Poll: Should dueling be legal?

[Ignatz_Zwakh]

Part of me says yes, the other part says no.

Not that we don't have violence in modern society (Fo sho we do), but I could see duels simply leading to more and more bloodshed. You get into a fight with a fellow, he challenges your honor. You meet the day after and slay him. Now you've his brother and his father to contend with, equally brash fellows who wish to slit your throat.
Not to mention his friends and the rest of his family...I dunno, the hopeless romantic in me views duels as something rife with honor and myth, but I really can't say they should be allowed.

 

[Lizmichi]

No no and no. Killing another human being, consent or no, is murder, assisted suicide or man slaughter. We may have an over population issues but killing each other off is a wrong way to do it. If you hated someone you could just kill then and get away with it. That's bull shit and unneeded. Today enough people don't have the ethics to not exploit dueling. It would be an issue in and of it's self, instead of population issues we'd have mass murder.

Violence should be the last thing we turn to for solve issues. There are much better, while yes lengthier ways, to solve issues.

 

[ReaperzXIII]

Not with weapons! Real men should fight without weapons with a referee overseeing the fight and stopping it when either a) one person is really injured b) one person is being dominated c) no longer able to defend themselves

 

[PancakesSUCKTHEYDO]

OH HELL YES!



I would duel the fucker who invented captcha.

 

[MaxwellEdison]

As long as your actions do not infringe on a rights of another, I have no problem with them.

If two people sign their right to life away like this, let them be dumbasses together.

 

[PancakesSUCKTHEYDO]

No no and no. Killing another human being, consent or no, is murder, assisted suicide or man slaughter. We may have an over population issues but killing each other off is a wrong way to do it. If you hated someone you could just kill then and get away with it. That's bull shit and unneeded. Today enough people don't have the ethics to not exploit dueling. It would be an issue in and of it's self, instead of population issues we'd have mass murder.

Violence should be the last thing we turn to for solve issues. There are much better, while yes lengthier ways, to solve issues.

Which in turn are often corrupt, bias, and often times favouring the rich; not saying violence is the way but, the ways we have are not as great as they seem.

 

[Sgt.Weirdo]

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

Agreed!

Also, no firearms (ranged weaps like bows, slingshots, boomerangs etc. fine) but any melee weapon of choice is allowed.

And both parties need their own respective witness (friend, family).

Once if a challengee gets attacked/killed after declining or the challengee had no witness from his side then it is still considered murder/assault.

 

[Lizmichi]

No no and no. Killing another human being, consent or no, is murder, assisted suicide or man slaughter. We may have an over population issues but killing each other off is a wrong way to do it. If you hated someone you could just kill then and get away with it. That's bull shit and unneeded. Today enough people don't have the ethics to not exploit dueling. It would be an issue in and of it's self, instead of population issues we'd have mass murder.

Violence should be the last thing we turn to for solve issues. There are much better, while yes lengthier ways, to solve issues.

Which in turn are often corrupt, bias, and often times favouring the rich; not saying violence is the way but, the ways we have are not as great as they seem.

But it's better then killing each other over sleeping with someone's girl friend.

 

[Z(ombie)fan]

no, of course not you fucking loons.

one: everything said by someone against dueling in this entire thread

Two: to that cracked poster thats pro-dueling, we should find something Better than the justice system, going backwards is a truly epic fail on many levels, in any situation. we must always go forward, with the mindset: "improvement"

three: my way of handling this would almost always be "AT DAWN? really? well fine then, it ain't dawn, so shut it" *dawn* "well, time to kill that asshole in cold blood. it IS a duel after all"

What? Just because I oppose it means I can't be someone who would abuse it?

 

[tthor]

I don't think things should be legal just because the majority wants it to be legal; because, if history has taught us anything, its that the majority of people are idiots

 

[Mercsenary]

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.

it wouldnt be murder. That would imply intent to kill. It would be manslaughter. Kind of like if you got into a collision with another car while drunk. And it killed someone. Charges would be DUI and involuntary manslaughter

Also duels would imply that our culture has this rigid code of honor kind of thing. 'S a reason why we grew out of it. "you killed my dad. Im here to challenge you to a duel." kills other guy. guy's son: "you killed my dad. I'm here to challenge you to a duel."

An endless cycle of revenge.

 

[BrionJames]

Agreed, friend. Sometimes, I think I'm the only one...

 

[Murray Whitwell]

I say yes only because dueling being illegal only shows the extent to which our world is ruled by control freaks who wont let you do what you want with your own life and body.

 

[Qmonster]

=Rich person murders someone... I mean, legally defeats someone in a duel. Sounds good to me.

 

[Nikolaz72]

Shit, it should be an Olympic sport.

I wonder how you would ever make a comeback.

 

[kypsilon]

If there was structure to the way duels were done and third party reps were to oversee the whole event, then it could work...and create jobs while eradicating over-population. The system could ensure that both parties were consenting to the affair, decide the time and place and weapons of choice. Burial matters could be hammered out before the duel itself and by the time all that paperwork was filed and approved, cooler heads may have prevailed and the duel could be called off.

I'm in.

 

[kickyourass]

Yes.
But lethal weapons are banned.

Paintball Duelling or something humiliating like a whole wet salmon or handbags.

Handbags at dawn would be amazing, pure comedy.

There is no more magnificent way to settle disputes between gentleman.

Someone I imagine that slapping some jackass with a fish would be infinitly more satisfying then just killing them.