1

Safety Hazard in the form of Suicide Drivers Normal cars are pretty dangerous themselves, but imagine someone with the ability to fly and crash very heavy and dangerous objects into places. (Or don't and do a Google search on terrorist activities using airplanes.) The magic carpet represents the ability to instantly achieve a powerful aerial speed, and when ...


0

Lawyers able to convince people that they were not breaking the law would become crime lords overnight. With no other way of enforcing the laws, these criminals are free to do as they please. Lawyers will have no trouble persuading themselves that they are acting legally and circumventing the mind control process.


3

There are two answers here, an in-universe one and a real-world one. In-universe, it's simply that one does not go into the superhero business unless one is a self-righteous prig - someone who thinks s/he is superior to others, and so has an inherent right to tell them how to live. Not something limited to superheroes (though they perhaps have more ...


5

Superheroes are not perfect. If they were their stories would be rather uninteresting. This issue is one where different superheroes would likely have different opinions and take different stances. Perhaps the conflict of opinions can lead to a very interesting story. In fact, in Batman: The Dark Knight Returns (part two), it's the political differences ...


0

Drug crimes are always surrounded by others. To make any illegal business one would come to terror and/or murders or god knows what else. Superheroes fight for justice against evil, "illegality". Drugs here are just a casus belli, not the essence of a war itself. So, no superheroes would leave politics for politics (but may combine this two activities as ...


Top 50 recent answers are included