Poll: Should dueling be legal?

[bloob]

no it should not, firstly people might be forced into it against their will, secondly if someone cheats then its a pretty big price to pay for the victim

 

[Inuprince]

I chose "mabye"

 

[babinro]

I suppose a dueling could work in society if it were handled correctly. The idea is that you couldn't simply challenge someone to a duel and fight the same day as this would easily come down to knee-jerk reactions. Duels could probably be setup like a boxing match, scheduled many months in advance with the option to opt out always available to either party.

There would certainly be many benefits to legalizing this when strictly compared to a current legal system. However, something like this would do very little good for society and only exist to further sensationalize violence/murder.

All told though I could only envision bad things coming from legal dueling and how society would ultimately exploit it.

 

[MightBeWrong]

Not up to debating the morals, but I just want to add this. Fun with outdated laws.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1416262/Court-refuses-trial-by-combat.html

 

[Raregolddragon]

There will need to a good deal of paperwork, so it can't be just of the moment murders going on can't be claimed as a duel.

There would have to be something like a 7 day waiting period so that maybe with cooler heads might talk it out before the duel.

 

[Foxbat Flyer]

Yes, what else is there to do at dawn on a weekend? Id much prefer to watch a good duel then go and play some games

 

[Conza]

How the majority have said yes here I will never know. You are basically asking the other person to 'try' and kill you, whilst allowing them the same. Obviously unless both miss, the winner would easily be charged with murder, and the loser will simply be dead. If both miss, they should both be charged with attempted murder.

 

[C95J]

No, that's a stupid idea.

Imagine:

1. The amount of dead bodies everywhere.
2. Stupid decisions made by people because they were angry.
3. It does count as murder, yes the person dead might have consented, but what about relatives and loved ones???
4. People could just kill other people, then say they both agreed to a duel, thus getting away with it.


How can people not see anything wrong with what is quite obviously murder. This would just encourage people to murder.

Hell even euthanasia is illegal. Seriously though how can you enjoy killing someone in real life, even if you don't like them.

Murder is the *unlawful* killing of another. If it's not against the law, it isn't murder.

Point 1 is completely unfounded, as few would consent to dueling.

Point 2 can be reduced significantly by requiring paperwork and a 3-day waiting period, signed by a judge and all.

Point 3 is irrelevant.

Point 4: See Point 2. We live in a modern society. There would be regulation of some sort for duels that would take place.

Just because euthanasia is illegal doesn't mean that it should be illegal. What a person does with their own body is no business of the State's, and what two consenting people wish to do to each other, so long as the rules are clearly defined, is also no business of the government's.

Also, out of curiosity, how the hell does participating in a duel equate to "enjoy[ing] killing someone in real life"?

POints 1 & 4 are tied together, sure there would be regulations, but what's to say people wouldn't just ignore them and just kill. I don't see how point 3 is irrelevant, if you didn't like someone and wanted to kill them, would you really risk leaving everyone who is close to you, relatives, and friends?

Also, the reason for the enjoying part is because you wouldn't duel someone if you wouldn't feel bad killing them. You obviously wouldn't like them, and the reason the duel is there in the first place is because you wanted to kill them.

And yes, we do live in a modern society, where duelling has no place in my opinion. It's a part of history now, there is a reason why it isn't around now, lets keep it that way.

 

[Ham_authority95]

Only if it was done is a completely fucking hilarious, non-lethal way.

Like fish-slapping.

 

[Internet Kraken]

Of course not. As a society we should not be encouraging the use of violence to solve problems. Dueling is counter-productive to that goal. It's barbaric and unnecessary, and thus has no place in the modern world. Even if you don't agree with me on that, you'd have to realize that everything involved to ensuring that duels are "lawful" would be ridiculous. They'd have to be heavily monitored by neutral parties to ensure that nobody that is not part of the duel is injured. It'd be such a drain on the legal and medical systems, and for what? So two idiots can try and kill each other in the street? How does this benefit society at all?

I honestly can't see why anybody would want lethal dueling to be legal.

 

[Mcupobob]

Yes, but only with whiffle bats, and both parties have to consent.

 

[iblis666]

sure as long as it was heavily regulated with a dueling judge, arena, witnesses and plenty of paper work with a mandatory talk with a mediator i wouldnt see why not

 

[2733]

sword duels are not legal? uh-oh, excuse me I need to go hide something.

 

[geldonyetich]

Oh, dear, it seems the debates around here have regressed to those of the 19th century.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Yes and here is proof.

Spoiler: big friggan image

http://cdn-www.cracked.com/articleimages/ob/dueling_headerwm.jpg

Makes sense to me. Burn the lawyers!

 

[Akihiko]

Depends how far we go with the said dueling. I don't think sword dueling would be a problem, permitting the combatants wear protective armour, and abide by set rules. Such as fencing shall we say. Lethal sword dueling I'd disagree with. Pistol dueling would be harder to safety proof and so I'd disagree with it, using fake pistols which fire something non-lethal, like paintballs or something, would be fine though, possibly. Consequently I vote a resounding, maybe.

 

[Caligulove]

It's 2011- no.
Such archaic means of settling trivial matters have no place in our society anymore. Not to mention that they would just become a spectator sport for the rich.

There are civil ways to solve your squabbles. If you want to kill or fight someone, encroach on another individual's rights in the preservation of your honor (or worse someone elses' honor) then fine, go right ahead and do so, just know that you will be arrested and charged for murder and throw away any potential or semblance of a normal life you once had.

 

[Lazy Kitty]

Yes, I think it should be legal.
But then again, I also think they should have criminals fight to the death in arenas for the people's amusement again.

 

[Auxiliary]

Cleans up more idiots, sure!

 

[trooper6]

First thing I want to say. For all those who are saying that it should be legal to duel in a non-injuring/non-lethal way. It is. If you and I want to fence each other with sport foils or handbags...there is no law against that.

Second thing,

As long as both parties have to agree to it, then yes. Violence is a good way to solve problems sometimes, and I'm one of the rare few people who believes that honor is important, and to die fighting for something to believe in is an honorable death- more than most people can lay claim to.

I actually am skilled with the rapier. I think it would be the exact opposite of honorable behavior for me to challenge someone to a duel and then kill them because they insulted me at a faculty meeting or something like that.

Killing people because they upset you is not honorable, it is bullying.

Also, solving problems with violence to satisfy "honor" is also usually not honorable at all. You know who cares a lot about their honor? The lunkheads on Jersey Shore, especially Ronnie, who like to destroy people or property in order to satisfy his "honor." Disgusting.