Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
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.
Right or wrong? Moral or immoral? What do you think about dueling? Would you accept a challenge to a duel?
I certainly would.
I guess the OP would ask you also "And...what´s wrong with that?"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.
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.
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.
...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.
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.
Thats because i am a romaticThat seems to be a rather romantic view of the topic.
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.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.
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.While some may believe that the power of righteousness might overcome the evil oppressors... it´s not always the baddies that lose the duel.
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.
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.
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.
Right or wrong? Moral or immoral? What do you think about dueling? Would you accept a challenge to a duel?
I certainly would.
And what would be the point in being killed by him?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 Rudakovs 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 wasnt 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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?