PDA

View Full Version : Immortal characters in the modern day: what can legally happen to them?



Isamu Dyson
2013-11-20, 01:06 PM
Let us suppose that, for whatever reason, an immortal slips up and is recognized to be unaging.

Realistically speaking, what can law enforcement/a government (local or otherwise) do to them?

Forrestfire
2013-11-20, 01:29 PM
I would imagine that it'd be the same as with any citizen, assuming they're citizens. If the immortal was pulling a faked death/inherit own stuff cycle, there's definitely some legal issues there.

I wonder if killing someone who can come back to life is murder or attempted murder. :smallconfused:

TheCountAlucard
2013-11-20, 01:38 PM
Forged legal documents could very well be the least of their worries. At the very least, they would earn the enmity of any fellow immortals for tearing down the curtain, as it were. I imagine that fellow immortals would watch the situation like a hawk, in case whatever becomes of the immortal sets a dangerous precedent.

How old the immortal is might be an important factor.

What if, for example, a court rules that an immortal isn't human?

molten_dragon
2013-11-20, 01:47 PM
Let us suppose that, for whatever reason, an immortal slips up and is recognized to be unaging.

Realistically speaking, what can law enforcement/a government (local or otherwise) do to them?

Legally, they'd just be on the hook for any crimes they committed. Most likely something related to fraud as others have mentioned. Life in prison could take on a whole new meaning.

Outside the courtroom, expect agents of every government who knows about it, and probably major corporations too, to be trying to get hold of that person and figure out the secret of their immortality. They'd never have a moment's peace the rest of their lives.

TheStranger
2013-11-20, 01:52 PM
Well, the first question is, what does the government *want* to do to them? Arrest them? Execute them? Torture the secret of immortality out of them? Employ them as an unkillable superspy?

Not surprisingly, there aren't any laws (at least that I'm aware of) that deal with immortality. So, assuming a U.S.-like legal system, it's not like the government can just arrest the guy for being immortal. But they can presumably arrest him for anything else he might have done.

The first thing that comes to mind is the likelihood that this guy has created a cover identity, which probably involves some criminal behavior. So that's a perfectly good reason to lock him up for a handful of years. Now, one issue that comes up is that this guy doesn't have a "real" identity, or at least not one that can be verified. Which means he's not a U.S. citizen, and is pretty much a non-person (depending on his exact history and how good his lawyer is), so he has substantially fewer rights than most people. Standard U.S. practice after arresting non-citizens is to deport them back to their country of origin. Which doesn't necessarily apply here, but let's play what-if and delve into some things that aren't "legal" in the strictest sense of the word, but which the government might well be able to pull off.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that our immortal has been arrested and convicted of being in the country illegally, using a fake ID, etc. Now the government might normally locate his country of origin and deport him, but we know that can't really be done. But it's not like this is the only guy in U.S. custody who isn't a U.S. citizen and can't prove his identity, so it would probably be trivially easy to "determine" his country of origin, which would conveniently be a friendly developing nation with poor record-keeping. At which point you can do all the paperwork to deport him, close his file, and make him disappear into Guantanamo, Area 51, or wherever you want him. Assuming the government was smart enough not to call attention to this guy's immortality, nobody is likely to notice, or to do the follow-up work to find the one guy out of thousands of deportees who didn't actually get where he was going.

So that's the extreme example, but I think the government could probably pull it off, unless the immortal could somehow stop it from happening. In this case, his best option might be to go to the press - intense scrutiny makes it much harder for him to fall through the cracks.

Gavran
2013-11-20, 02:04 PM
While I'm not a lawyer and it'd of course depend on the governments involved, there are weirdly specific legal definitions for many things, not only "citizen" but also "person." It's possible that such an individual would be, in effect, outside of the legal system. Not that any hands would actually be tied by this, since laws can be re-written and even ignored. If aliens started kidnapping people, nobody would care that there aren't laws forbidding aliens from doing that.

AKA_Bait
2013-11-20, 03:15 PM
As some have noted, there are really two questions here:

1. What could a government/law enforcement do to them within the boundaries of the law?

2. What could a government/law enforcement do to them as a matter of fact?

The former would be nation specific and vary with their conduct. It's possible they will have broken no laws, if they are "off the grid" so to speak. This isn't as unlikely as it sounds if you consider how much things have changed in the past 200 years. A Bronze Age person might have a very very difficult time adjusting to modern society and actually prefer to live off in the woods or something.

The latter is, as it is for everyone immortal or no, pretty much anything they want.

Slipperychicken
2013-11-20, 03:31 PM
Life sentence, no parole*. While in prison, experiments and interviews are conducted on him, against his will. Prison ought to break his spirit (particularly if he happens to be uneducated and/or ignorant. Double bonus points if he's a member of an already-persecuted minority), hopefully science gains something from the experiments.


*If he hasn't done anything wrong, you could just "disappear" him to some overseas secret prison. Say it's a national security thing. Assuming they don't have money, power, and influence (i.e. vulnerable) you can put pretty much anyone in jail if you use the words "national security". Maybe you could say that he was lying on his birth records, and is therefore a suspect for terrorism. An immortal person should have a bunch of inconsistencies in his paperwork.

Alternatively, say he's a lunatic for claiming to be immortal, then lock him up in an asylum "for his own good" while you do the experiments.

veti
2013-11-20, 03:42 PM
The first thing that comes to mind is the likelihood that this guy has created a cover identity, which probably involves some criminal behavior. So that's a perfectly good reason to lock him up for a handful of years. Now, one issue that comes up is that this guy doesn't have a "real" identity, or at least not one that can be verified. Which means he's not a U.S. citizen, and is pretty much a non-person (depending on his exact history and how good his lawyer is), so he has substantially fewer rights than most people. Standard U.S. practice after arresting non-citizens is to deport them back to their country of origin. Which doesn't necessarily apply here, but let's play what-if and delve into some things that aren't "legal" in the strictest sense of the word, but which the government might well be able to pull off.

Tricky...

If he was born anywhere in the territory that currently comprises the US, then (a good lawyer could argue) he's got every bit as good a claim to the title "US citizen" as, say, George Washington had. And if he's been accumulating investments for any significant length of time, he can probably afford a very good lawyer indeed to make an argument on those lines. Heck, he's had time to become such a lawyer himself, if he wants to.

But the question is what could 'legally' happen to them. For me, the toughest part of that question is - the baseline assumption, in most civilised countries, is that legal proceedings are public. So any charges, trials, arguments relating directly to someone's longevity - would mean that the secret is out.

If the government doesn't want to publish that (for obvious reasons), and it doesn't want to go to the other extreme of just having the guy disappear - which as you point out, is distressingly easy, but I like to think a government would be reluctant to resort to it, unless provoked - then really, it's limited to prosecuting him when he steps out of line. Charges along the lines of identity fraud probably aren't going to make it into court, because of the publicity angle; but other crimes, like, e.g., tax evasion, won't get any such immunity.

Icewraith
2013-11-20, 04:27 PM
How immortal is the character in question? Are they invulnerable? Do they heal wounds? Can they regenerate limbs? Are their memories immortal?

If they simply don't age, there's quite a lot of nasty things a government can do to them, and they're still subject to death by injury or illness.

TheStranger
2013-11-20, 04:29 PM
The ability to manage publicity is kind of the wild card here. A man claiming to be immortal could become a celebrity, or he could be dismissed as a lunatic (or both). He can probably go public at any time, and the government can't stop him, unless it bypasses the normal transparent court system completely (which isn't impossible, even "legally"). But he needs some kind of proof, and there's just no guarantee how anybody will respond to that sort of thing. Unless and until he knows for sure that his cover's already blown, he won't want to play that card. And unless he's taken the time to set up his proof in advance (which in itself risks discovery), claiming to be immortal won't do him much good. I mean, imagine that you were on a jury and the defendant raised that as his defense - I can't think it would go well.

This assumes that the immortal has slipped up, but his secret isn't widely known. Now, if you have an immortal who has already gone public and convinced the world, you have a different situation. People will be watching, so it's much harder to just make him disappear. You can probably convict him of something (tax evasion is indeed a classic), but putting him in prison for a couple years doesn't accomplish any major goals, because it's still fairly open and people will keep an eye on him - you need him to disappear from the system completely so you can get him into your secret lab and run some tests. And prosecuting could raise his profile even further if the government plays it wrong.

In that case, the best solution might be to throw a pile of money at him in exchange for his cooperation in some minimally-invasive testing and a promise to stay quiet about it.

Slipperychicken
2013-11-20, 04:39 PM
Tricky...
If he was born anywhere in the territory that currently comprises the US, then (a good lawyer could argue) he's got every bit as good a claim to the title "US citizen" as, say, George Washington had.


Not if his paperwork doesn't check out (If someone's records indicate that he's 200 years old, then they don't check out). If they do, then someone can doctor the records, so they don't check out, so he can be held suspect for that reason.

Also, indefinite detainment is, technically speaking, legal. All you need is the right justification. At least in some countries, anyway. In any case, as long as you can get the right judge to sign off on it, it's legal.


And if he's been accumulating investments for any significant length of time, he can probably afford a very good lawyer indeed to make an argument on those lines. Heck, he's had time to become such a lawyer himself, if he wants to.

This is actually pretty reasonable, assuming that our immortal has high socioeconomic status and good education. The OP should clarify on this, however.

MonochromeTiger
2013-11-20, 05:04 PM
Let us suppose that, for whatever reason, an immortal slips up and is recognized to be unaging.

Realistically speaking, what can law enforcement/a government (local or otherwise) do to them?

depends on the type of immortality.

"invincible" immortals like in highlander or certain comic book characters would likely be locked up and studied/experimented on so that some pharmaceutical company in cooperation with a bureaucrat can get the fame and fortune of "curing death"....and considering the reasons for that are usually magic that means entire generations of people trying this with the immortal never being seen in public again.

fixed age immortals would be about the same as invincible.

non fixed age immortals, meaning ones who will live forever until either killed or sickened but will still age physically (just not enough to kill them) would likely become famous and become the focus of several advertising and publicity campaigns for insurance companies as they suffer through an eternity of uncomfortable old age.

Grim Portent
2013-11-20, 05:42 PM
Legally? Not much that actually relates to their immortality, eternal life isn't a crime after all. At worst the actual legal trouble an immortal would be in is fraud, although depending on how they kept their longevity a secret even that might not be a problem.

People would certainly try to ascertain (and copy) the nature of their immortality but if the existence of the immortal was publicly known of then trying to do anything to them against their will would be very difficult.

Kadzar
2013-11-21, 01:20 AM
This blog post presents a lawyer's view of the legal issues of immortality (http://lawandthemultiverse.com/2010/12/03/immortality-and-the-law/) (The rest of the blog also contains lawyers' opinions on how various things that happen in comic books would work out legally). Not only is there the secret identity thing, but apparently property laws would also get involved if they don't want to spend an eternity working for a living.

TheStranger
2013-11-21, 11:29 AM
This blog post presents a lawyer's view of the legal issues of immortality (http://lawandthemultiverse.com/2010/12/03/immortality-and-the-law/) (The rest of the blog also contains lawyers' opinions on how various things that happen in comic books would work out legally). Not only is there the secret identity thing, but apparently property laws would also get involved if they don't want to spend an eternity working for a living.

There is a definite challenge to passing wealth between your successive alter egos. (I'm also a lawyer, FWIW, but with no particular expertise in this area.) Moving lots of money around does tend to attract government attention, at least in the U.S. Not that the government is opposed to people having money, but it likes to know where it's coming from and it wants to take its cut. One potential solution is to keep your money in a country that doesn't pay as much attention to those things, or where officials can be bribed relatively cheaply. This may also make it somewhat easier to swap identities.

Another solution is to accept a certain amount of attrition with each identity and move the remainder of your wealth outside the legal system. Essentially, bury a pile of gold somewhere (not necessarily literally), establish your new identity, then go dig it up. Then build back up to a large amount of money before you have to do it again. Or, just keep the bulk of your money off the books entirely for a few identities in a row. Probably not an option if you prefer the Bruce Wayne lifestyle, but the average person can probably sneak some extra cash into their budget without attracting too much attention if they're smart about it.

To a large extent, it depends what you're doing with your immortality. Are you trying to take over the world? Just kind of living under the radar for a prolonged period? Partying like there's no tomorrow? What kind of standard of living are you looking for? Do you have any family? New family with each identity? How long do you want to spend in a given identity?

Slipperychicken
2013-11-21, 11:42 AM
Our immortal could push it in the opposite direction, if he was so ambitious: Acquire enormous wealth (through investments and other such activities), then come out as immortal and start a cult worshiping himself as a messiah (probably marketing himself as a reincarnation of a well-known religious figure to pull followers off of major religions), or prophet, or something like that. Mortals do this kind of stuff all the time, and it works pretty well even when they have only scant evidence of immortality. Just imagine the money he could get from book sales alone!

After that, he might try to (non-violently, maybe) gain control over at least one state (hopefully a powerful one, since he has infinite time to build up his resources. Ideally he might get multiple states under his thumb) using his massive power, wealth, and influence. Then if he's actually good at running his theocracy, he can gradually expand it and try to become the god-emperor of mankind.


tl;dr: Become a religious figure, take over the world, become the WH40K god-emperor.

SiuiS
2013-11-21, 12:04 PM
Let us suppose that, for whatever reason, an immortal slips up and is recognized to be unaging.

Realistically speaking, what can law enforcement/a government (local or otherwise) do to them?

Depends on the country and regime.

Re'ozul
2013-11-21, 01:17 PM
Unless they specifically want to do something to the Immortal there really isn't a lot they can do unless said immortal has done something that any other person could be prosecuted for.

And with the USA as an example, the statute of limitations would probably make anything that has happened as a result of the immortality unlikely to be brought to court:


Although the majority of federal crimes are governed by the general five year statute of limitations, Congress has chosen longer periods for specific types of crimes – 20 years for the theft of art work;10 years for arson, for certain crimes against financial institutions, and for immigration offenses

Now murder on the other hand (assuming relevant evidence is even on record somewhere) could always be prosecuted and if we go by Highlander Immortals then theres probably a lot of that. Of course figuring out which ones can be attributed and getting enough evidence for it to be considered substantial enough for a court case could be hard if the immortal had been peaceful for a few decades.

Slipperychicken
2013-11-21, 01:26 PM
Of course figuring out which ones can be attributed and getting enough evidence for it to be considered substantial enough for a court case could be hard if the immortal had been peaceful for a few decades.

If our immortal had large amounts of wealth from centuries of investment, then he could afford teams of good enough lawyers (and otherwise influence the justice system) to crush most allegations anyway*. This goes double if he had used his time and wealth to build/maintain connections with powerful friends.

*Even if his legal defense wasn't sufficient, he could try to force a settlement through the ability to "outlast" the prosecution's willingness to dump money into legal expenses.


The trick for an immortal is to avoid life-without-parole sentences.

TheStranger
2013-11-21, 02:39 PM
Our immortal could push it in the opposite direction, if he was so ambitious: Acquire enormous wealth (through investments and other such activities), then come out as immortal and start a cult worshiping himself as a messiah (probably marketing himself as a reincarnation of a well-known religious figure to pull followers off of major religions), or prophet, or something like that. Mortals do this kind of stuff all the time, and it works pretty well even when they have only scant evidence of immortality. Just imagine the money he could get from book sales alone!

After that, he might try to (non-violently, maybe) gain control over at least one state (hopefully a powerful one, since he has infinite time to build up his resources. Ideally he might get multiple states under his thumb) using his massive power, wealth, and influence. Then if he's actually good at running his theocracy, he can gradually expand it and try to become the god-emperor of mankind.


tl;dr: Become a religious figure, take over the world, become the WH40K god-emperor.

Interesting scenario, though probably not as easy as you make it sound. Building enough of a following to become god-emperor is a very long game - probably on the order of centuries. And you're pretty vulnerable for most of that time, unless you have powers other than simply being immortal.

The better solution is probably to gain power first (in the normal way of wealthy and connected individuals), develop a cult of personality, and go from there. You wouldn't actually announce that you were the immortal god-emperor, you'd just stick around until you were a permanent fixture atop the government. Actually... do we have any proof that Vladimir Putin *isn't* immortal?

OTOH, half the internet would immediately march on Washington if Chuck Norris declared himself emperor. So there's that, too.

Slipperychicken
2013-11-21, 03:59 PM
The better solution is probably to gain power first (in the normal way of wealthy and connected individuals), develop a cult of personality, and go from there. You wouldn't actually announce that you were the immortal god-emperor, you'd just stick around until you were a permanent fixture atop the government. Actually... do we have any proof that Vladimir Putin *isn't* immortal?


That's more or less what I meant. I guess the order would be: Get rich -> Acquire political influence (up to and including direct control of at least one state) -> Come out as immortal -> Attempt to convert people into worshiping self.

I'm sure that once he's had enough years in power, and still looks like he's in his 20s, people would widely believe the immortality stuff.

Mr Beer
2013-11-21, 05:17 PM
Depends on type of immortailty as stated above.

My guess is they'd get locked up for intensive study about the nature of their immortality and how it can be extracted/duplicated for use by the correct people.

Tanuki Tales
2013-11-21, 06:02 PM
Interestingly enough, this is what happens in the light novel series Baccano! to one or two different character.

Anyways, it also depends on the immortal, along with the type of immortality. If he's the kind of guy who can Solomon Grundy through military grade arms and has training (through experience) that would put Batman to shame, I'd like to see any world government do anything that he doesn't want happening to him in the first place.

And this is all assuming he's not well connected enough to make his slip up be covered up.

Beleriphon
2013-11-21, 08:58 PM
The trick for an immortal is to avoid life-without-parole sentences.

It would probably qualify as cruel and unusual punishment as the presumption is the person will die in custody not stay there until universe finally reaches heat death. The Law and the Multiverse blog (linked up thread) probably has the most complete discussion on the topic I've ever seen.

You could take the Futurama method and just dump some money into a low interest savings account in year X wait and arbitrary amount of time and have millions/billions. As I recall the episode of Futurama that deals with that idea even has the correct amount of interest based on Fry's initial bank balance.

veti
2013-11-21, 10:15 PM
You could take the Futurama method and just dump some money into a low interest savings account in year X wait and arbitrary amount of time and have millions/billions. As I recall the episode of Futurama that deals with that idea even has the correct amount of interest based on Fry's initial bank balance.

The problem with that is that real interest on an account like that is - if you're lucky - approximately zero, and often actually negative (as now, for instance, in many countries).

So by the time your 93 cents has grown to 4.3 billion dollars, it'll cost 4 billion dollars (at least) just to buy a can of Coke. Sure you'll be a billionnaire, but you'll be no closer to "rich" than when you made the deposit.

MonochromeTiger
2013-11-21, 10:18 PM
The problem with that is that real interest on an account like that is - if you're lucky - approximately zero, and often actually negative (as now, for instance, in many countries).

So by the time your 93 cents has grown to 4.3 billion dollars, it'll cost 4 billion dollars (at least) just to buy a can of Coke. Sure you'll be a billionnaire, but you'll be no closer to "rich" than when you made the deposit.

especially taking into account that the best way to actively save that money up would be to never touch it, that might mean purposefully limiting what you can do with money for years on the promise that it will net you slightly more if you wait long enough. it's like saying you can eat a feast now or you can increase the size of the feast by 0.00001% every year if you hold off.

Beleriphon
2013-11-22, 10:41 AM
The problem with that is that real interest on an account like that is - if you're lucky - approximately zero, and often actually negative (as now, for instance, in many countries).

So by the time your 93 cents has grown to 4.3 billion dollars, it'll cost 4 billion dollars (at least) just to buy a can of Coke. Sure you'll be a billionnaire, but you'll be no closer to "rich" than when you made the deposit.

Yeah, I know that but Futurama clearly doesn't work that way.

Slipperychicken
2013-11-22, 01:59 PM
The problem with that is that real interest on an account like that is - if you're lucky - approximately zero, and often actually negative (as now, for instance, in many countries).

So by the time your 93 cents has grown to 4.3 billion dollars, it'll cost 4 billion dollars (at least) just to buy a can of Coke. Sure you'll be a billionnaire, but you'll be no closer to "rich" than when you made the deposit.

The immortal would (I hope) be smart/well-informed enough to use real investment strategies (which would yield actual ROI/growth), instead of naively dumping it in the bank.

And also, you know, keep track of his account so he can tell when the fund manager/investor is trying to rip him off.


Of course, all this is assuming quite a bit about our immortal, his understanding of the financial system, and also his general intelligence and education.

Isamu Dyson
2013-11-22, 02:06 PM
My guess is they'd get locked up for intensive study about the nature of their immortality and how it can be extracted/duplicated for use by the correct people.

It seems that laws wouldn't matter.

MonochromeTiger
2013-11-22, 03:46 PM
It seems that laws wouldn't matter.

the most important thing to know about laws is that if someone high enough up really wants something, they can change. I think a good example would be the movie where the robot gained sentience after being struck by lightning (why do I not remember the name...) no matter how human he got and how much the human race changed from his efforts he wasn't legally considered human because he didn't age. the "human rights" issue of legal matters can be waived from the perspective of law if someone points out a big enough difference from what is considered human. it's also the reason so many stories discuss "mutants", who are simply humans with some genetic variation, as suffering the effects of segregation and even being slaughtered, normal in society is defined by the group in charge and as long as one of them has that feeling of "they're different, I hate anything different" they can and will use law as a vehicle for their bias.

TheStranger
2013-11-22, 04:33 PM
the most important thing to know about laws is that if someone high enough up really wants something, they can change. I think a good example would be the movie where the robot gained sentience after being struck by lightning (why do I not remember the name...) no matter how human he got and how much the human race changed from his efforts he wasn't legally considered human because he didn't age. the "human rights" issue of legal matters can be waived from the perspective of law if someone points out a big enough difference from what is considered human. it's also the reason so many stories discuss "mutants", who are simply humans with some genetic variation, as suffering the effects of segregation and even being slaughtered, normal in society is defined by the group in charge and as long as one of them has that feeling of "they're different, I hate anything different" they can and will use law as a vehicle for their bias.

An equally important thing to know about laws is that a right is only as good as the remedy that's available for a violation. If there's a law that says you can't be imprisoned without a trial, but there's absolutely no recourse if you are, you have no effective right to not be imprisoned. Similarly, if the people responsible for enforcing the laws decide to subvert them instead, the laws don't offer a lot of protection. Exhibit A might be "dropsy" cases, in which police search a suspicious (read: black) person with no probable cause, find drugs, then testify in court that the person "dropped" the drugs and fled before being arrested (this allows the police to avoid illegal search issues). In some cases, the police planted the drugs to begin with, most likely because the suspect was a "known" dealer that they wanted to arrest.

Now, can the government really act as some sort of monolithic entity in this? Would there be whistleblowers? Would they be believed? These are important questions, but I don't think there's a single, obvious answer (particularly if you're dealing with the sort of speculative fiction that has immortals walking around). For reference, the "dropsy" cases eventually led to judges looking more closely at suspect police testimony, but a lot of people were convicted first, and police still (successfully) make similar claims from time to time.

Slipperychicken
2013-11-22, 04:44 PM
It seems that laws wouldn't matter.

They do matter, for most people. However, when enough powerful people want something it happen, it happens. Whether using vulnerable populations (prisoners, the retarded, the poor, etc) for obviously-unethical human experiments, stealing peoples' hard-eared assets, shipping people overseas for torture, enslaving people, or even assassinations, legal barriers have little meaning when there's enough money and power behind it.

Scratch that, even regular people trample the law when it pleases them. The law is only as stong as its defenders' willingness and ability to carry it out.

Wardog
2013-11-24, 03:07 PM
While I'm not a lawyer and it'd of course depend on the governments involved, there are weirdly specific legal definitions for many things, not only "citizen" but also "person." It's possible that such an individual would be, in effect, outside of the legal system. Not that any hands would actually be tied by this, since laws can be re-written and even ignored. If aliens started kidnapping people, nobody would care that there aren't laws forbidding aliens from doing that.

Kidnapping people is already illegal. I don't think that fact that the kidnapper is non-human would chaneg that. (Being a foreigner or non-citizen doesn't).

TheCountAlucard
2013-11-24, 06:22 PM
Kidnapping people is already illegal. I don't think that fact that the kidnapper is non-human would chaneg that. (Being a foreigner or non-citizen doesn't).AFAIK, they never arrested or tried the wolf-packs who raised the Lobo Wolf Girl of Devil's River, Marcos Rodriguez Pantoja, Traian Căldărar, or Lyokha.

Obviously, even if these criminal wolf-packs never directly kidnapped the children, they should have at least done the responsible thing and tried to report the missing child to the authorities, rather than trying to raise it for themselves.

Humanity, or lack thereof, can indeed strongly impact whether or not a certain act is a crime on the part of its perpetrator.

RochtheCrusher
2013-11-24, 06:36 PM
Kidnapping people is already illegal. I don't think that fact that the kidnapper is non-human would chaneg that. (Being a foreigner or non-citizen doesn't).

Kidnapping people is absolutely illegal. However, if the immortal isn't legally human, they aren't a person, and they have no protections under the law against kidnapping.

The law also does not make a habit of taking man-eating lions to court, despite the fact that killing and/or eating people is illegal. Instead, the animal is simply shot, as it has no right to a trial. If you found that the creature couldn't be killed, you'd be legally pretty free to cage it indefinitely. If PETA didn't care about it, you could probably bury it in concrete without too much difficulty, as it isn't human.

The real question, though, is why the government would want to do anything to a law-abiding immortal. Technically, faking your own death is a crime, but it's a pretty innocent one in this case, and perfectly understandable. Honestly, I can't see why the Smithsonian (for his historical knowledge) and various private and public research agencies (for medical/magical knowledge) wouldn't just invite him over to tea, offer him a ride in the space shuttle for his cooperation, and call it a day.

More flies with honey than vinegar, and all that.

MonochromeTiger
2013-11-24, 06:55 PM
The real question, though, is why the government would want to do anything to a law-abiding immortal. Technically, faking your own death is a crime, but it's a pretty innocent one in this case, and perfectly understandable. Honestly, I can't see why the Smithsonian (for his historical knowledge) and various private and public research agencies (for medical/magical knowledge) wouldn't just invite him over to tea, offer him a ride in the space shuttle for his cooperation, and call it a day.

More flies with honey than vinegar, and all that.

why bother asking with a billion dollar gift in hand when handcuffs and a sap cost less than a hundredth that amount? why let a resource go when you may get something else out of it with a bit more effort? why let someone with centuries of knowledge, experience, and moral views walk around being a potential threat to you when you can lock them away and use that experience to your benefit? greed and power are absolutely astounding motivators and there will always be at least one person influenced by them, whether it's right away or later someone would make a move.

bird in the hand and all that.

Brother Oni
2013-11-24, 07:30 PM
why let a resource go when you may get something else out of it with a bit more effort? why let someone with centuries of knowledge, experience, and moral views walk around being a potential threat to you when you can lock them away and use that experience to your benefit?

How are you going to coerce them to help you after you've locked them up?

Depending on the type of immortal, torture may not be effective, not to mention it gives inherently unreliable results even when it is.

Going through the espionage checklist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motives_for_spying) for subverting someone to your side:

Money - they're like to be independently wealthy with assets and funds buried so deep (literally and figuratively) that you're unlikely to find it all.

Ideology: Depending on the age of the immortal, that's unlikely to be a good way to get through to them, since they have a chance of pre-dating any form of modern belief system. Not to mention, you've just locked them up for no good reason.

Coercion: We've already discussed torture. Blackmail is tricky depending on what they have to hide - threatening to reveal their nature as an immortal to the public isn't going to help if you intend to keep them locked up permanently, not to mention the large amount of public backlash since they're going to be naturalised citizens no matter which way you look at it.
Threatening their descendants may or may not be of some use depending on how attached the immortal is to their mortal family and how old they are, but that involves more innocent people.

Ego: no go here since you've locked them up.

The simple fact that they've been around for a considerable amount of time and haven't gone mad indicates that the immortal is likely to have a strong personality with a good amount of willpower. Such people are hard to forcibly coerce, especially if methods like infliction of pain, are ineffective.

MonochromeTiger
2013-11-24, 07:39 PM
How are you going to coerce them to help you after you've locked them up?

Depending on the type of immortal, torture may not be effective, not to mention it gives inherently unreliable results even when it is.

Going through the espionage checklist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motives_for_spying) for subverting someone to your side:

Money - they're like to be independently wealthy with assets and funds buried so deep (literally and figuratively) that you're unlikely to find it all.

Ideology: Depending on the age of the immortal, that's unlikely to be a good way to get through to them, since they have a chance of pre-dating any form of modern belief system. Not to mention, you've just locked them up for no good reason.

Coercion: We've already discussed torture. Blackmail is tricky depending on what they have to hide - threatening to reveal their nature as an immortal to the public isn't going to help if you intend to keep them locked up permanently, not to mention the large amount of public backlash since they're going to be naturalised citizens no matter which way you look at it.
Threatening their descendants may or may not be of some use depending on how attached the immortal is to their mortal family and how old they are, but that involves more innocent people.

Ego: no go here since you've locked them up.

The simple fact that they've been around for a considerable amount of time and haven't gone mad indicates that the immortal is likely to have a strong personality with a good amount of willpower. Such people are hard to forcibly coerce, especially if methods like infliction of pain, are ineffective.

and the fact that they've been around a long time could also mean they have plentiful resources and amusements of their own and non aggressive means of coercing them could be just as ineffective. the thing to know about having someone locked up is that you don't always need them to talk to get something from them. let's go with the medical company option, if they want to research what makes an immortal tick they're less likely to worry about what he tells them and more likely to pay attention to all the medical tests they can do. if it's a government removing a potential threat to their power or legitimacy then simply having the person out of public view and incapable of influencing events is a win for them. further I'm not certain that everyone's strict adherence to "torture is ineffective" is really true, ESPECIALLY in the case of an "invincible" immortal. as I've said elsewhere pain tends to motivate people even if it's in a negative way, if you can guarantee that person a near eternity of pain until you get the information you want eventually they are likely to tell you...until they do tell the truth the information you get is just as likely to be true as information they'd give you WITHOUT torture anyway, people always seem to forget that just because someone is nice to you or gives you gifts doesn't mean you're going to tell the truth (or that if everyone is so certain that torture is ineffective the torturer wouldn't somehow be smart enough to check the facts before accepting what they're told).

Brother Oni
2013-11-25, 12:59 PM
and the fact that they've been around a long time could also mean they have plentiful resources and amusements of their own and non aggressive means of coercing them could be just as ineffective.

If an immortal is rich and powerful enough that a government has nothing to offer them, I'm sure that the aforementioned government would be unable to detain them, either legally or by force.



further I'm not certain that everyone's strict adherence to "torture is ineffective" is really true, ESPECIALLY in the case of an "invincible" immortal.

Torture is ineffective as a means for obtaining reliable information and coercion (I can find more references and sources if you like):

The Effects and Effectiveness of Using Torture as an Interrogation Device: Using Research to Inform the Policy Debate, Costman, SPSSI Vol. 3, No. 1, 2009, pp. 179--210 (http://www.cgu.edu/pdffiles/sbos/costanzo_effects_of_interrogation.pdf)

FM-34-52 Intelligence Interrogation (http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm34-52.pdf): "[Torture] is a poor technique that yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say what he thinks the interrogator wants to hear."

Being immortal is irrelevant in the specific case of obtaining effective information - all it means is that you can employ more extreme methods without causing permanent damage to the subject.

With regard to the medical company, suppose all your non-invasive techniques and limited damage biopsies come up negative - do you simply vivisect the immortal? What if that comes up negative? You've now reached the limits of your technology and have forever lost the most valuable source of information regarding the immortal - the immortal themselves.

One of the first things a doctor asks a new patient is about their medical history - imagine what a willing immortal would be able to tell a medical professional.

MonochromeTiger
2013-11-25, 01:55 PM
If an immortal is rich and powerful enough that a government has nothing to offer them, I'm sure that the aforementioned government would be unable to detain them, either legally or by force.

how are you sure? what evidence do you have that either of those will actively prevent any attempt at capture from a determined force?



Torture is ineffective as a means for obtaining reliable information and coercion (I can find more references and sources if you like):

The Effects and Effectiveness of Using Torture as an Interrogation Device: Using Research to Inform the Policy Debate, Costman, SPSSI Vol. 3, No. 1, 2009, pp. 179--210 (http://www.cgu.edu/pdffiles/sbos/costanzo_effects_of_interrogation.pdf)

FM-34-52 Intelligence Interrogation (http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm34-52.pdf): "[Torture] is a poor technique that yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say what he thinks the interrogator wants to hear."

Being immortal is irrelevant in the specific case of obtaining effective information - all it means is that you can employ more extreme methods without causing permanent damage to the subject.

again, people keep bringing those documents up as complete irrevocable proof that torture will never yield any results but a lie...and again in believing that you are ignoring the fact that someone can lie even without being tortured (and in the case of something as big as immortality very likely WILL), that's why you TEST all the information you're given instead of stupidly taking the first thing you're told as true. consider the fact that like most studies there was a preexisting bias against the method in those studies, being funded supported and run by individuals and organizations that are against the use they will inevitably stick to the cases that prove them right and disregard the cases in which they are wrong. if you've ever been in constant pain you'd know that at some points you'd do just about anything to make it stop, you'd give up secrets, you'd do something you normally despise, something to make the pain just go away so you can live a halfway tolerable life. if you're immortal that DOES make a difference because that pain and that suffering can last generations.



With regard to the medical company, suppose all your non-invasive techniques and limited damage biopsies come up negative - do you simply vivisect the immortal? What if that comes up negative? You've now reached the limits of your technology and have forever lost the most valuable source of information regarding the immortal - the immortal themselves.

One of the first things a doctor asks a new patient is about their medical history - imagine what a willing immortal would be able to tell a medical professional.

suppose, again, the possibility that they don't want you to know or don't have the knowledge themselves. in that case the closest you'd get is that invasive biopsy to see what biological differences from the average person exist. I'm not saying any of this is anywhere near morally good but I'm saying the fact that it's all shot down right away because we're told that wrong or evil things will always fail is flawed.

TheStranger
2013-11-25, 03:46 PM
My two cents on torture:

I don't think anybody is disputing that a person who is being tortured will lie to make it stop. But I imagine they will also, at some point, tell the truth to make it stop. I mean, the general objection to the effectiveness of torture seems to be that the victim will say pretty much anything to make it stop. I haven't heard that they'll say anything *except the truth.* The truth is probably in there somewhere, mixed in with anything else the victim thinks the torturer wants to hear.

So in many contexts, torture doesn't yield useful results because there's no reasonable way to separate the wheat from the chaff. Particularly if the honest answer is that they really don't know the thing the torturer wants to know, or didn't commit the crime, in which case you'll spend a lot of effort investigating worthless information. So it's not a great method for getting time-sensitive information about terrorist plots, or extracting confessions. But if you have time to follow up on what you're being told, you can probably find out any piece of verifiable information that a person has.

Additionally, the fact that torture isn't necessarily effective is kind of beside the point - we're just asking whether our immortal could conceivably be subjected to it. Whether it works or not is debatable, but it's pretty well-established that torture is a thing that people do. Besides, any setting including immortals is fictional - if the creator of that setting decides that the government will torture him, the government will torture him.

None of this is meant to condone torture. I'm pretty much against it, but primarily for moral reasons.

MonochromeTiger
2013-11-25, 03:54 PM
My two cents on torture:

I don't think anybody is disputing that a person who is being tortured will lie to make it stop. But I imagine they will also, at some point, tell the truth to make it stop. I mean, the general objection to the effectiveness of torture seems to be that the victim will say pretty much anything to make it stop. I haven't heard that they'll say anything *except the truth.* The truth is probably in there somewhere, mixed in with anything else the victim thinks the torturer wants to hear.

So in many contexts, torture doesn't yield useful results because there's no reasonable way to separate the wheat from the chaff. Particularly if the honest answer is that they really don't know the thing the torturer wants to know, or didn't commit the crime, in which case you'll spend a lot of effort investigating worthless information. So it's not a great method for getting time-sensitive information about terrorist plots, or extracting confessions. But if you have time to follow up on what you're being told, you can probably find out any piece of verifiable information that a person has.

Additionally, the fact that torture isn't necessarily effective is kind of beside the point - we're just asking whether our immortal could conceivably be subjected to it. Whether it works or not is debatable, but it's pretty well-established that torture is a thing that people do. Besides, any setting including immortals is fictional - if the creator of that setting decides that the government will torture him, the government will torture him.

None of this is meant to condone torture. I'm pretty much against it, but primarily for moral reasons.

thank you, this is the kind of logical answer I can respect on the matter and I fully respect that you are against it and find it impractical on a personal level (as many others do) without steadfastly refusing any chance for success it may have.

Brother Oni
2013-11-25, 05:08 PM
how are you sure? what evidence do you have that either of those will actively prevent any attempt at capture from a determined force?

You're asking for evidence in a hypothetical situation with a theoretical person that's immortal? :smallconfused:

Here's a theoretically entity that's immortal yet is virtually immune to anything you can apply to it: Motoko Aramaki from the Ghost in the Shell franchise.



again, people keep bringing those documents up as complete irrevocable proof that torture will never yield any results but a lie...

Again? This is the first time in this thread that somebody's provided evidence to prove that torture provides unreliable results. Unreliable results does not mean they won't tell the truth, just that it's going to be mixed in with so much useless or biased information that it's going to take a while to sift through, if at all.

TheStranger clarified my statement (thanks for that), which you apparently agree with.



suppose, again, the possibility that they don't want you to know or don't have the knowledge themselves. in that case the closest you'd get is that invasive biopsy to see what biological differences from the average person exist.

A biopsy is invasive but generally non-harmful and I'm not objecting to it. Are you sure you're not thinking of a different medical procedure?



I'm not saying any of this is anywhere near morally good but I'm saying the fact that it's all shot down right away because we're told that wrong or evil things will always fail is flawed.

I don't disagree with that statement. All I'm disagreeing with is your presumption that locking them up and torturing them is the only effective way to get what you want out of them.

By the way, could you please format your posts? They're starting to give me a headache.


thank you, this is the kind of logical answer I can respect on the matter and I fully respect that you are against it and find it impractical on a personal level (as many others do) without steadfastly refusing any chance for success it may have.

You mean a logical answer that agrees with you? You'll note that he's agreeing with both of us, just different parts of our argument.

MonochromeTiger
2013-11-25, 05:31 PM
You're asking for evidence in a hypothetical situation with a theoretical person that's immortal? :smallconfused:

Here's a theoretically entity that's immortal yet is virtually immune to anything you can apply to it: Motoko Aramaki from the Ghost in the Shell franchise.

no I'm asking for evidence that says money or power are somehow complete proof against capture, which is what your post implied. "If an immortal is rich and powerful enough that a government has nothing to offer them, I'm sure that the aforementioned government would be unable to detain them, either legally or by force."



Again? This is the first time in this thread that somebody's provided evidence to prove that torture provides unreliable results. Unreliable results does not mean they won't tell the truth, just that it's going to be mixed in with so much useless or biased information that it's going to take a while to sift through, if at all.

TheStranger clarified my statement (thanks for that), which you apparently agree with.


the again, and resulting mini-rant, are a result of the fact that every time torture is brought up someone inevitably posts the two documents you did and claims they are somehow proof that torture will never work.



A biopsy is invasive but generally non-harmful and I'm not objecting to it. Are you sure you're not thinking of a different medical procedure?

on this one I can simply say I was using a few words from your post as a way of responding to the idea in general. detail wasn't exactly a key point of that part of my response.



I don't disagree with that statement. All I'm disagreeing with is your presumption that locking them up and torturing them is the only effective way to get what you want out of them.

I never said that locking them up and torturing them WAS the only effective way to get the information, I've been saying repeatedly that it's A means of getting the information and no less likely to get the wanted result than any number of other methods. I'm not attempting to invalidate the "nice" ways of getting information, I'm attempting to make it clear that there are less good aligned ways to achieve the goal and it's not out of place to assume someone somewhere would use them.



By the way, could you please format your posts? They're starting to give me a headache.


and you're well within your right to ignore my badly formatted responses. if they are somehow causing you physical pain you have my sympathy but this is the easiest way I have of typing while I'm working on the 5 other things I have to focus on all day.



You mean a logical answer that agrees with you? You'll note that he's agreeing with both of us, just different parts of our argument.

I never said it was about agreeing with me or not, I was merely glad that he admitted slight validity to both points of view instead of using the morality of one or the other as evidence that it would fail. I don't care if someone agrees with me or not so long as they are willing to accept that there is more than one possible answer.

Brother Oni
2013-11-25, 07:35 PM
Yeah, I'm done.

Mutazoia
2013-11-25, 09:32 PM
Another solution is to accept a certain amount of attrition with each identity and move the remainder of your wealth outside the legal system. Essentially, bury a pile of gold somewhere (not necessarily literally), establish your new identity, then go dig it up. Then build back up to a large amount of money before you have to do it again. Or, just keep the bulk of your money off the books entirely for a few identities in a row. Probably not an option if you prefer the Bruce Wayne lifestyle, but the average person can probably sneak some extra cash into their budget without attracting too much attention if they're smart about it.

Honestly....offshore accounts are a great way to solve the money problem. That and dummy (or actual) corporations. Have your immortal own Waldo's World Wide Widget Works that just happens to own various other companies, such a real estate management company, that just happens to own the high rise that the immortal lives in. He can be listed as the CEO of said company and living in the penthouse suite as part of his salary, or actually pay rent (to himself) to live there. The bulk of his money would be in offshore accounts (numbered Swiss accounts are great for this kind of thing) that can't be traced and his personae's spending money will be paid by the dummy corporation (which may be earning a legit income as well).

As for Taxes...believe it or not the IRS doesn't really care if you make up a phony social security number...just as long as you are paying your taxes on it. (There is an actual case of an escaped convict creating a new identity for himself. He get's married..eventually his wife suspects something and goes to the law with the phony SSN...and is told..well what I just stated above).

And honestly creating a new identity isn't as hard as one would think (if you are immortal and have a load of cash that is). Take the Highlander way out and assume the identity of a kid that dies in labor (or shortly there after), or adopt one that was, in reality, killed (along with the rest of his family)...or if your a cold heartless evil immortal, adopt an orphan then 86 'em and assume his identity when he (would have) reached the desired age.

Technically (depending on when this immortal was actually born) he/she could just keep their original identity indefinitely as long as they don't get hit by a train in front of a bunch of witnesses. Since you don't need to renew your SSN, and you can renew your Drivers License on line. So what if your DOB on your DL says you were born in 1943 and you look like your 35... "that's some crazy typo eh?" And unless you get pulled over or something, nobody's going to ask for your ID for anything (as long as you don't look like your 12 and your trying to buy a case of beer).

Ninja Bear
2013-11-26, 01:39 AM
no I'm asking for evidence that says money or power are somehow complete proof against capture, which is what your post implied. "If an immortal is rich and powerful enough that a government has nothing to offer them, I'm sure that the aforementioned government would be unable to detain them, either legally or by force.
There is a difference between "physically unable" and "politically unable." An example might be that during the Cold War, the Soviet intelligence services would have had the ability to break into the White House and lay hands on President Nixon, perhaps kidnap him for further study... but there would be no one willing to give that order given the resources available for a retaliation.

Our immortal is known to have enough resources that for all practical purposes, a country can offer them nothing. "Mutually assured destruction" would apply in this case. Or, perhaps, given the scenario we're dealing with... "peace through power."

Frozen_Feet
2013-11-26, 09:15 AM
The simple fact that they've been around for a considerable amount of time and haven't gone mad indicates that the immortal is likely to have a strong personality with a good amount of willpower.

Or they can just forget things.

Funny thing about old age: it provenly makes you forget a lot of life's rough parts and generally makes you more positive. With enough time, grudges will be let go, trespasses will be forgiven, traumas will be overcome, so on and so forth.

Generally, when people talk about immortality, I find it funny how they often take immense physical recuperative abilities as granted, but completely forget about even normal psychological recuperative mechanisms. Really, there is no reason to assume an immortal would be any more or less sany than your average octogenarian who has seen a lot of his friends and family die. A lot of perfectly normal people go through horrible events and still turn out cheery and well-adjusted after enough time has passed from the incident.

Slipperychicken
2013-11-26, 11:29 AM
Funny thing about old age: it provenly makes you forget a lot of life's rough parts and generally makes you more positive. With enough time, grudges will be let go, trespasses will be forgiven, traumas will be overcome, so on and so forth.

Generally, when people talk about immortality, I find it funny how they often take immense physical recuperative abilities as granted, but completely forget about even normal psychological recuperative mechanisms. Really, there is no reason to assume an immortal would be any more or less sany than your average octogenarian who has seen a lot of his friends and family die. A lot of perfectly normal people go through horrible events and still turn out cheery and well-adjusted after enough time has passed from the incident.

This reminds me of that one greek myth. Some guy loved an immortal woman, so she got someone to make him immortal also. However, she didn't specify to make him eternally young like her, so he kept aging (getting smaller and more wrinkly) until he became the first grasshopper.

So yeah, that might happen to him.


EDIT: And on that thought, he might get some kind of grimdark immortality where he's eternally bedridden and/or in a coma, requires daily blood transfusions and tons of pills to remain conscious, or something similar which makes his eternal life tragic and depressing.

The Random NPC
2013-11-26, 12:01 PM
the most important thing to know about laws is that if someone high enough up really wants something, they can change. I think a good example would be the movie where the robot gained sentience after being struck by lightning (why do I not remember the name...) no matter how human he got and how much the human race changed from his efforts he wasn't legally considered human because he didn't age. the "human rights" issue of legal matters can be waived from the perspective of law if someone points out a big enough difference from what is considered human. it's also the reason so many stories discuss "mutants", who are simply humans with some genetic variation, as suffering the effects of segregation and even being slaughtered, normal in society is defined by the group in charge and as long as one of them has that feeling of "they're different, I hate anything different" they can and will use law as a vehicle for their bias.

You're mixing two movies, the first is Short Circuit, which has a military robot gaining sentience after being hit by lighting, and the second is Bicentennial Man, which has a robot that was somehow built sentient and tries to be declared human.

Emmerask
2013-11-26, 12:19 PM
Since when does law in any way shape or form matter to the government when it is "for the greater good" (in their view).

I mean even now people in western society are illegally imprisoned for an indefinite amount of time and tortured... some (maybe most?) of them have very little or no useful information to give...

So someone who maybe has information about immortality?
Imprisonment, torture and experiments would most assuredly be what awaits that poor immortal.

Slipperychicken
2013-11-26, 12:42 PM
So someone who maybe has information about immortality?
Imprisonment, torture and experiments would most assuredly be what awaits that poor immortal.

I'll qualify this statement with "..if he refuses to cooperate".

Geddoe
2013-11-26, 04:17 PM
I'll qualify this statement with "..if he refuses to cooperate".

I guess. But, a lot of immortals(especially in fiction) are very much in the realm of "if Duncan MacLeod wants you dead, you are dead" levels of buttkicking. Making an enemy of an immortal with possibly centuries of tactical experience and accumulated wealth would be the last thing any sane mortal person would want to do.

Sith_Happens
2013-11-27, 02:28 AM
This reminds me of that one greek myth. Some guy loved an immortal woman, so she got someone to make him immortal also. However, she didn't specify to make him eternally young like her, so he kept aging (getting smaller and more wrinkly) until he became the first grasshopper.

So yeah, that might happen to him.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8b/Face_of_Boe.jpg

Axiomatic
2013-11-27, 10:28 AM
I can't help but think that an immortal just might have enough life experience to anticipate being taken so that "the correct people" may benefit, and have arranged some truly horrifying things to happen to persuade the correct people to not take that road.

****, given a few thousand years to consolidate his or her power, the immortal probably IS most of the correct people.

Frozen_Feet
2013-11-27, 12:04 PM
... assuming he is, you know, smart. Being immortal doesn't guarantee that, and age doesn't guarantee wisdom.

Seriously, some trees can live for over a millenium, but are the trees in power? Nope. A lot of what an immortal would learn through the years would be obsoleted sooner or later. If they are not particularly witty, eventually they would struggle to keep in line with just everyday life.

Axiomatic
2013-11-27, 12:08 PM
... assuming he is, you know, smart. Being immortal doesn't guarantee that, and age doesn't guarantee wisdom.I guess that depends on the flavor of immortality. One version is "You've lived two thousand years even though you've made so many mistakes you should have ended up dead a hundred times over" and the other version is "You haven't made a single lethal mistake in TWO THOUSAND YEARS which is why you're still around."

Isamu Dyson
2013-11-27, 01:27 PM
... assuming he is, you know, smart. Being immortal doesn't guarantee that, and age doesn't guarantee wisdom.

Guarantee, it is not, but it is the more likely outcome of (a typically "normal" immortal) surviving for so long.

Frozen_Feet
2013-11-29, 12:26 PM
I guess that depends on the flavor of immortality. One version is "You've lived two thousand years even though you've made so many mistakes you should have ended up dead a hundred times over" and the other version is "You haven't made a single lethal mistake in TWO THOUSAND YEARS which is why you're still around."

Like I said, there are trees that manage this. You are right that mechanics of immortality play into it, but it isn't anywhere as simple as you propose. For example, there's the obvious third option: "Never was put into situation where a mistake would've been fatal (luck)".

If or when you think of your counter-argument, remember the trees.

Axiomatic
2013-11-29, 12:55 PM
If or when you think of your counter-argument, remember the trees.
I suppose that your immortal COULD have grown two thousand years old by hiding out deep in an inaccessible valley where nobody ever saw him, and he thus escaped notice for millennia, until a logging company tore down the rainforest.

Such an immortal, having not interacted with human society for over 2000 years, could indeed be completely inept at everything.

Nevertheless, I suspect that's not the sort of immortal the original poster was actually interested in.