Poll: Should dueling be legal?

[Odegauger]

Grrr. I'm angry.

Case in point.

Oh! I have been bested in this duel of rhetoric. I must withdraw from this altercation, my honor dashed, the prospects for the renewal of my dignity, dire indeed.

 

[liquidangry]

Or you could just say no, then knock his ass out. Or just leave.

If duels were legal, they would be an absolutely last resort, and you would really only duel those who you felt really deserved it. In your "drunk guy" scenario, there would be no need to agree to the duel if other forms of conflict resolution would work just as well.

Basically, it would make no sense to actually accept every challenge that came along. Some jackass hitting on your woman wouldn't be worth killing, so you can just dismiss him like you normally would.

So I can't go where I want to go because someone is going to be a dick to me and I should just take it? Also, hitting him outside of a duel is illegal. That's not an option. Remember, we're talking about legal dueling here. People seem to think when you knock someone out they're out for hours. Usually it's only a couple of minutes, just an fyi. What do I do when he wakes up? What if he came with friends and they were just waiting at their own table. I can't leave, what if there were cameras. Now I'm wanted for assault and fleeing the scene of a crime. What if he follows us outside? Again, my original point still stands. Sometimes people don't leave you a way out. On top of this since he challenged me to a duel he's probably armed.

When I was in college there was a fight EVERY night without fail. I mean EVERY night over a girl or something else. (i wasn't involved in any luckily mostly because i am a pus) I was there for some of the starts and a good 80-90% of the time, one of the combatants wasn't at fault an really should beat that guy up or was stopping someone from being molested. People would get sent to the hospital, beaten when they were already down etc. I can just imagine a scene where dueling was legal; a brawl would see their friends separating them and then them yelling that they wanted to duel to settle it. It's just a bad idea. A really bad idea.

 

[TheRealCJ]

OF COURSE NOT

How else will I defend my fair lady's hounour?

 

[Psycho Cat Industries]

Dueling would imply we still had some code of honor.

Couldn't have said it better. In olden times, people dueled to protect their honor... seeing as a good majority of people are caniving bastards, it wouldn't serve the purpose to well.

Besides, I don't think too many people have proper training in the use of either of those. Swordsmanship and "quick draw" like gun use aren't as popular amongst said majority either. Now amongst the group of people who do enjoy learning and using such skills, they probably might not agree to dying either. Although that's why the sword users use dulled weapons, wooden weapons, or a weapon that can't cut. As for guns... dud bullets? Probably would still hurt.

Unless of course you agree to a Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel... I'm up for that

Fear my trap hole spam!

 

[somonels]

Yes. It worked adequately for quite some, time despite having some flaws, but it is no worse than the current legal system — which is even more in favor of the upper classes.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

Sure it should legal. By which I mean only unconventional dueling should be legal.

Person A: How dare you call my mother a whore, you low life scum!
Person B: How dare you call me low life scum, you son-of-a-whore!
Person A: Right! Good sir, I challenge you to a duel!
*whips out a DS, slaps Person B with it*
Person A: Choose your Pokemon!
Person B: I see! I accept your challenge! We duel at dawn!

 

[ThisIsSnake]

I accept!
http://static.funnyjunk.com/pictures/1222663220800.jpg

 

[GLo Jones]

I think that's a great idea! It'd definitely help filter out the idiots from society if they could just merrily go at each other like that, hell, it might even make for some good entertainment.

 

[Drakmorg]

Sure. Maybe not with lethal weapons, use paintball guns and foam swords instead.
That way it becomes solely a matter of honor, instead of also being a matter of life and death.

 

[Atrax]

All major eletions should be decided by a duel.

 

[schiz0phren1c]

I'm surprised at the results tbh...
my god! that king of the Jackasses Jackoff Thompson is right!
games make us more prone to violence!/sarcasm font.
but seriously,I voted yes because I can shoot,and fight.
Simple as that,
I totally agree with the "rich jackasses" part though,there would be people with the time and money to become shit hot duellists while still being assholes,
just for everyones interest(and sorry if its been mentioned already)
but an Author called KJ Parker wrote a trilogy of books(look for "The Fencer Trilogy") in which Lawyers fought by the sword instead of ripping EVERYBODY off...its a brilliant series and the laws are well codified,different outcomes,first blood for smaller crimes,to the death for others etc,
check them out.
also,
I KEEEEEL YOU!

 

[Akalistos]

A good way to weed out the impulsive, confrontational idiots in the world so why not?

Not so much. If the confrontational idiot is impulsive, he may not play fair. It's far easier with a pistol duel but manageable with swords too. Hey, a win is a win after all.

 

[FoolKiller]

Abso-fucking-lutely.

If it's that important and two people of sound mind agree on it, then go right ahead.

 

[Shock and Awe]

Sometimes I think it would be pretty good if it was. Though it would need an ass ton of regulation to make sure people are not coerced into entering one, age limits, officials present, ect.

EDIT; On a side note, I don't mean strictly sword fighting. Any duel, hell, the only way I would fight one is if I was allowed to use a firearm, and preferably one I have experience handling.

 

[Twad]

well, no. I think.

But if yes; choice of weapons must be entertaining and/or require creative thinking to use properly.

Like:

helicopter
spoon
rubber duck
Books. Lots of books.
ect.

 

[Saelune]

Would make hip-hop cooler. Or lamer. (if they DONT use it)

 

[Neyon]

Too many people would drunkedly, or merely in a rage start a duel they would certainly not if sober or given time to calm down. Hence no.

 

[Kurokami]

By dueling i'm referring to the sword or pistol duel. And I see no problem with it, although that doesn't mean I think it's right.

I don't think that it's really murder because the other person agreed to it, but it's not really suicide because the point of the duel is to not get killed.

I'm asking this out of boredom.

That... Is moronic. And easily abusable too! Having dueling as legal could easily result as easy murder or suicide, and regardless you're still killing someone. That doesn't mean I don't think it would be fun (all of one duels I would have before dying) but to think it doesn't have anything wrong with it... Well, lets just say I strongly disagree.

 

[StBishop]

Yup. What two consenting people do is none of the government's business.

It goes further than this, there are implications beyond simply "two consenting adults". For example, using "It was a duel" to cover up murder, or people who cheat in duels.

What about the people that have to clean up the corpse, and what if both are grievously wounded but neither are killed, and this happens say, 3 times a day nation wide. The strain on the (in this country) already stretched public health service would be ridiculous.

And what about injuring passers by? The problem is that you assume that by making duelling legal only the duellists are being affected, which is not true.

However, it is true that if their actions had no impact on others then the law should not stop them from doing what ever they want. But in the real world, you will almost always impact others with your actions.

 

[Branches]

Yes, because if you could actually get someone to say yes to a duel then shit, you've found someone worth dueling.

Our forefathers all shot at each other with single shot pistols. I think it's time for the .55 caliber hand cannon to make a comeback.