Poll: Should dueling be legal?

[liquidangry]

Ooh, I like how you structured this. Very nice.

I'm glad you like it. Keeps things tidy
This design is a little clunkier... Too much space taken. I don't feel like redoing the post though, lol.

1. I wouldn't kick his ass. I didn't kick his ass last time some guy hit on my girl, and I doubt I ever will, I don't think violence is a proper response to anything but violence. You can always move on, or make it clear with words that what he's doing has to end.

Yeah, but I also stated previously that he didn't take the hint and even physically pushed me. There really aren't many options after that. You should watch the movie "Crash". Look for the scene when the cop molests this guys girlfriend right in front of him and there's basically nothing he could do. They were both armed and cops. She was not pleased to say the least.

2. That is correct, which would be my only problem with legalizing duels. That is a very good point.

If you can't do something right then why do it at all?

3... Such as that guy who wanted that other guy to kill and eat him.

......WTF!?!?!?!?!?

4. I kinda figured this would come up at some point. If someone is disregarding the feelings of their family, friends, and acquaintances just to duel, then that person is either an idiot, or dueling over something very, very important. If it's the former, he'd probably do something retarded to hurt them anyhow, I don't think it should be the law's job to make people only do things that wouldn't hurt others.

Well, he might not necessarily hurt anyone. There's no way for you to know that nor is it your place for you to decide someones worth based on whether or not they get into duels. That's just one aspect of their character. It sounds like you're basically saying people should be able to duel, but if they die there's absolutely no loss ever. How does dueling not hurt others? If feuds erupt from it, more duels, possibly even a mountain of litigation after every duel I would suspect, why is it a good idea? All I'm saying is having it legal is a bad idea for a multitude of reasons. Don't get me wrong -- I'm all for personal freedoms. There's a lot of laws I don't agree with because they needlessly limit freedoms or I think are simply superfluous. Legalize pot! Dueling isn't one of them. It just sounds like we'd be opening Pandora's box. I simply just reject the notion that it would be victimless.

5. Well, that is very subjective.

Right, it is. I'm just confused as to why someone who wouldn't ever do it themselves would push for it. I'm the kind of guy who believes people should follow the same moral, ethical and philosophical principles as myself. Not that they should be forced to, but rather that they would because it only makes sense logically. If I don't believe dueling is a good choice for just about any situation for myself, then it's not a good one for others either.

6. If a person wants someone to kill them, or just die in any way. I think that it is monstrous that we won't allow it.

Well, sure. Assisted suicide is a different topic altogether in my opinion. I'm not helping you commit suicide if you try to kill me too while I'm doing it.

7. Yes they are. But whether someone would encourage violence or not says a lot about their general character. And women egging their drunk boyfriends to go harm someone...

Again, you need to watch the movie "Crash" if you haven't already. It's a good one and it touches on this topic specifically to an extent. It's a little more complicated than her just egging you on to kick people's asses for her honor. There's a lot of mixed emotions and nobody is totally in the right.

 

[Arizona Kyle]

gladiator duels would be awesome

well not really cuz those guys were slaves but the idea of two people fighting to the death would be make a good show

 

[AgDr_ODST]

I support this idea but only if the A) the duels were nonlethal(swords but they must be dull, pistols only if they are of the paintball and pellet variety) B) there is neutral crowd assembled as witnesses to ensure fairness(and the humilation of the loser) and C) it must be test in which neither participant to highly skilled to enusure a fair contest(ie no pistols if duelist #1 is a marksman or more familiar than Duelist number 2)

 

[SultanP]

-snip-

Sorry if the following is a messy read, it's getting late.

Of course, if it comes down to it, still in the case of some dude hitting on your girl, if he doesn't get the message, my I'd first attempt to just go somewhere else. If he persists, I guess a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do.

With most of the rest, It kinda seems like the discussion comes down to where you stand on the "an eye for an eye" thing. You're operating from people begrudging the winner of a duel that the loser died. That's a very realistic approach.
I guess my problem is that I put too much stock in the average person. Most people go "an eye for an eye makes the world go blind" meaning that you would have a feud on your hands, you're right. I go "an eye for an eye makes two people with one eye", meaning that once you've gotten back at someone, you're even again, and it ends there. Thus, in my view of the world, when two people enter a duel, what happens in vegas stays in vegas, and as such a feud wouldn't come from it. Because two people entered accepting whatever the outcome would be, that would be the end of it. But you are right that people wouldn't let it end there.
So I'm arguing from a point where people would use the system with a sense of honour, and you aren't. That makes you right. I'd still say it should be legal though, not my job to make people stop being idiots, and maybe having them kill each other on a larger scale would be a good thing.

 

[liquidangry]

-snip-

Yeah, but how smart is it to plan your society around an idealized version of itself? I hate to say it, "but think of the children." Btw, your idiots killed off idea really doesn't work that well. There's been lots of intelligent people caught up in duels throughout history. Again, dueling/hotheadedness is only a single aspect of a person. As much as I agree with the "not my job/governments business to meddle in personal affairs" statement, I just don't think that it's totally realistic in this case or the best choice.

I support this idea but only if the A) the duels were nonlethal(swords but they must be dull, pistols only if they are of the paintball and pellet variety)

Your idea is silly. Paintball and airsoft guns are for recreation. Not seriousness. Go watch the latest top 5 with Lisa Foiles to see what I'm talking about I think I'd be challenging people to duels non-stop if they were the way you suggested.

 

[AgDr_ODST]

I support this idea but only if the A) the duels were nonlethal(swords but they must be dull, pistols only if they are of the paintball and pellet variety)

Your idea is silly. Paintball and airsoft guns are for recreation. Not seriousness. Go watch the latest top 5 with Lisa Foiles to see what I'm talking about I think I'd be challenging people to duels non-stop if they were the way you suggested.

Okay in hindsight maybe not so great of an idea(the guns anyway, the crowd and the dull swords I still stand behind). That aside how would you suggest dueling be handled? (provided your a proponent of it, of course)

 

[SultanP]

-snip-

Yeah, but how smart is it to plan your society around an idealized version of itself? I hate to say it, "but think of the children." Btw, your idiots killed off idea really doesn't work that well. There's been lots of intelligent people caught up in duels throughout history. Again, dueling/hotheadedness is only a single aspect of a person. As much as I agree with the "not my job/governments business to meddle in personal affairs" statement, I just don't think that it's totally realistic in this case or the best choice.

Yeah, I concede. With a realistic view of people/society in general, you are totally right. Legalizing duels would do more harm than good. Probably only harm. So... yeah.

Edit: Been good discussing with you though.

 

[Griffolion]

ITS TIME TO D-D-D-D-DDDDDD DUEL!

 

[liquidangry]

Okay in hindsight maybe not so great of an idea(the guns anyway, the crowd and the dull swords I still stand behind). That aside how would you suggest dueling be handled? (provided your a proponent of it, of course)

As much as I'd like to beat on people I don't like with blunt objects, it's kinda the same result with blunted swords. Also, where is the crowd coming from? Sounds more like a sport than a duel. I don't have a problem with the weapons used, I have a problem with the non-lethality. It'd make more sense to just go to court and get monetary compensation, no? Unless, you can't for some reason and you just wanna smack them for disagreeing with you. I don't see people setting time aside when they have jobs, families, social lives, etc. to engage in a airsoft gun fight or what amounts to a wooden sword fight just because someone called their mum a whore. Just sayin'

Edit: Been good discussing with you though.

Indeed. It's been good for me too. Looks like we won't have to duel after all

 

[liquidangry]

Okay in hindsight maybe not so great of an idea(the guns anyway, the crowd and the dull swords I still stand behind). That aside how would you suggest dueling be handled? (provided your a proponent of it, of course)

As much as I'd like to beat on people I don't like with blunt objects, it's kinda the same result with blunted swords. Also, where is the crowd coming from? Sounds more like a sport than a duel. I don't have a problem with the weapons used, I have a problem with the non-lethality. It'd make more sense to just go to court and get monetary compensation, no? Unless, you can't for some reason and you just wanna smack them for disagreeing with you. I don't see people setting time aside when they have jobs, families, social lives, etc. to engage in a airsoft gun fight or what amounts to a wooden sword fight just because someone called their mum a whore. Just sayin'

Edit: Been good discussing with you though.

Indeed. It's been good for me too. Looks like we won't have to duel after all

 

[Lord Beautiful]

What two consenting adults do is none of my business.

 

[Ice Car]

No. Although it would be entertaining to watch people argue and then pull out a sword and start fighting in the middle of a public area. If idiots would argue over shit like that and try to kill each other that is.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

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

because then the sane people would also need to learn to duel in case they were challenged.

Again, both people would have to agree to do it and go to a designated area to duel.

 

[gabe12301]

It would probably have a whole lot of paperwork. like immense piles of paper. So you can't just start beating people up than say it was a duel.

 

[WolfThomas]

Maybe the German style where the emphasis is on scarring the opponent not killing.