Prison Gladiatorial Death Matches

[Colour Scientist]

People who commit suicide have lost the will to live, these people are being forced to die.

And why is that? Pain. Emotional or physical.

Do you think someone is going to live longer just to feel more pain? That goes against suicide because even people who have lost the will to live will chose to delay their suicide to live a little longer.

Plus, if they are forced to die in the first place, it is most likely that they will wish for death sooner than later.

TL;DR people will chose the less painful way to go, specially if said death match does not grant them freedom.

I've never been in jail, but you don't value freedom that much if you think someone in going to chose a few months in the death row over a quicker death.

Do you even know what you're trying to say in the first few lines of that? I certainly can't make much sense out of it. How can something even 'go against suicide'?

Exactly, you've never been in jail. If people would rather die than be in prison we wouldn't have the global problem of overcrowding in prisons, would we? Value freedom? You must not value life that much if you think other people aren't going to fight for theirs, even if it's short term.

 

[Dizeazedkiller]

The problem isn't the ethical issues, the voluntary part takes this out of the issue. No the REAL problem is the risk and reward bit, and the social hierarchy of the prison. (I'd just like to say i have no idea how prison's are so don't take offense to anything or I'll punch you).

Living a little longer is hardly a fitting reward for a prisoner. When they are put to death it is humane and painless, whereas fighting in an arena will probably be a bit more painful. The prisoner's would want something more. Maybe they'd be persuaded by better material goods for their cells or better food, but i wouldn't be won over by a free tv. The only thing i'd fight for would be my freedom, aka the way it worked in The Condemned (I'd say death race but they weren't really going to release anyone, and if the prisoners were lied to like in that movie ethics would immediately be front and centre). Of course they are death row convicts so they'd never be released, unless of course someone went to all the trouble of building a small isolated town for them to live in and have normal lives. Back to the tv mattress give me shit bit though. If that were done then people would fight over the stuff,threatening and manipulating to get the things won by the fighters rather than fighting themselves. Or maybe it would set up a hierarchy where the gladiators were on top and everyone else just avoided them.

But whatever, that's my opinion and i talk alot of shit.

Edit: Just realized that everyone's already past the problem and is just discussing if they'd watch it or not or some stupid crap like that. Honeslty, i wouldn't know if it would be entertaining. Exciting yes but maybe I'd be a ***** and get all sickly over it. SO maybe instead of this gladiator idea how about another form of entertainment? Maybe just fighting but not to the death. But whatever.

 

[ElPatron]

Exactly, you've never been in jail. If people would rather die than be in prison we wouldn't have the global problem of overcrowding in prisons, would we?

And we never had problems with suicides in prisons.

Nor people killing themselves before being arrested.

Plus, your argument works fine because there are a lot of people imprisoned for two, three, five years. Few are not going to kill themselves for 5 years of life lost.

So, please take into account that this problem is based on people with a death sentence, not general prison population.

Value freedom? You must not value life that much if you think other people aren't going to fight for theirs, even if it's short term.

Life without freedom is not life.

You would be fighting for a life where you are told when to sleep, when to eat, when to die. You would be fighting to be locked up in a cell, you won't spend that time with the people you love.

You'd be spending that time training for the next time you have to feel pain and cause pain, so that you can live a little longer.

That is not life. That is like being a slave forced into joining the military.

 

[Colour Scientist]

Life without freedom is not life.

And... that's where you lost me.
I don't buy into that romantic viewpoint on life, I'm afraid. If someone were to visit death row and offer people the option of dying now or later, if you thought most of them would say now, you don't know too much about survival instinct. Sure, some might, but it definitely won't be the majority, or even a sizable minority.

 

[RickyRich]

This sounds an awful lot like the movie "Gamer". The movie is basically about the same thing, but with people controlling the prisoners. Actually, it might be more akin to "The Condemned" starring Steve Austin. Google both of theses and you'll see where your friend is getting his sick vision of the future of correctional facilities.

 

[subtlefuge]

This sounds an awful lot like the movie "Gamer". The movie is basically about the same thing, but with people controlling the prisoners. Actually, it might be more akin to "The Condemned" starring Steve Austin. Google both of theses and you'll see where your friend is getting his sick vision of the future of correctional facilities.

Ugh, don't remind me of Gamer. The only part I enjoyed was Michael C. Hall's out of place campy, hammy puppetmaster bit at the end.

Also this guy's friend isn't nearly as clever as he thinks. Getting ideas from ancient civilizations that have had Ridley Scott movies made about them is cheating. It's like stealing from the Simpsons.

 

[Knight Captain Kerr]

The hell is wrong with you? Prisons are meant to be about rehabilitation not just killing people for fun, like monsters.

 

[backinthepresentfuture]

YES. i didn't even read it. just yes, all the way

 

[Kahunaburger]

The hell is wrong with you? Prisons are meant to be about rehabilitation making money for the prison-industrial complex not just killing people for fun, like monsters.

Just sayin'.

OT: Of course not. But it's an interesting "a modest proposal" sort of argument re: death penalty.

 

[Dogstile]

My god, the amount of people who haven't read the OP on the first page alone is insane. Well done guys, great observation.

OP: I'd watch, quite happily. I don't care that its immoral. In fact, hell, you remove the perks they'd get and its just voluntary fighting to the death that can be used to settle disputes with eachother before they die (because they get no reward). Which is actually much better than your version. Also it gives me something to bet on while drunk.

 

[ElPatron]

Life without freedom is not life.

And... that's where you lost me.
I don't buy into that romantic viewpoint on life, I'm afraid. If someone were to visit death row and offer people the option of dying now or later, if you thought most of them would say now, you don't know too much about survival instinct. Sure, some might, but it definitely won't be the majority, or even a sizable minority.

It's not a romantic viewpoint.

Suicides in the death row are 10x higher than in regular population, and 6x higher than in regular prisoners.

It speaks for itself.

 

[Wulfheri]

Let's give the masses bread and games...

It disgusts me.

 

[ShadowStar42]

Life without freedom is not life.

And... that's where you lost me.
I don't buy into that romantic viewpoint on life, I'm afraid. If someone were to visit death row and offer people the option of dying now or later, if you thought most of them would say now, you don't know too much about survival instinct. Sure, some might, but it definitely won't be the majority, or even a sizable minority.

It's not a romantic viewpoint.

Suicides in the death row are 10x higher than in regular population, and 6x higher than in regular prisoners.

It speaks for itself.

Um, looking at the statistics even if it's true that they are 6 times more likely to commit suicide than non-Death Row inmates that puts their suicide rate about about 1.2%, I mean that's high for suicide rates but not exactly an overwhelming figure.

Also, just to throw in on the general question here.

1) Yes it is unethical, as has been said telling someone that they have to fight to continue their lives isn't really giving them a choice.

2) Beyond ethics is the moral character or the society. Executions are a solemn and generally regretful side effect of our justice system and should not be treated with fan fair. An execution represents the failure of our society and should be treated as such.

3) Just as a bit of not looking foolish on forums advice, if someone calls you out and sites the proliferation of false credentials online siting your friends GPA and your competitive fighting doesn't do anything for your argument. Even if true it is unverifiable and simply comes off as more of the same. In addition neither fact would improve any aspect of your argument, your friends GPA doesn't make the idea any objectively smarter or better and your experience as a fighter doesn't make your opinion any more valid.

 

[ElPatron]

Life without freedom is not life.

And... that's where you lost me.
I don't buy into that romantic viewpoint on life, I'm afraid. If someone were to visit death row and offer people the option of dying now or later, if you thought most of them would say now, you don't know too much about survival instinct. Sure, some might, but it definitely won't be the majority, or even a sizable minority.

It's not a romantic viewpoint.

Suicides in the death row are 10x higher than in regular population, and 6x higher than in regular prisoners.

It speaks for itself.

Um, looking at the statistics even if it's true that they are 6 times more likely to commit suicide than non-Death Row inmates that puts their suicide rate about about 1.2%, I mean that's high for suicide rates but not exactly an overwhelming figure.

Remember, those numbers do not show the rates of attempted suicides.

Do not forget that they might not even have the chance to commit suicide, and if they are caught trying, they will be closely monitored.

Also, just to throw in on the general question here.

1) Yes it is unethical, as has been said telling someone that they have to fight to continue their lives isn't really giving them a choice.

It is. Even when you don't. During World War I, people shot their feet to avoid going to war. The Romans had to start punishing people with their thumbs cut off, because many started cutting off their thumbs to become unable of using a sword.

Even when you are presented with binary dilemmas, people find ways out.

If prisoners were forgiven, then they would certainly join the fights. But there would be many that wouldn't.

3) Just as a bit of not looking foolish on forums advice, if someone calls you out and sites the proliferation of false credentials online siting your friends GPA and your competitive fighting doesn't do anything for your argument. Even if true it is unverifiable and simply comes off as more of the same. In addition neither fact would improve any aspect of your argument, your friends GPA doesn't make the idea any objectively smarter or better and your experience as a fighter doesn't make your opinion any more valid.

I said my GPA? In my country we don't have GPA's, that's a bit hard to reveal.

And who cares about GPAs? There are smart people that can't finish high-school and stupid people that get trough it.

I'm in college so I don't care about my high-school grades.

 

[ShadowStar42]

You're arguement that people will shoot themselves in the foot rather than risk dying in war isn't really a counter to my argument that a choice of fighting or certain death isn't a choice. In fact it kind of strengthens my argument as another example of the lengths to which people will go to live.

Also, don't say that the suicide rates in prisons speak for themselves, and then when those rates are pointed out to be still low on the grand scale say that you have to look beyond the suicide rates. We can't know how often suicides are prevented in prisons so it's useless to speculate.

I said my GPA? In my country we don't have GPA's, that's a bit hard to reveal.

And who cares about GPAs? There are smart people that can't finish high-school and stupid people that get trough it.

I'm in college so I don't care about my high-school grades.

My apologies, I am quite tired and I had you conflated with Jimbob a little further up the page so far as the GPA thing goes.

 

[ElPatron]

You're arguement that people will shoot themselves in the foot rather than risk dying in war isn't really a counter to my argument that a choice of fighting or certain death isn't a choice.

1. It proves that if you have to chose between X and Y, people will try and say Z

2. It does not prove your argument, because the Roman Empire and the Allies/Axis still had many people to fight for them. So if you use my argument to support yours, you're basically saying "people prefer death to have their feet shot/thumbs cut off", which is not the matter at hand.

3. Death row inmates are a minority in the rest of the inmate population. They are much more closely watched than regular inmates.

2. It proves that people will prefer a quick, summary way of doing things. WWI was not a "clean" war, it was pretty gruesome. People preferred the short term suffering of having their feet shot than suffering from infections, cold, famine, not seeing their family, getting mangled and dying slowly, facing permanent injury for life.

4. Choosing between death and fight is still choosing between death and death. If you decline the fight, death. If you lose, death. If you win, death.

You can get too injured to win another fight and get killed in the arena. Or just give up fighting. Or even if you win, your next opponent might kill you anyway. All choices result in death.

5. If you are a 50 year old man with some disabilities, you won't be able to fight a 20 year old. Or you might be a skinny guy, facing a huge guy that looks like he was a bouncer of some sort. People will chose death instead of dying slowly in the hands of someone who can just dominate the whole match, while everyone is watching.

 

[Fleaman]

We cluck about how movies and video games desensitize people to violence, but they don't do a great job of desensitizing us to death. We still cringe at real injury and vomit at real car crash victims, because the difference in the perception of fantasy violence and actual violence is deeper than we might think.

And, that's a good thing. I think we should keep that up. Better a generation of simpering vegans unable to envision a cow dying in a slaughterhouse than the bloodthirsty mob clamoring for public hangings.

Also, consider what corruption in the business of gladatorial matches would mean. "Voluntary" is such a weak word when the "volunteer" may be dead tomorrow.

 

[Leninv3l]

I'd watch that.
#1. Prison making extra cash, so less tax dollars need to be put towards prisons.
#2. Death row inmates are going to die anyway, might as well let them go out in an epic battle.

But, there need to be some refinements.
For one, the combatants must at the same time, be fighting lions.
Secondly, no modern weaponry would be allowed. Need swords, and the like.
Lastly, it wouldn't be in some dilapidated room or something, there needs to be an arena of epic proportions.

Humans are bound to return to this form of entertainment eventually, because we're animals. So we might as well do it in the least horrible way possible.

And, it's their choice. Would you rather die peacefully, or in an epic glorification of battle? Myself, peacefully, but hey, some people might not agree.

 

[trollnystan]

What is with the people on this site thinking that once someone breaks the law they stop being human? It's disgusting to let dogs and cocks do this anymore, let alone people.

What's even more sick is people would watch it and think they were better than the 'scum' they're forcing to brutally fight to the death for their amusement. Also, before you say it's voluntary, your giving people the chance for life so it isn't really.

One more thing, allowing a prisoner to fight another one to death in a dirty ring in a prison somewhere is not a glorious, romanticised death. They will die in agony with people at home jeering and hissing.

What this person said. I would hate to live in a society where people's deaths were made into entertainment for the masses. I'd hoped we left that behind us in the 19th century. It's really bad enough that we make entertainment from other people's pain and ridicule with these god-awful reality TV shows.

 

[Bassik]

Dear people on this thread who find this a "cool" idea,

I don't care what your reasons are, maybe you honestly want to watch something like this on TV, maybe you want to clean up the prison system, some of you might even be out for a little justice.

Take a good look at your life, you pathetic excuses for human beings that you are. I don't care what your ideology behind your reasoning is, all I care about is that the only thing dividing you and the monsters waiting in a cell is that you never had the opportunity to do what they did. Perhaps you have better control over yourself then they do, maybe you are too cowardly to act on your fantasies.
But you are of the same breed as the psychopath, the serial killer and the subhuman.

The minute you start to think that forcing (Because you DO force them, you understand that don't you?} two living beings to fight for the death, while Joe Sixpack and his dangerously obese wife jeer them on like it's a fucking wrestling match is a great idea, then guess what? You are not a good person. Maybe you think of yourself as a nice guy, but trust me, you are not. You belong behind padded walls, my friend.

Sincerely,

Bassik.