Prison Gladiatorial Death Matches
- Thread starter jimbob123432
- Start date
Recommended Videos
so its not okay for murderers to kill other murderers, but it IS okay for the government to kill them?Ham_authority95 said:
well, it's Death Row prisoners. they're either going to be killed by an injection or electricity or whatever. why not by a fistfight? and death row prisoners are probably going to be pretty violent and not care about killing fellow prisoners. but what about the other prisoners? they can either watch two people fight to the death in a controlled situation, or get the same effect by starting a massive riot.Arontala said:
why do you think the Romans built the Colosseum? people like watching people smashing the God-given fuck out of other people. wrestling, boxing, MMA, UFC, rugby... we just think "its only bad if one person dies!" but what's the difference between Jimmy Stabface and Bob Murderballs fighting, then one of them getting executed, and one of them dying in the ring.
Well, yes. One of the primary reasons for establishing a government in the first place is to kill people that need killing without society descending into anarchy.TrilbyWill said:
Just because we're going to execute someone anyway, does not mean that the manner of their death doesn't matter. That's just a weird mirror image of the silly argument that if you execute a murderer, "you're just as bad as he is."TrilbyWill said:
The reason there is so much elaborate ceremony involved in an execution (the last meal, the long walk, the blanks in the firing squad, the final statement, etc.), to say nothing of the elaborate legal proceedings that precede it, is to underscore the grave nature of taking someone's life.
A pay-per-view event with swooshing graphics and commercial breaks for Fritos doesn't have quite the same tragic dignity.
It's bad simply because they don't HAVE a choice. By choice they wouldn't be in that situation. It's exactly the same as bumfights. Pay a couple hobos to beat the fuck out of each other while you film it. The problem is, they're not exactly homeless by choice. So you get the illusion of consent, when in reality you're just picking meat off the corpse of whatever dreams they might have had.
Same thing with this. Ostensibly you're taking people who enjoy killing, and rather than trying to, ya know, FIX them, or at least make it so they somehow contribute to society as a whole, you allow them to kill each other. Why is this a bad idea? For the same reason it was a bad idea when it was banned 1500 years ago. Because it's frigging inhuman and turns those watching into goddamned monsters, saying nothing of those participating. Your "friend" should seek help immediately, lest he join their future ranks. I get playing devils advocate, but some things are wrong, BECAUSE THEY'RE WRONG. People killing each other for "entertainment"? Wrong. Real wrong.
Same thing with this. Ostensibly you're taking people who enjoy killing, and rather than trying to, ya know, FIX them, or at least make it so they somehow contribute to society as a whole, you allow them to kill each other. Why is this a bad idea? For the same reason it was a bad idea when it was banned 1500 years ago. Because it's frigging inhuman and turns those watching into goddamned monsters, saying nothing of those participating. Your "friend" should seek help immediately, lest he join their future ranks. I get playing devils advocate, but some things are wrong, BECAUSE THEY'RE WRONG. People killing each other for "entertainment"? Wrong. Real wrong.
And why do you think they shut down the colosseum? Because while people may like watching adults maim and kill each other, it's not exactly conducive to a healthy society as a whole. If we did this now we would literally be setting the human race back two thousand years. 'sides, the net has plenty of outlets for you gore fetishists, sick fucks that you are.TrilbyWill said:
A better question should be if we still want to be a society bent on destroying those we can't "fix". This ain't exactly sophie's choice here. NO ONE dying is a very viable option. Particularly if you get the casual drug users out of the clink to make room for those who actually NEED to be there.
Screw ethics, that would be awesome!
(Unless you're - quite possibly - trolling, in which case well done:3)
I regularly watch bloody UFC, Dream and StrikeForce fights, partake and spar in BJJ and do Muay Thai - don't tell me how to think. I don't think I'm 'edgy', I think I'm fairly normal, instinctively, I like watching people fight.GreatTeacherCAW said:
(Unless you're - quite possibly - trolling, in which case well done:3)
Biiiig difference between boxing or MMA and two men literally beating each other to death to survive. I want you to think about it. REALLY think about it. Ever seen a car wreck up close? Ever watched the light slip from someone's eyes as they die in excruciating agony? Ever watched a snuff film? If the answer is no, you quite literally have no fucking idea what you're talking about, 'cuse that's what you'd be willingly signing up for. Just as a viewer! If you genuinely think that's "awesome" I suggest you seek immediate mental help, because there is something seriously wrong with you.SextusMaximus said:
Look, if we're talking about forcing inmates to do shit to survive, why not make them do something constructive? Tax preparation? First one through the I-9 forms gets an extra week of life. I mean if you're going to make them dance like monkeys, why the fuck not go all out? Dancing with death. A reality show where whoever's the best dancer survives while those that aren't get fed through a wood chipper feet first so all the good little girls and boys of america can hear their agonizing death screams. Amateur surgery hour! This one's only for inmates with illnesses, like cancer and whatnot, you go grab folks off the street and they perform the operations, see if you can survive!
Or better still, how about this, you let them go, give them unlimited ammo and weapons and just film the killing spree while you have people paid to hunt them down. Sure, innocents would die by the hundreds, but think of the ratings!
All I say is: Don't end it after 6-7 years of my childhood only to make a crappy-beyond-crap reboot in my teens!
(Get it? Gladiators joke, eh brits.........*Sigh* forget it)
Being on topic, this would be a viable way for england to get the death penalty. After all, we put up with Big Brother and the X Factor, why not this?! At least the then the person we really hate WILL be set upon by a mob out for their blood!
(Get it? Gladiators joke, eh brits.........*Sigh* forget it)
Being on topic, this would be a viable way for england to get the death penalty. After all, we put up with Big Brother and the X Factor, why not this?! At least the then the person we really hate WILL be set upon by a mob out for their blood!
Yes! Let's give murderers in a prison MORE OPPORTUNITY TO MURDER.
ON PAY-PER-VIEW.
...
FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU Y HUMANITY Y DO YOU FORGET THAT WE DITCHED GLADIATORS FOR A REASON
ON PAY-PER-VIEW.
...
FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU Y HUMANITY Y DO YOU FORGET THAT WE DITCHED GLADIATORS FOR A REASON
The main issue people have with the death penalty is what it says about our society. Having death row inmates fight to the death just multiplies that by a thousand.
You know, combining "hopeless, dying orphans" and/or "children on the brink of death" with "child molesters" ALSO equals an "everyone wins" scenario.Darren716 said:
As does "dead people" and "necrophiliacs".
Sometimes, it's better to go with some simple ethics and humanity rather than stone-cold logic.
Oh, I'd totally watch that, the all-pedo network. It would need to be an "adult" network, of course (Irony! Ha!).lacktheknack said:
You'd just have to pay the families a couple million for their dying children. Everyone wins. And it'd be all done voluntarily, so that makes it morally and ethically sound.
..right?