Dueling

[SithDoughnut]

Most action films involve some sort of plot, albeit foolish, that brings the story along to justify the use of violence for some sort of just cause.

So if the duelling can be justified for a just cause, it is OK?

 

[benglobal]

Right or wrong? Moral or immoral? What do you think about dueling? Would you accept a challenge to a duel?

I certainly would.

Pistols at dawn you cad, only your pistol would be a water one.

Otherwise I'd be running for the hills!!!!!

 

[truelies]

Right or wrong? Moral or immoral? What do you think about dueling? Would you accept a challenge to a duel?

I certainly would.

a return to dueling would be a straight forward way to remove shysters, banksters and numerous other riffraff from the Community.

 

[jwu]

Hmm...wouldn't legal duels create quite an opportunity for abuse? People could be coerced into accepting a duel and then pretty much legally be killed by a professional duelist.

 

[quatona]

Hmm...wouldn't legal duels create quite an opportunity for abuse? People could be coerced into accepting a duel and then pretty much legally be killed by a professional duelist.

I guess the OP would ask you also "And...what´s wrong with that?"

 

[Freodin]

What would be the advantage of a legal duell over regular courts?

 

[mpok1519]

all and any dispute can be settled by rational, logical intellegent adults. But, if theyre not rational, logical or intellegent (aka "Stewwwwwpiiiiid!") they won't find a solution to their problems. And will resort to violence.

Yes the "its stupid" rule does apply bc dueling only makes sense if the parties involved are too stupid to resolve their differences civilly.

 

[daveth]

I would consider duel if I was father of Roman Rudakov. "Private Roman Rudakov, a victim of bullying in the army, died in the intensive care unit of the Burdenko hospital, where he had spent over a year. Over the course of many months, he was waiting on an intestinal and kidney transplant operation. He was 21 years old, and he died slowly and painfully....When Roman Rudakov’s story first appeared in the media, Sergei Ivanov, then the minister of Defense, publicly said that Roman had a “rare blood disease.” – and no manner of “bullying.” Almost immediately it became apparent that this wasn’t so: Rudakov genuinely suffers from a blood condition, but “bullying” was also present. Medical documents and witness testimony soon surfaced and made it clear that Roman was regularly beaten in the unit where he served."

If I was father of Roman Rudakov, I would challenge Sergei Ivanov.

 

[daveth]

all and any dispute can be settled by rational, logical intellegent adults. But, if theyre not rational, logical or intellegent (aka "Stewwwwwpiiiiid!") they won't find a solution to their problems. And will resort to violence.

Yes the "its stupid" rule does apply bc dueling only makes sense if the parties involved are too stupid to resolve their differences civilly.

rational, logical intellegent adults. Only if they are willing to solve the dispute peacefully. Otherwise, one (at least one) of them may hire killers.

 

[MoonLancer]

If you want, you can start by answering my posts here and here, which deal with duelling being a waste of goverment money and duelling being a waste of life respectively.

How does dualing waste government money compared to someone who must serve life in prison? I would content that duals would actually SAVE on government money.

Dualing may be looked at as a loss of life, however we are overpopulated as it is. Besides in many cases justice is impossible. In my opinion people with power would have a harder time hiding behind that power if duals were legal.

 

[SithDoughnut]

How does dualing waste government money compared to someone who must serve life in prison? I would content that duals would actually SAVE on government money.

It's not a comparison - you've got to add the cost of duels on to the costs of the justice system so far. Legalising duelling will not get rid of imprisonment, nor will it necessarily even lower the number of people in prison, because you'll have to add all the people who are tried for illegal duelling or not following the rules and so on.

Dualing may be looked at as a loss of life, however we are overpopulated as it is.

Not necessarily. It's more a mismanagement of resources than overpopulation.

Besides in many cases justice is impossible. In my opinion people with power would have a harder time hiding behind that power if duals were legal.

Not really. If duels were legal, you'd have to make it optional for both combatants, otherwise it's just another form of the death penalty. People in power could just refuse.

 

[Freodin]

...in many cases justice is impossible. In my opinion people with power would have a harder time hiding behind that power if duals were legal.

That seems to be a rather romantic view of the topic.

Yes, our justice systems fails sometimes (more or less often, depending on who you ask). But duelling would fail just the same... and I´d say with exactly the same quote of failures.

It´s the same with "people with power". People with power might be able to evade our current justice system. They would equally be able to evade duelling.

And while failures in our current justice system might mean that an offender is not punished... failure in the duelling system can additionally mean that not only the offender isn´t punished, but a further innocent is hurt / killed.


While some may believe that the power of righteousness might overcome the evil oppressors... it´s not always the baddies that lose the duell.

 

[onemorequestion]

Right or wrong?

Right.

Moral or immoral?

Moral.

As moral as smoking pot, abortion on demand, or engaging in unsafe sexual practices. It's a pro choice between willing partners.

What do you think about dueling?

Best idea politicians ever had.

Would you accept a challenge to a duel?

Yes. And, I would like to be able to offer one as well.

I certainly would.

Are you a liberal, progressive, or politically a leftist? I'm not.

Dueling? It's an activity that needs rethinking. It is certainly a free exchange if ideas.

 

[MoonLancer]

That seems to be a rather romantic view of the topic.

Thats because i am a romatic

Yes, our justice systems fails sometimes (more or less often, depending on who you ask). But duelling would fail just the same... and I´d say with exactly the same quote of failures.

It´s the same with "people with power". People with power might be able to evade our current justice system. They would equally be able to evade duelling.

possibly, But i dont think so. Dueling comes into play when the guilt is not clear. It would really depend on if champions are permitted or not as that would greatly change the dynamic.

While some may believe that the power of righteousness might overcome the evil oppressors... it´s not always the baddies that lose the duel.

Its not so much that, as if a person feels guilty when going into a fight it effects their capacity to win duals. Its a physiological thing.

That said if champions were granted things wouldn't be much different then they are today. As lawyers are basically champions of today (in many cases a sleezy kind of way)

 

[SithDoughnut]

Thats because i am a romatic

Yes, our justice systems fails sometimes (more or less often, depending on who you ask). But duelling would fail just the same... and I´d say with exactly the same quote of failures.

Except that failure would mean the death of innocent people.

possibly, But i dont think so. Dueling comes into play when the guilt is not clear. It would really depend on if champions are permitted or not as that would greatly change the dynamic.

Again, nothing would be there to stop people refusing to use the duelling method, and use the courts instead. You can't force people into it, otherwise it's just a badly done death penalty that often kills the wrong person.

Its not so much that, as if a person feels guilty when going into a fight it effects their capacity to win duals. Its a physiological thing.

You assume that they'd feel guilty. Plenty of criminals do not feel bad about what they've done, often because they thought it was the right thing to do.

 

[jwu]

Post deleted - i hadn't noticed that the thread meanwhile had progressed farther.

 

[bricklayer]

Right or wrong? Moral or immoral? What do you think about dueling? Would you accept a challenge to a duel?

I certainly would.

You know what you call someone who refuses to duel?
A target.

Sometimes you just gotta do what you gotta do. The good thing is you're the one left to say what was done.
Call me out, and I'll drop you like livestock.

 

[quatona]

I would consider duel if I was father of Roman Rudakov. "Private Roman Rudakov, a victim of bullying in the army, died in the intensive care unit of the Burdenko hospital, where he had spent over a year. Over the course of many months, he was waiting on an intestinal and kidney transplant operation. He was 21 years old, and he died slowly and painfully....When Roman Rudakov’s story first appeared in the media, Sergei Ivanov, then the minister of Defense, publicly said that Roman had a “rare blood disease.” – and no manner of “bullying.” Almost immediately it became apparent that this wasn’t so: Rudakov genuinely suffers from a blood condition, but “bullying” was also present. Medical documents and witness testimony soon surfaced and made it clear that Roman was regularly beaten in the unit where he served."

If I was father of Roman Rudakov, I would challenge Sergei Ivanov.

And what would be the point in being killed by him?

 

[Freodin]

possibly, But i dont think so. Dueling comes into play when the guilt is not clear. It would really depend on if champions are permitted or not as that would greatly change the dynamic.

So dueling would have to be some sort of "last resort", when other means of settling disputes have failed. And all the trials and errors to find out if this is not "last resort" would have to be done before. So there wouldn´t be any savings or simplifications of our currect judicial system... just more complications.

Its not so much that, as if a person feels guilty when going into a fight it effects their capacity to win duals. Its a physiological thing.

I can´t see that. This might be the cause when a duel was fought as some kind of truth-finding-mechanism: that the winner had shown the truth of his case, and that both participants believed in that.

But a lie-detector might find out such guilty feelings as well... no, better, and without the chance of killing or maiming an innocent.

That said if champions were granted things wouldn't be much different then they are today. As lawyers are basically champions of today (in many cases a sleezy kind of way)

So you would make duels compelling? I challenge you, and you have to accept? I´d rather trust any sleezy lawyer to defend my (just or not) cause, than my steady hand or quick blade.

 

[MoonLancer]

nevermind