Gladatorial Combat

[Antoninus Verus]

In Ancient Rome, punishment for crimes such as rape, murder, arson, and burglary, one form of the punishment was to be sold by the government to an entertainer. That entertainer would then take you, train you, and send you to the arena.

Once in the arena, you would have had to fight against annother man, called a Gladiator (as were you). You would be given a weapon which could be a short sword, a trident, a short knife, a net (usually accompanied by annother weapon), plus a shield. If your owner was wealthy, you might recieve a full head covering helment, but usually you were given leather armor that covered the top part of your back and sword shoulder.

Once the fight commenced, there was two ways to leave the arena. Walk, or be carried. If you were walking, you were alive and had one. If you were being carried, you were dead and had lost. Sometimes a gladiator would pause before delivering the deathblow if the looser raised his hand, pleading to the Emperor (Who usually attended most gladitorial events). If the looser's skill had impressed the Emperor or you were a crowd favorite, the Emperor would put a thumb up and your life would be spared. Thumbs down meant death. If you survived three years, you were taken back to the gladiator school and train new gladiators. After two years of training, you were issued a wooden gladius and your freedom.

This pastime served several purposes.

It generated revenue for the government through admission prices and sales of convicts.

It served to entertain the public

It provided a safe outlet for public agression and prevented rioting and general unrest.

It served as an effective means of punishment and discouragement.


Now...heres my idea, we re-instate this policy. We build a new Coliseum, and have gladatorial combat become an option for death-row inmates. We give them a couple months training to get them strong and able to fight, then we send them into the arena. We charge admission to crowds to come and watch the fight and we televise it on pay-per-view. The crowds could be restricted to 18 and older and alchahol forbidden in the stadium.

The revenue generated could create an entirely self-sufficent system of punishment and entertainment. Not a single dime of tax-payer money would be needed once the system was fully up and going. Ill bet it would even generate extra money that could be distributed into our budget. Merchandising and spin-offs could generate millions uppon millions of dollars alone. The dramatic strain on the prison populations would be eased and the tax money required to incarcerate someone untill a full state execution would disapear.

Some might say its cruel and unusual punishment. I disagree. If men were FORCED to participate, then I would agree, but the system would be totally voluntary. Taking candidates off death row would speed up the process of punishment. These are violent men whom society has concluded have no chance of re-habilitation. These men would be using thier violent talents to benefit society and expunge themselves from the system that would have flushed them anyways, except that it would have taken longer and cost far more. The only people who would be elligible for the system would be men serving 30 or more years and have served less than 3 years of thier sentence and those condemned to death.

Yes its violent, yes its harsh, but you dont punish someone with a pillow. The entertainment would be no less violent than modern films and news reports. We already glorify violence in entertainment, this is just a case of us using that glorification to help our society.

 

[Caylin]

What happens after 5 years when violent felons are walking the street with actual combat training?

 

[Antoninus Verus]

What happens after 5 years when violent felons are walking the street with actual combat training?

I never said we would use the Roman method of release and internment. The new system would state that someone who enlisted fought till they died. If they were serving 30 years or more, they had to fight untill they died or untill those 30+ years were up. In which case, the chances of that person surviving till the end of thier service are absolutely astronomical.

 

[Caylin]

I never said we would use the Roman method of release and internment. The new system would state that someone who enlisted fought till they died. If they were serving 30 years or more, they had to fight untill they died or untill those 30+ years were up. In which case, the chances of that person surviving till the end of thier service are absolutely astronomical.

Ohhhh ok. Could they opt out if they wanted to? Like fight for several years and then go back to prison?

If they could do that I wouldn't see any problem with it.

 

[Antoninus Verus]

Ohhhh ok. Could they opt out if they wanted to? Like fight for several years and then go back to prison?

If they could do that I wouldn't see any problem with it.

Not unless they had serious health concerns such as a broken bone, severed limb, or a physically debilitating disease. Once you sign up, your in

 

[Caylin]

Not unless they had serious health concerns such as a broken bone, severed limb, or a physically debilitating disease. Once you sign up, your in

In that case, I don't think anyone would sign up. Fighting till you die a gruesome death doesn't seem like it would get alot of volunteers. Maybe a few on death row would sign up, but it would seem to me that they would prefer to die somewhat painlessly.

 

[Antoninus Verus]

In that case, I don't think anyone would sign up. Fighting till you die a gruesome death doesn't seem like it would get alot of volunteers. Maybe a few on death row would sign up, but it would seem to me that they would prefer to die somewhat painlessly.

Are you kidding? Convicted criminals would probably MUCH rather go out in a blaze of glory than a sad little operating table. Plus achieving nation-wide fame and a chance to kill without punishment. Im sure if criminals designed heaven, itd be something pretty close to that. How would YOU feel if you got a chance to kill someone you hated and have thousands of people cheering your name while you did it all with the knowleage that you wont be punished at all for it.

 

[Caylin]

Are you kidding? Convicted criminals would probably MUCH rather go out in a blaze of glory than a sad little operating table. Plus achieving nation-wide fame and a chance to kill without punishment. Im sure if criminals designed heaven, itd be something pretty close to that. How would YOU feel if you got a chance to kill someone you hated and have thousands of people cheering your name while you did it all with the knowleage that you wont be punished at all for it.

Oh. Well when you put it like that you do have a point. I think it could work, but I don't like to think of the state of society where people pay to watch people die.

 

[Antoninus Verus]

We already are. Most popular movies now involve death in far more numbers and gruesome deaths.

 

[Caylin]

We already are. Most popular movies now involve death in far more numbers and gruesome deaths.

Yeah, but when I go see a violent movie I know it isn't real. People aren't really dieing. I can sit and watch action movies all day. However, when my brothers start looking at things that show real people dieing, I get somewhat ill.

 

[Antoninus Verus]

The live audience would be limited to only 18 and older patrons and the televised version of a fight would be avalible on pay-per-view, which would restrict the number of under-age people seeing the fight plus generating more profit

 

[MoonlessNight]

I detailed the various moral and practical problems with this the last time you brought it up, and I still don't like the idea. Simply put it makes a sport of the judicial system, never is really better than other forms of punishment (as you say, if it is forced it is cruel. If by choice without possibility of freedom few will take the option, and many that do will do so in some escape attempt anyway. And with possibility of freedom there are obviously problems). To be effective the convicts would have to be trained, and I'm not comfortable training people we condemned as killers to be more efficient killers, even if they will never use their skills on the public. Upkeep costs would be enormus so that revenue alone could not support the practice, thus to make a profit we would likely have to merchandise, as you said. Then we are glorifying killers. And so forth.

I will say, however, that I have no problem with the practice of dueling and see no good reason why if there were a duel it could not be televised. This could lead to a colliseum like event or program. But it's when it is a government run program in the prison system that I am uncomfortable with it.

 

[Antoninus Verus]

And with possibility of freedom there are obviously problems

Such as...

To be effective the convicts would have to be trained, and I'm not comfortable training people we condemned as killers to be more efficient killers, even if they will never use their skills on the public.

Many serial killers are already effective killing machines, the training would be geared to teach swordsmanship and shield skills, skills that would not be very useful to the inmates in the unlikely event of an escape. A sword in a gun-fight is not a useful weapon.

Upkeep costs would be enormus so that revenue alone could not support the practice, thus to make a profit we would likely have to merchandise, as you said. Then we are glorifying killers. And so forth.

Combat sports are HUGE business. My great-uncle owned a boxing gym for years and he never failed to sell out atleast half of the tickets avalible. People love violence, people WILL watch it, and people will most certainly pay for it.

And as for glorifying killers, we already do. Open a history book or turn on the TV. We are a killing obsessed culture. Turn on Court TV and watch one of thier shows "...and then after cutting off his wife's head, the killer went into his son's room and crushed his son's head with a hammer". You cant tell me we dont already obsess with death and the people who cause it.

 

[MoonlessNight]

Combat sports are HUGE business. My great-uncle owned a boxing gym for years and he never failed to sell out atleast half of the tickets avalible. People love violence, people WILL watch it, and people will most certainly pay for it.

It will sell well, true, but the matienence costs will be much much larger than managing a boxer. Above standard prison costs we must train the prisoners, pay for their medical attention (I assume they will receive that, the masses don't eat up this stuff if their fighter dies after one fight because of a unlucky hit. In any case we'd probably run out of fighters if we didn't save the loser of most fights (some times the loser has to die to satisfy the crowd, but that's not usually true)). We also have to have extensive security protocals, these are people who would likely be put in maximum security prisons, and we are arming them. It is possible to nullify the threat, but it will take many people, a lot of security systems and all that. That's a lot of money. I don't know exactly how much, because stuff like this has never been done in a modern nation, but it would be very expensive so though we would be able to make a profit, I don't think the profit would be as large as you think it would be.

And as for glorifying killers, we already do. Open a history book or turn on the TV. We are a killing obsessed culture. Turn on Court TV and watch one of thier shows "...and then after cutting off his wife's head, the killer went into his son's room and crushed his son's head with a hammer". You cant tell me we dont already obsess with death and the people who cause it.

Perhaps we do, but I don't see why that means we should become part of the problem.

EDIT: The quote formatting was getting screwed up even though the tags were right, so I opted to quote Zoot-style instead.

 

[Antoninus Verus]

It will sell well, true, but the matienence costs will be much much larger than managing a boxer. Above standard prison costs we must train the prisoners, pay for their medical attention (I assume they will receive that, the masses don't eat up this stuff if their fighter dies after one fight because of a unlucky hit. In any case we'd probably run out of fighters if we didn't save the loser of most fights (some times the loser has to die to satisfy the crowd, but that's not usually true)). We also have to have extensive security protocals, these are people who would likely be put in maximum security prisons, and we are arming them. It is possible to nullify the threat, but it will take many people, a lot of security systems and all that. That's a lot of money. I don't know exactly how much, because stuff like this has never been done in a modern nation, but it would be very expensive so though we would be able to make a profit, I don't think the profit would be as large as you think it would be.

If the revenue generated wasnt enough then we could bring in sponsors to cover the gaps.In the immortal words of George Carlin, Im sure as long as we're killing people, Marboro Ciggarettes and DOW Chemicals wouldnt mind making an extra buck.

Perhaps we do, but I don't see why that means we should become part of the problem.

Because we love violence, that will never change. And as long as we have to live with this love, why not make it work for us?

 

[Lyric's Dad]

I must say this idea is ludicrous and inhuman. We are supposed to be a civilized people. This is definately not something I would ever support.

 

[Antoninus Verus]

I must say this idea is ludicrous and inhuman. We are supposed to be a civilized people. This is definately not something I would ever support.

Why?

 

[ChristianCenturion]

Why?

If you have to ask, then I suppose that answers how you could come up with such a proposal.

 

[Antoninus Verus]

If you have to ask, then I suppose that answers how you could come up with such a proposal.

I think its a wonderful idea. It generates income that will take a HUGE burden off the American tax payer, freeing up funds to be used for things like healthcare or social programs. It will establish a totally self-reliant punishment and incarceration system. On top of all that, provide entertainment for people.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

I think its a wonderful idea. It generates income that will take a HUGE burden off the American tax payer, freeing up funds to be used for things like healthcare or social programs. It will establish a totally self-reliant punishment and incarceration system. On top of all that, provide entertainment for people.

Fine for you; However, I am a citizen of the United States and I too have priorities of my own.
I do not do 'anything' for money, I am content with giving money to keep dangerous and immoral persons away from the rest of society and I am already somewhat disgusted with the quality of entertainment we have now and cringe at the idea that it would exponentially get worse.
As I am giving you the benefit of the doubt in that this is all rhetorical and you are simply toying, I will simply tie that string of reality to it by saying that the administration of justice has nothing to do with entertainment and income generation - those would be conflict of interests.