Jump to content
X-Ray

An Explanation Of The "no-Kill" Rule In The Mu- A Theory

Recommended Posts

Note: Edited for spelling and grammar mistakes by author.Fellow denizens of BZPower- after much thought, I think I may have found a logical explantion as to why the MU's good guys do not, or, in certain interpretations, heavily look down upon, killing.I believe that it all depends strictly upon the nature of the environment created by the Great Beings for the MU inhabitants to live in. Firstly, as we saw in The Many Deaths of Toa Tuyet, there does not appear to be an established system of law and punishment in even the most "civilized" parts of the MU, such as Metru Nui. There is certainly crime (such as smuggling and forgery), but the Vahki are in place there for internal threats, though they are mainly concerned with making the Matoran get back to work.Actually punishing caught criminals such as rouge Toa seems beyond the capacities of our heroes Lhikan and Nidhiki, who actually have to take time to deliberate Tuyet's punishment, as opposed to getting her a court date, through which a judgement and punishment would be imposed. But wait, I forgot; the MU does not have any courts of law.Since Metru Nui, and indeed, the entire MU, was designed as little more than a giant circuit board, it is easy to see why the GBs did not put into place some sort of crime and punishment system. The Toa are more about dealing with external threats, and the Vahki are about keeping the Matoran in line. In a way, Metru Nui is not unlike a socialist police state. The only reason it works is because the inhabitants do not need food, and the closest alternative is easily obtained at apparently no cost. Also, everyone effectively works for the government, seeing as how Metru Nui is essentially an oversized powerplant.But getting back to the main subject, because an automated world with automated inhabitants provides the only reasonable solution to the "if but men were angels" dilemma of all societies, the Great Beings did not see the need to establish a justice system, or at least a protocol for one, since there were no criminals- only hostile outsiders or aberrants. So, we see that at least in the beginning, it wasn't that Toa weren't allowed to kill; they simply didn't need to.However, as the Brotherhood of Makuta can attest, those of the MU were not all "angels", due to the sentience inducing "glitch" that eventually pervaded all of that realm's inhabitants (dear me, I sound like a GB writing a term paper). So, we see that somewhere along the very long line of MU history, when the possibility of having to kill someone came up, the concept of "There is no need to kill" transformed into one of the key tenants of the vaguely defined "Toa Code": "Do not kill." Thus, no courts of law, because infractions by Matoran could be easily "corrected" by Vahki, and anything else essentially constituted an act of war, and that's a whole different akilini game.In the courts of the real world, Tuyet would surely have received the death penalty or at least life in prison for treason, three counts of murder, property damage, theft, resisting arrest, and obstruction of justice, and I'm not even sure that's everything.This is exactly why the Order of Mata Nui was founded, and it also explains why the police, the neighborhood watch program, and the CIA have apparently switched places in this allegory (quick reference- Toa=NWS, should be Police; OMN=CIA, though essentially fills police role as well; Ta-Koro guard, Chronicler's Company, etc- Undetermined. Logically, the Chronicler's Co. would be a NWS and the TKG would be police, but it's never clearly defined as their main job is to call the Toa if they can't handle something), and why the OMN is constantly demonized for their allowance of killing and why the Toa are often seen as morons.So, in the end, the whole no-kill rule isn't about misguided honor or illogical policy- it's about an unforseen programming error. Thanks a lot GB's, you totally nerfed the super-police.Of course, it's only theory... :akaku: X-Ray :akaku:

Edited by X-Ray

"Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken."
- Ecclesiastes 4:12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that might be part of it, but you seem to be assuming there's something wrong with the policy, that it's somehow a bad thing the Toa don't kill. But the very good reasons for that have been gone over many times. And for extreme cases there is the Order.And I don't understand what you were driving at in the last paragraph, with switching analogies and "demonizing" and stuff. First of all, it's fiction, maybe you're taking it a little too seriously? :P But that aside, it reads like a "darned if you do, darned if you don't" -- which is it? Again, they're clearly right where they should be to handle most threats. And it makes it sound like the Order will just kill willynilly -- only if necessary -- and if the Toa are in an extreme situation where there's no other choice they will kill.But good thinking at the first part anyhow. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wahoo! I'm a denizen of BZP! (It's sort of a funny word when you think about it... denizen... XP)Anywho, that's an interesting way to look at it. Though, I'm surprised you didn't mention that killing is generally viewed as a bad thing by most sentient life forms in our world. I wouldn't think it's unnatural to dislike murder, also thinking about it from a GB's perspective, wouldn't it be beneficial to make toa avoid killing? Say something went screwy with a toa and he/she malfunctions. That's a being with the potential to shoot fire, lightning, etc at will, so it would be dangerous if, say, toa killed and then forgot what it should be targeting via glitch and then targeted everything that moved. Well, maybe that's a bad example, but I hope you see what I'm getting at. Also, I'm surprised you didn't mention the Pit in all of this. After all, that is a sort of justice/punishment system in the MU and it is where Tuyet ended up (well... sorta kinda... >>). Granted the OMN created it, but it's still present in the MU. The question of whether it's right to kill or wrong to kill in the name of justice is a pretty interesting debate for a story (and one that you'll see in real life as well), so I don't think it's surprising to see that the "Good Guys" are against the act of killing in the story. Anyway, this was an interesting way to look at things nonetheless.

Edited by Tekulo: Toa of Gales

Executive Vice President of Tomato Throwing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good reasoning there, mostly. What I think is missing here is that one must assume that with sentience comes a sense of morality, and more often than not, a sense of morality leads to rules and laws. Which is part of the reason we have in the real world laws against stealing, murder, etc.. Another important factor to consider is the difference between OMN and the Toa.The Order of Mata Nui is an organization, as in organized. Whereas the Toa are a tradition, the only thing that's keeping them together is a mutual moral code. It's like comparing the FBI to the knights of the crusades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think "not killing" is the most naturally occurring moral code, you wouldn't kill yourself, and when you look at things from another beings perspective, you wouldn't kill them either. If the Matoran could gain sentience, they could gain this piece of moral code.

And it makes it sound like the Order will just kill willynilly

Forgetting Tobduk? :P

- Taipu1.

tayis.png

HighFly Matoran

Showdown

BZPRPG Profiles

Have you seen my Blog? I understand if you haven't

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I beg your pardon, all of you, especially boneseii. I really should have been more clear about my point.What I'm trying to say is that Toa, who are supposed to be the equivalent of a police force, are generally prohibited from using lethal force, unlike a police force in real life.The OMN, on the other hand, is often portrayed in a negative light for its use of such force, and indeed, the simple measure of sending particularly nasty criminals to a prison (without trial, no less, but remember, no courts) is viewed as an extreme measure. Of course, the Pit would probably not be allowed to exist in the United States in the real world, and would be fraught with human rights abuse charges.But anyhow, my point is that it is completely absurd that this is the case at all. A rule against murder, yes, that is only common sense. But a rule against any killing of any sort for the nearest equivalent of a police force, that's where my issue is. And no, I don't believe that the OMN is so "darker and edgier" as to go about killing willy-nilly, no more than any modern law enforcement agency such as the FBI or the Department of Homeland Security does. By "demonized" I meant that they were often criticized in-story for this.

The Order of Mata Nui is an organization, as in organized. Whereas the Toa are a tradition, the only thing that's keeping them together is a mutual moral code. It's like comparing the FBI to the knights of the crusades.

I hadn't thought about it that way, but I'm not sure I totally agree with it. The Toa's capacity as officers of the government is unclearly depicited in the saga, so your theory may have some merit. However, since GregF has oft-confirmed the Toa-as-police allegory, I'm not sure that it holds much water. And even if it does, I'm afraid it only makes the situation worse by relegating the Toa to state-sponsored vigilantes. :akaku: X-Ray :akaku: Edited by X-Ray

"Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken."
- Ecclesiastes 4:12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it makes it sound like the Order will just kill willynilly

Forgetting Tobduk? :P
When they believe it necessary, to clarify. :P Even Tobduk doesn't kill anybody who's a problem. If he did he'd be fired (which probably means killed lol :P).

What I'm trying to say is that Toa, who are supposed to be the equivalent of a police force, are generally prohibited from using lethal force, unlike a police force in real life....But anyhow, my point is that it is completely absurd that this is the case at all. A rule against murder, yes, that is only common sense. But a rule against any killing of any sort for the nearest equivalent of a police force, that's where my issue is.

I suspected this might be the problem -- basically you have misunderstood the rule and the whole system. You seem to be getting this confused with real life, for one thing, but that's not at all a good analogy, because in real life you don't have relatively defenseless citizens threatened with beings with inherent powers such as elemental, etc. Maybe a little with physical strength but for the most part a normal prison will handle them, weapons can be taken away, etc. (I'm oversimplifying, but you get the point).Also, Toa may kill if they have no choice. That's a common misconception. As I've put it before, the reason the rule is stated as an absolute is so that they are not tempted to use the "if no choice" option too readily. They should find every other way to solve it. And many good reasons for this have been presented.This lesson was learned most clearly in 2006 when the Inika were forced to go out of control and murder what appeared to be monstrous villains, but then shapeshifted into the Toa Nuva. Of course, the Nuva too were an illusion, but the point is that in a world filled with powers, including illusion, you cannot assume your eyes are seeing the real picture. Real police could almost never face such a situation, so any comparison to them falls flat on its face right here.Also, the Toa are often facing villains without a "profile" on what information they might have that the Toa might need. And even more importantly, the Toa actually have a ton more options to handle most villains without killing. Even now in the early days of stun technology (tazers), police still often have no reasonable choice left but to shoot guns. When you compare that to elemental powers and mask powers it's extremely primitive.And just in general I would advise against analogizing when trying to understand a story. Analogies can be useful for making points, but only once you first consider the actual story in its own context and make sure the analogy fits, or just a key part of it. This part of this analogy doesn't even remotely fit.

...The OMN, on the other hand, is often portrayed in a negative light for its use of such force, and indeed, the simple measure of sending particularly nasty criminals to a prison (without trial, no less, but remember, no courts) is viewed as an extreme measure.

This appears to be another misunderstanding -- you are judging the Toa and the Order separately as if they do not work hand in hand. Understandable since the Toa don't usually know of the Order and probably wouldn't like it if they heard of it. But they don't need to know of them in order for the Order to rely on the Toa to handle the vast majority of problems, and only step in where they really are needed. :)But you know, if it is portrayed in a negative light for possible abuses, then so be it. Good guys are not perfect; this is a realistic story where people make questionable decisions. You're not supposed to go "ra ra ra whatever these guys do must be good". :)

Of course, the Pit would probably not be allowed to exist in the United States in the real world, and would be fraught with human rights abuse charges.

It most certainly would if we had villains who could do what Bionicle villains can do. Also, my memory's a little foggy on the Pit, but I'm not sure what abuse charges you are talking about. It's a prison, and Earth is filled with prisons. (And life there ain't happy or safe, so not sure what you mean that could be worse at the Pit. :P)But more to the point, the Pit is an alternative to killing for the Order, so shouldn't we look at this as a good thing? Often the Toa imprison too, and in some ways that are even dangerous. Get frozen -- someone bumps you, oops, your head falls off. Both groups try to imprison before killing, but both prisons might not be safe. And really the Order's methods of imprisonment are a lot more reliable since it's standardized, whereas the Toa's are just temporary and whatever they can manage. Sometimes without being given a chance to properly plan, just thought up in the heat of the moment. Edited by bonesiii

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the OMN kills because the Toa cannot. Think about it. Terry couldn't be stopped unless he died. We saw that he was able to come and go as he pleased in the Pit. We thought we stopped him THREE TIMES before he died. If a Toa had been in Mata Nui's place, Terry would have never have been stopped. And, if not for the Brotherhood-Order war, in which most of the Makuta died, there would have been many more to take his place. Sometimes, death is the only way to stop an enemy, and the Toa Code just stops merciless and unreasonable killing of enemies that could have been imprisoned, disbanded, or prevented from being a threat.


aouROFb.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the OMN kills because the Toa cannot. Think about it. Terry couldn't be stopped unless he died. We saw that he was able to come and go as he pleased in the Pit. We thought we stopped him THREE TIMES before he died. If a Toa had been in Mata Nui's place, Terry would have never have been stopped. And, if not for the Brotherhood-Order war, in which most of the Makuta died, there would have been many more to take his place. Sometimes, death is the only way to stop an enemy, and the Toa Code just stops merciless and unreasonable killing of enemies that could have been imprisoned, disbanded, or prevented from being a threat.

And it's worth mentioning that the Toa tried to kill Teridax at least twice. They just didn't know how. And both times they (and we the fans) were led to believe he really was dead. These are good examples of how the Toa Code really means "Toa don't kill unless a villain literally leaves them no other choice." It's just worded as "Toa don't kill" to emphasize how hard they should strive to avoid it. Edited by bonesiii

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the OMN kills because the Toa cannot. Think about it. Terry couldn't be stopped unless he died. We saw that he was able to come and go as he pleased in the Pit. We thought we stopped him THREE TIMES before he died. If a Toa had been in Mata Nui's place, Terry would have never have been stopped. And, if not for the Brotherhood-Order war, in which most of the Makuta died, there would have been many more to take his place. Sometimes, death is the only way to stop an enemy, and the Toa Code just stops merciless and unreasonable killing of enemies that could have been imprisoned, disbanded, or prevented from being a threat.

And it's worth mentioning that the Toa tried to kill Teridax at least twice. They just didn't know how. And both times they (and we the fans) were led to believe he really was dead. These are good examples of how the Toa Code really means "Toa don't kill unless a villain literally leaves them no other choice." It's just worded as "Toa don't kill" to emphasize how hard they should strive to avoid it.
Besides that, the Toa Code was very vague, and that was intentional. After thousands of years of protecting matoran, it would certainly be vague. The original code was probably very percise, and allowed for cases of termination.-Bane

Gentlemen, it's time to spread the word. And the word is: Panic

 

life is not a question of how long we live, but what we do with the life we have



BZRPG profiles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could have been, yeah. I've also pointed out in past topics that it makes sense to keep it simple. Far easier to remember "don't kill" than "don't kill except blah blah blah." They might start putting the wrong things after the "except." But yeah, I hadn't thought of the idea there might have been an except originally. It's possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry boneseii, but I was under the impression that Toa are generally not allowed to kill at all. Of course, the whole "Toa Code" is rather vaguely defined. Just read this exchange between Kopaka and Pohatu from the first chapter of The Powers That Be:

“Could be,” nodded Pohatu. “He finds Karzahni, stabs him, and his enemy goes over the cliff into the canyon.”“If that’s true, he has violated the code of the Toa,” said Kopaka. “We have to bring him down.”

Now, what I want to know is if they're saying that it's against the Toa Code to straight up murder somebody, or killing period. I'm just not entirely sure. I think it may have been stated somewhere that the "Toa Code" allows for killing only when absolutely nessascary, but throughout the Bionicle saga, our heroes on consistently written as if it's no killing, period. For example, when Tahu dueled with Nektann during the Battle of Bara Magna (as detailed in Journey's End), I couldn't tell from their banter whether killing in the middle of a battle was against the "Toa Code" or killing period. Nektann was like "muwahaha, you're going to kill now, ha" and Tahu was like "No, I win! May I never kill anybody ever ever evar!11!" (specifically, Tahu said, "be gratefull that I never learend from my enemies to kill." [Emphasis added]) There's also the time when Mazeka reflected on the ineffectiveness of the Toa's percieved chase-the-enemy-away strategy, but Mazeka's rather obscurred opinions aren't exactly the most reliable source.My point in the above paragraph is that it's rather confusing about just what the "Toa Code" probits and allows, thus making it hard to argue about its effectiveness.Also, I'm comparing the Toa to a real-life police force in terms of principle. Toa are essentially military police in function, even though they talk like they're superheroes half the time (thus, no to all killing), and most of the threats they fight, are, like I said, acts of war anyway, and that's something else entirely. As for the Pit being a more merciful alternative to execution; dude, it's the Pit. It's a living death. And of course regular prisons in the MU (if they existed) would be a lot different from real life prisons. But all they need is a court system and some laws actually carved out in stone, and *POOF* -all moral ambiguity and any drama derived therof disapears. :akaku: X-Ray :akaku: Edited by X-Ray

"Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken."
- Ecclesiastes 4:12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Could be,” nodded Pohatu. “He finds Karzahni, stabs him, and his enemy goes over the cliff into the canyon.”“If that’s true, he has violated the code of the Toa,” said Kopaka. “We have to bring him down.”

The reason Kopaka says this is there are many other options before killing Karzahni. And Karzahni may have actually been just minding his own business at the time (I dunno; he's a villain, but he's kinda a "fish out of water" then).Also you were probably writing that while the above posts were added, so read those for more. :)

I think it may have been stated somewhere that the "Toa Code" allows for killing only when absolutely nessascary, but throughout the Bionicle saga, our heroes on consistently written as if it's no killing, period.

Yes, it's confirmed by Greg. There was a major debate once between someone worrying because the Toa were killing in extreme cases, and Greg and me pointing out how sometimes it's necessary. He gave lots of reasons and scenarios in that topic why the Toa sometimes need to kill, etc.And again, I think the reason it's written this way is literally a challenge to you the reader to change your thinking. Notice you're worrying about the exceptions and the killing. It almost seems as if people who do this (I'm not talking just to you here so pardon if this doesn't describe you, just a general observation from experience) are missing the point of the Code. It is to emphasize, strongly, that we should be thinking about how to avoid killing, not about how to find reasons TO kill.Maybe if we humans truly adopted this attitude we would have seriously advanced stun technology beyond the rather clumsy tazers we currently have, and police would have long ago been fully equipped with these. Notice how on TV you almost always still see cops drawing a gun first, not a tazer. Why? Tazers are lame for the most part, even today. That's basically the fault of the entire populace for not seriously trying hard to fund research into better stun technologies. We don't care enough about it.

Also, I'm comparing the Toa to a real-life police force in terms of principle. Toa are essentially military police in function, even though they talk like they're superheroes half the time (thus, no to all killing), and most of the threats they fight, are, like I said, acts of war anyway, and that's something else entirely.

No, they really aren't, though. The closest thing to police are Vahki, and even these have various advanced no-kill options (prior to the glitch :P).Toa are more like highly skilled special ops commandos with very advanced stun technology and skills, who often go after high-value targets who need to be captured for information, not killed.

As for the Pit being a more merciful alternative to execution; dude, it's the Pit. It's a living death. And of course regular prisons in the MU (if they existed) would be a lot different from real life prisons. But all they need is a courty system and some laws actually carved out in stone, and *POOF* -all moral ambiguity and any drama derived therof disapears.

I really don't understand what you're trying to say here. For example, what do you mean that it's a "living death"? Maybe that's how you think you would feel if you were put there, but that's just you, isn't it? And how is that, again, any different from real prisons? They're not fun either.And that last line opens up a ton of cans of worms. Legalism has become a monster in and of itself in modern society. Most problems can be solved with the simple principle of thinking things through carefully with a strong goal towards peacefulness and harmony. A lot of times exponentially increasing laws create the impression that something is okay as long as there's a legal loophole for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think another reason is possible as well - that having some of your nanotech destroy other nanotech would eventually reduce the total number of nanotech. As it's not known where new Matoran are made (if at all), it seems logical that if a Matoran can be corrected by the Vahki, then there is no use in wasting a perfectly good worker. It's like cells in the human body. If tissue becomes infected, your body doesn't just destroy it, it tries to fight the infection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Matoran are made with special machines, present at least in Metru Nui, but your point stands. After all it would be a waste of energy to make new ones needlessly, if nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Matoran are made with special machines, present at least in Metru Nui, but your point stands. After all it would be a waste of energy to make new ones needlessly, if nothing else.

Wait, when were the origins of Matoran explained? I haven't heard of anything like this. Then again, I'm not that active on this site. Edited by Paleo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a story rule that the origins will never be explained in detail. But we know that part about the machines. We don't know how the machines work. The main reason that part was revealed is to confirm that new Matoran can still be made on Spherus Magna; these machines will need to be found and relocated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it may have been stated somewhere that the "Toa Code" allows for killing only when absolutely nessascary, but throughout the Bionicle saga, our heroes on consistently written as if it's no killing, period.

Yes, it's confirmed by Greg. There was a major debate once between someone worrying because the Toa were killing in extreme cases, and Greg and me pointing out how sometimes it's necessary. He gave lots of reasons and scenarios in that topic why the Toa sometimes need to kill, etc.And again, I think the reason it's written this way is literally a challenge to you the reader to change your thinking. Notice you're worrying about the exceptions and the killing. It almost seems as if people who do this (I'm not talking just to you here so pardon if this doesn't describe you, just a general observation from experience) are missing the point of the Code. It is to emphasize, strongly, that we should be thinking about how to avoid killing, not about how to find reasons TO kill.Maybe if we humans truly adopted this attitude we would have seriously advanced stun technology beyond the rather clumsy tazers we currently have, and police would have long ago been fully equipped with these. Notice how on TV you almost always still see cops drawing a gun first, not a tazer. Why? Tazers are lame for the most part, even today. That's basically the fault of the entire populace for not seriously trying hard to fund research into better stun technologies. We don't care enough about it.
boneseii, please don't think of me as out of turn, but as someone who has extensively researched police forces and related topics as part of a side project of mine, the stuff after paragraph one is nonsense. [bones: X-ray, please calm down. You have used an insulting tone here, and flamed. I will not edit it in this case, as it was mild, and I should have seen it coming better and guided against it. But I'm editing in here now to let you know you crossed the line. In general, calm down, and think this through. I made valid points, which you clearly didn't read carefully enough, probably getting too worked up to do so. Most of your reply is not addressing things I actually said, and I was actually agreeing with you in a lot of it. My full reply in a moment. :)]Tasers have only been around for a few decades, and the technology is still new and improving. A lot of police departments are undermanned, overworked, and don't have a big budget. The job of, you know, enforcing our laws has been largely left to the police, who are trained to discern when and when not to employ lethal force. The idea of weapons that incapacitate but don't kill is a fairly new one, not because our cops aren't conerned with loss of life, but because lethal force is meant for situations that require it, and it's hard to apply a non-lethal solution to such situations. Meaning that if a bunch of cops armed only with tasers go up against a handful of madmen with shotguns, the criminals will win. Of course Toa and police aren't going around looking for reasons to kill. That's stupid, and they're not sadists. The only reasons tasers aren't as frequently featured on televisions shows about police (as if that somehow pertains to this discussion, which is already getting off topic) is that tasers are generally used by regular patrol officers, (as opposed to detectives, who are often the "stars" of such shows) and until recently have not been as widespread.BTW, a lot of police use tasers as well as regular guns, but the thing is that tasers cannot solve all problems just because they are classified as non-lethal. They don't have the range (some can stun people at a distance, but that's only so far), stopping power, or track record of guns, and sometimes can in fact cause death in certain situations. It's not culture or morality- it's technology. If we had laser beams which could magically render all criminals unconsious, and it was practical to use them, they would be used. As for more research on the subject, buddy, we had batons before there were tasers. Tasers are just the next step in non-lethal weapons after those.

Also, I'm comparing the Toa to a real-life police force in terms of principle. Toa are essentially military police in function, even though they talk like they're superheroes half the time (thus, no to all killing), and most of the threats they fight, are, like I said, acts of war anyway, and that's something else entirely.

No, they really aren't, though. The closest thing to police are Vahki, and even these have various advanced no-kill options (prior to the glitch :P).Toa are more like highly skilled special ops commandos with very advanced stun technology and skills, who often go after high-value targets who need to be captured for information, not killed.
I thought I discussed the Vahki. They're more like giant robotic truant officers than actual police. And really, how are elemental powers remotely comparable to "advanced stun technology"? Furthermore, the comparison of Toa to commandos is logical fallacy, I'm afraid. Just because such commandos sometimes do what you say they do, that ignores their primary function- to blow up stuff more subtly and better than the regular soldiers. What I mean is, Toa do what police do; catch criminals (Tuyet) and preserve the peace.

As for the Pit being a more merciful alternative to execution; dude, it's the Pit. It's a living death. And of course regular prisons in the MU (if they existed) would be a lot different from real life prisons. But all they need is a courty system and some laws actually carved out in stone, and *POOF* -all moral ambiguity and any drama derived therof disapears.

I really don't understand what you're trying to say here. For example, what do you mean that it's a "living death"? Maybe that's how you think you would feel if you were put there, but that's just you, isn't it? And how is that, again, any different from real prisons? They're not fun either.And that last line opens up a ton of cans of worms. Legalism has become a monster in and of itself in modern society. Most problems can be solved with the simple principle of thinking things through carefully with a strong goal towards peacefulness and harmony. A lot of times exponentially increasing laws create the impression that something is okay as long as there's a legal loophole for it.
*Facepalms* I'm sorry bones, but our prisons are nothing like the Pit, nothing. Prisons in the real world can be terrible places to live, but they have guards, solitary confinement, opportunities to transfer to safer prisons, appeals courts, food, clothing, etc. The Pit has none of these. Have you played the video game Batman: Arkham City? Arkham City is a big area of the city cordoned off with all the criminals thrown in and left to themselves. The Pit is that, only it's underwater, full of scary and deadly monsters, and very, very dark. I was just saying that someone, like say, Pridak, might want to be executed as opposed to going to the Pit, but that's another argument for another topic.And lastly, the laws aren't meant to tell us what we can do, they're meant to tell us what we can't do. When you get a parking ticket, you know you're not supposed to park in a certain spot. That's all there is to it. But that's just a simple analogy. If you can find a loophole that allows for someone to break into my house and steal my stuff, let me know. And the whole thing about thinking things through for the sake of peacefulness and harmony? That's why we have a court system. But aren't you being a touch naive about this sort of thing? It's a lot more complicated than that.Well.This has been a rather though provoking conversation. At the very least, I'm sure we can agree on that. : ) :akaku: X-Ray :akaku: Edited by bonesiii

"Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken."
- Ecclesiastes 4:12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, please take serious note of what I just edited into your post:

[bones: X-ray, please calm down. You have used an insulting tone here, and flamed. I will not edit it in this case, as it was mild, and I should have seen it coming better and guided against it. But I'm editing in here now to let you know you crossed the line. In general, calm down, and think this through. I made valid points, which you clearly didn't read carefully enough, probably getting too worked up to do so. Most of your reply is not addressing things I actually said, and I was actually agreeing with you in a lot of it. My full reply in a moment. :)]

And in general that seems to have been your mistake from the start here. It sounds like you're getting emotional about this, but it's just entertainment, and frankly it looks like you've let this interfere with understanding it clearly. I don't think the story is actually depicting quite what you thought; you've been relying on some common misconceptions. I suspected so and wrote my post to bring them out if you did believe them, so that I could clear them up.First of all, the Pit you're thinking of is the result of the Great Cataclysm and has barely any relation to the old Pit that the Order actually ran. Don't forget one of the guards, Hydraxon, was killed by that incident, and most of the prisoners escaped and it was just the robots trying to keep them relatively contained in the new Pit. You started out talking about the Toa and the Order, so the Pit we should be looking most at is the original Pit. I was asking you how the original Pit is really much different from real prisons. As far as I can tell it's no different except to handle villains' powers.Secondly, let's just take a step back and let me ask you if you agree with this: It's best to use effective (key word) stun/cage/no-kill options that are available, and to save lethal force for extreme scenarios such as if you don't kill the villain first he WILL kill innocents and/or you. And that in some cases villains who are likely to escape do need "executed" when there's no better solution. This is the canon answer. Also, that the Toa are the public face of justice in the MU, and need to be peaceful to keep the Matoran's trust. For situations they can't handle because of this, there is the Order. Yes?Thirdly, instead of emotionally declaring everything I said after the first post "nonsense" (which is flaming, against our rules, and emotionalism too, but I forgive it :)), you should have read what I said more carefully -- it seems clear you just skimmed it and you gave a stock reply to a totally different point nobody brought up here. Let me quote that section again:

And again, I think the reason it's written this way is literally a challenge to you the reader to change your thinking. Notice you're worrying about the exceptions and the killing. It almost seems as if people who do this (I'm not talking just to you here so pardon if this doesn't describe you, just a general observation from experience) are missing the point of the Code. It is to emphasize, strongly, that we should be thinking about how to avoid killing, not about how to find reasons TO kill.Maybe if we humans truly adopted this attitude we would have seriously advanced stun technology beyond the rather clumsy tazers we currently have, and police would have long ago been fully equipped with these. Notice how on TV you almost always still see cops drawing a gun first, not a tazer. Why? Tazers are lame for the most part, even today. That's basically the fault of the entire populace for not seriously trying hard to fund research into better stun technologies. We don't care enough about it.

And I'm not really talking about "fault" -- maybe that's the wrong choice of words, since it's a negative, but about a positive -- we can change and improve, and we are. But we can improve faster. ^_^ But yes, the real victims in this are the police, who wrongly get a bad rap when they must use lethal force -- for lack of a quality alternative -- in questionable situations.

Tasers have only been around for a few decades

And the question is, why?Because everyday people have for too long had the attitude that lethal force is the answer to a wider variety of problems than it should be, and we have not pushed for reform hard enough and put our money where our mouth is. The only way that's going to change at a fast pace is if there is a "sea change" among the public at large, and that's why I am so encouraged that Bionicle has boldly taken an avoiding killing approach in its story. ^_^Now for a big chunk of the rest of your post you have gotten really detailed about police funding in the real world, etc. and is kinda getting into political ground we can't discuss here. I'd like to simply direct this conversation back to Bionicle, because that's what we're really talking about here. :) Besides, that part of your reply doesn't seem to really disagree with anything I said.

tasers cannot solve all problems just because they are classified as non-lethal.

That's the whole point I'm making. Real police don't have magical masks and elemental powers. Which is why the analogy to police really doesn't work here. What you should be doing is trying to understand what the Toa should do, given their actual (fictional) abilities and circumstances. :) Yes?

the Vahki [are] more like giant robotic truant officers than actual police.

Let's just stop worrying about what is more comparable to what in real life, lol. Nothing in real life is close enough for these analogies to work very well. The point is, Toa tend to go after villains they might need kept alive, for all kindsa reasons.

And really, how are elemental powers remotely comparable to "advanced stun technology"?

Or caging, etc. "No-kill" options would have been a better choice of words there, my bad. But some, like Toa of Ice or Lightning, are literally very good at stun (or equivalents). :) All the teams the canon story has followed directly have a Toa of Ice among them. And they have far more direct control over what happens with their elements than anybody in real life, whether kill or no kill.

Furthermore, the comparison of Toa to commandos is logical fallacy, I'm afraid. Just because such commandos sometimes do what you say they do, that ignores their primary function- to blow up stuff more subtly and better than the regular soldiers.

You missed my point. It wasn't that Toa are comparable to commandos in general, but to a specific purpose of some commandos, to capture possible informants. But again, let's not get sidetracked with the real-life stuff here. The point you need to understand is the good guys will often need information from their enemies once captured (or once Botar takes 'em mysteriously, etc.).Other reasons they might need to not kill include troublemakers who might reform, especially with Rahi, the villain might come in handy later against worse enemies or the like (Carapar comes to mind), they might be mind-controlled, they might actually be good guys stuck in an illusion like the 06 Nuva-killing test, they might have an important destiny (such as Makuta Teridax!), etc.Also, most of the Toa really do "blow stuff up" well. Emphasis on stuff, not people.

I was just saying that someone, like say, Pridak, might want to be executed as opposed to going to the Pit, but that's another argument for another topic.

It's relevant here.Again, you've misunderstood the Pit. Pridak is clearly portrayed as seeing the new Pit as an opportunity to get free and get back to conquering. He isn't worried about being comfortable; he's a villain with sadistic goals. And I doubt someone as ambitious as him is going to suddenly get suicidal instead of going to the old Pit (the one that's like real prisons, and the one he was actually sent to). He's going to think he'll one day escape, and he did -- and get back to conquering, which he kinda almost did, on a small scale.And that is probably typical of villains in Bionicle. They are thinking that prisons give them a chance to get out and get back to villainry, far preferable over death. And life in the old Pit would have been basically the same or perhaps better than many prisons in real life.You raised a valid point about appeals processes though. But I think the Order doesn't put anyone in there unless it's crystal clear they need to be. Other caging situations done by Toa can be "appealed" in the informal way, by the person convincing them that they will not be a problem again. And since the Toa are encouraged so strongly to be good, they are likely to listen when appropriate. Mistakes will be made, though -- it would be unrealistic if not.And really, I don't think little kids want to hear a story about heroes who go to court. :P They want to imagine battles with powers and cool weapons. That's probably why you see LEGO designing the story like this, and that applies to HF too BTW.Besides, Bionicle villains haven't heard of our real-life court systems so it might not have occurred to them. And the Order's judgement basically is the equivalent of a court system, or the Toa's judgement in their situations.

And lastly, the laws aren't meant to tell us what we can do, they're meant to tell us what we can't do.

What they may be meant for is besides the point. In real life, a lot of people take the fact that there's such a complex set of laws for what you can't do as implying that things not banned by the law are good. Not always true. What I'm basically saying is -- whether "instead of" or "alongside of" the law -- we'd be much better off if we had the sort of focus on doing the right thing that Toa have. They're not sitting around debating what exceptions should be written into the Code -- they simply understand the real key point, that they should avoid killing strongly. :)Let's put it this way. The Code is meant in a somewhat poetic sense, not in a strictly legalistic sense. "Toa don't kill" is like saying, "I don't eat that kind of food." But if you were starving and that was all there was, of course you would do it. You didn't mean it in a literally absolute sense. You just mean that you try hard to avoid it. :) And the point it is poetically making is to value life. :)

And the whole thing about thinking things through for the sake of peacefulness and harmony? That's why we have a court system. But aren't you being a touch naive about this sort of thing? It's a lot more complicated than that.

Not entirely clear what you're trying to say here, so lemme just elaborate on where I was going with that.Basically, as a fan, and as a fanfic writer, I much prefer stories grounded in realistic psychology, and in interpersonal choices, that have plenty of room for moral abiguity, not all about far-off rules that don't necessarily anticipate real situations well.Is that the world I would rather live in myself? Eh... I'm undecided. :P Our legal system is a mess in a lot of ways, though as you allude to, it has a lot of good points too. But the real question here is what kind of science fantasy fictional universe we are seeing stories in, not about where we want to live personally, heh. I wouldn't want to live in a world with elemental robots bent on destroying my home either, but it makes for a fun story. :)I just think it's more interesting to explore people in "uncharted situations" faced with choices they really don't know how best to handle, who are concerned directly with "what's the right thing to do here?" (or not, with morally ambiguous characters, my favorite type, esp. for characters we don't get to know the thoughts of; makes 'em more mysterious). A fictional story in a world without courts is thus more entertaining, at least to this target audience, and to me.Also, it's quite possible there are specific laws in a lot of places, but because there's little fan interest in it the story team didn't bother to establish them. For example, there were quite detailed rules for Kolhii laid out by the Turaga on Mata Nui. It shows the sort of thinking they plausibly would use in normal life, but that we simply had no interest in hearing about.Edit: Hey, since I AM in the position of rule-enforcer here, ironically, let's draw a comparison to S&T. Your debate seems to imply I don't know what I'm talking about, for example, but obviously I do, from experience. We designed a lot of rules this way, talking about the basic principle instead of worrying about the letter of the law needing to define every situation. And I've had a much longer version of the S&T rules in the past, and over time figured out from careful observation of the members that it works better to be more concise, hence the shorter new version. :)For example, the rule against flaming (which you stretched or bent) could have listed a big long legalistic set of words you can't say, or just let the filter handle everything. But as the filter demonstrates, it's impossible to have a complete list that fits every situation best. So I could make a massive list, along with a set punishment for every word, but nobody would read it anyways. Instead the rule just says basically don't insult people.If I ran my forum the way you seem to be suggesting, I would have had no leeway with your above violation and probably would have had to punish you. As it is, I judged it based on this situation and deemed it borderline but doesn't need anything more than a warning. There have been attempts to standardize things before, but it always runs up against the fact that life is unpredictable, and standard responses are usually not the best for specific people.So in other words, Unity Duty and Destiny are basically the laws. And people are supposed to use good judgement in determining what that means on a daily basis. :) Anybody who seriously doesn't, the Toa and others are there to handle. Edited by bonesiii

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that it should be remembered that most Bionicle characters (especially dangerous criminals) have physical endurance surpassing that of humans. As a result, Toa can stun enemies with attacks that would kill a human. In addition, 80 years in prison isn't so bad for beings who live for thousands of years. Also, I think Dume made laws such as outlawing the First Rahi. Cases like those of Tuyet and the Barraki were unique, so it's unlikely there would be specific laws already in place for how to deal with them. Since the Toa dealt with major threats in the story, we never saw what ordinary prisons look like, but Guardian's job proves they existed.


Read my comedy, about the Hero Factory villains watching a television channel produced by our Spherus Magnan friends!

The Bionicle Channel

 

"I expect that when I write my next entry in this chronicle, I will be writing as uncontested ruler of the Brotherhood."

-Certainty, my Memoirs of the Dead entry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ohmanohmanohmanohman... First off, I'd like to apologize to everybody here, especially boneseii, for getting all flamey. Truly, I do not like arguing at all. Secondly, I realise that I'm taking this whole thing way too seriously. I have really strong views on things like this, and I let that get in the way of having a friendly but serious chat about this subject. Thirdly, I realise that due to a lack of my own understanding, my own theory may be flawed, and all of this argument has been for naught.You were talking about the original pit? Oh man, that changes everything. (Of course, since the OMN still used the "new" Pit for a long time, there's still issues there, but I digress).So, let's set down some points here.Point 1: While vague, the Toa Code has been established to indeed provide for the use of lethal force, but only in situations where such force is reasonably justified. Point 2: The original Pit was actually a pretty humane prison. The new Pit, not so much.Point 3: The Toa and Vahki's role as police/soldiers has never been entirely clear, but the general idea is that the Toa and Vahki enforce the laws, catch criminals, and preserve the peace, like officers of various real life law enforcement agencies.Point 4: The OMN probably isn't looked down upon soley for killing, but mainly how they're so cold and casual about it, with their cavalier ends-justify-the-means-take-no-prisoners attitude. That, I really think is worthy of being concerned with.Let's step back from all of this text-snarling (entirely my fault. Really, really sorry, I did get a bit emotional back there; also, treespeak for the win!), so that I may start over, and ask- are these points what you are trying to say?:akaku: X-Ray :akaku:


"Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken."
- Ecclesiastes 4:12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ohmanohmanohmanohman... First off, I'd like to apologize to everybody here, especially boneseii, for getting all flamey. Truly, I do not like arguing at all. Secondly, I realise that I'm taking this whole thing way too seriously. I have really strong views on things like this, and I let that get in the way of having a friendly but serious chat about this subject. Thirdly, I realise that due to a lack of my own understanding, my own theory may be flawed, and all of this argument has been for naught.

Apology accepted, and it's "not for naught" (if you'll pardon the pun :P) if it helps you learn. ^_^You are raising some good points, I'm just saying it's better to do it calmly and stuff. :)

You were talking about the original pit? Oh man, that changes everything. (Of course, since the OMN still used the "new" Pit for a long time, there's still issues there, but I digress).

Yes, it is a bit strange that they'd continue to use the new Pit and not just make new prisons and then Botarport them all to the new place. For security reasons if nothing else. But it does seem that the Maxilos robots kept trying to make cells and get the prisoners back into them, but they kept getting out again. But the resemblance to Arkham City this caused was, again, probably wanted by the prisoners, to help escape. Otherwise they all would have just walked up to the robots and said, "please get me to safety!"Also it being dark and watery, I should have mentioned above, isn't really "living death". :P The monsters part is a valid point. Then again, Pridak and company ruled many of those monsters, so they probably weren't personally worried about that.But yeah, none of that was originally intended by the Order. :)

Let's step back from all of this text-snarling (entirely my fault. Really, really sorry, I did get a bit emotional back there; also, treespeak for the win!), so that I may start over, and ask- are these points what you are trying to say?

With points 1-3, yes. :) Point 4 is more about fans in general, and I'm sure opinions vary.To me, though, it seems somewhat clear that canonically they are not casual about it, or "cold" (more in a moment on that though :P) per se, but that this is something Helryx had to set up because it really was called for, and it was thought through carefully. For example, this is why they intentionally work so hard to keep themselves secret. They know that while what they're doing is necessary, most people will not think it through as thoroughly and will simply condemn it. That doesn't show casualness to me; quite the opposite. If they were casual about it they wouldn't really care about secrecy, IMO.Also, I really dunno how we can be on the one hand talking about conditions at the Order-run prison and on the other hand talking about a "take-no-prisoners" attitude. :P"Cold" kinda gets into a pet peeve of mine; many people's view of calm analytical approaches I have noticed (since that's my way) is to assume it's not caring. I know for me it is, and in fact it's because I care that I am so motivated to think things through carefully, and avoid mistakes if I can that might hurt people. I think Helryx is more like that, which can come across as cold, but not actual coldness.Then again, Kopaka really is "cold" and he's one of my favorite characters, so whatever. :P Edited by bonesiii

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait...Weren't the Barraki brought before the Brotherhood? And Terry was just about to sentence them to death? So that might be a type of court, if not unofficial and run by the winner of the war.


aouROFb.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait...Weren't the Barraki brought before the Brotherhood? And Terry was just about to sentence them to death? So that might be a type of court, if not unofficial and run by the winner of the war.

The Brotherhood is given to formalities - a formal declaration of "you're going to die" is less savage. If it was a court, it was Makuta Teridax serving as judge, jury and executioner - except he missed the last part, thanks to Botar. I mean, back in those days the Brotherhood were supposed to be the good guys. Executing the Barraki without at least a formal statement of why would have been seen as overstepping their bounds, so they had one. I wouldn't compare it to our legal system - it's not like the Barraki had lawyers. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the Toa code of not killing anything makes any sense at all. The Toa Mata/Nuva killed multiple infected Rahi, Bohrok, Rahkshi and I'm sure other Toa teams killed enemies in the name of greater good. I just think that code means to not slaughter enemies in a horrendous way or for fun.


250px-Vakama_Metru.jpg

"There can only be ONE of us"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, I agree with a lot of your reasoning. I believe that the Toa do not kill because they still firmly believe that everyone still has a duty or destiny to live, though their thoughts may be a tad close minded. The OoM sees it realistic to remove those "glitches" that threaten a balance or become too dangerous. But back to the Toa code, its more of an honor system. No use of excessive violence unless necessary.



audio_narration_project_banner_wide.jpg

 

Bionicle: ANP aims to create narrated versions of all the Bionicle books, with voice actors for each character, and music taken from various media to enhance the story. Check here if you're interested in voicing a character, and here for the chapters that've already been released!

Formerly: Tahu Nuva 3.0

Looking for a Bionicle Beanie. Black one with the symbol on it. Contact me if you are willing to sell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the Toa code of not killing anything makes any sense at all. The Toa Mata/Nuva killed multiple infected Rahi, Bohrok, Rahkshi and I'm sure other Toa teams killed enemies in the name of greater good. I just think that code means to not slaughter enemies in a horrendous way or for fun.

In 2001, the Toa didn't kill Rahi, they just knocked off their masks so they wouldn't be controlled by the Makuta anymore. The Bohrok were just machines which the Toa took living compnents out of (Krana).Although you do raise a good point about the Rahkshi...although Rahkshi are more like pieces of Makuta's organic matter that are strongly influenced, if not completely remote-controlled, by the Makuta who made them. Killing them is like breaking a tool, although one that has been brought to life. Also, most of the times when Toa fought Rahkshi, they merely busted the armour and let the living Kraata escape. The couple times we saw blatent murder was on Spherus Magna, one of them with Glatorian (Kiina) and the Golden Armour, which was an entirely special case; the armour's effects weren't known by Tahu, and it was a last resort, not like he had much choice. And there is that scene in MoL. On that, you have a good point. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about this. The Great Beings seemed very concerned about the possibility of their creations doing some killing-- they created Marendar just for that.


"Well, Mr. Louie, that leaves big Max all alone for you."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...