Gladatorial Combat

[Tomk80]

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.

That actually depends on the range. When the gun is holstered, you have to draw the gun, unpin the safety, lock and then pull the trigger. In that case, drawing a sword (or a knife) and getting to someone is actually quicker. It takes less than a second.

 

[Ninja Turtles]

The funny thing about this topic is that you have rabid fans of the death penalty, which is much worse. You restrain them and then kill them.

 

[Tomk80]

The funny thing about this topic is that you have rabid fans of the death penalty, which is much worse. You restrain them and then kill them.

Indeed. And according to a recent article I read in the newspapers, research has shown that even lethal injections (which I think was considered most 'humane') involve an amount of suffering, as the sedation they get first doesn't always work.

 

[Donut Hole]

You wouldn't get many volunteers. The only people who would volunteer are from Texas, and maybe one or two other states like Virginia and Delaware. In most states, executions are pretty rare (or they don't have DP). In California, for example, they've had hundreds/thousands of people on death row, but have only actually executed 3 since 1976, when the DP was found constitutional once again.

All moral problems aside, I doubt it would work economically.

But it would also give an "incentive" to sentence people to death, aside from anything else, and that would be an unacceptable distortion of the judicial process.

 

[Allister]

I think this idea is insane. it is barbaric.

Why not start having two minute hate as well.

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

Would it really generate THAT much money? i doubt it. if it did it would go to big corporations, probably owned by Murdoch.

It served to entertain the public

SO?

isn't American Football, World Football, Baseball etc, film, tv, etc enough, now you want to watch two convicts fight to the death.

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

Is there that much rioting and unrest that public executions are nessecary?

It served as an effective means of punishment and discouragement.

I seriously doubt that. isn't the death penalty enough discouragment already? obviously not, but putting people in a ring and watching them hack each other to a bloddy and grusome death is monsterous.

Merchandising and spin-offs could generate millions uppon millions of dollars alone.

merchandising? what, like action figures and lunch boxes with photo's of crushed heads? rental videos? ect.

Yes its violent, yes its harsh, but you dont punish someone with a pillow

you should not punish anyone with any form of weapon or torture.

The entertainment would be no less violent than modern films and news reports.

Films are fictitious, you know no one is really dying or being murded.
the News is 'real' and depicts horrible events but these events are not condoned and marketed for entertainment but to show the problems of the world, or at least they are supposed to.

 

[sparklecat]

I doubt many criminals would go for it, and it would never be implemented anyway, but it would certainly be interesting if it were. Those who think it barbaric would be under no compulsion to watch or participate.

 

[Antoninus Verus]

I do not do 'anything' for money

Then why do you have a job?

it would exponentially get worse.

Not true, we already have things like "Rumble Cage" and WWF (Even though WWF is fake) which serve no purpose but to generate profit. A system of inmates fighting in gladatorial situations would serve to create an independant punishment system that can support itself and generate money for the government.

I am content with giving money to keep dangerous and immoral persons away from the rest of society

Great, but that money that you give could also be used to fund a children's cancer hospital. Prison, hospital, which one would you rather your money went to?

That actually depends on the range. When the gun is holstered, you have to draw the gun, unpin the safety, lock and then pull the trigger. In that case, drawing a sword (or a knife) and getting to someone is actually quicker. It takes less than a second.

Hence why the gladiators would train only with wooden swords and would only be issued real weapons in the presencse of heavily armed guards

Indeed. And according to a recent article I read in the newspapers, research has shown that even lethal injections (which I think was considered most 'humane') involve an amount of suffering, as the sedation they get first doesn't always work.

Im sorry, but a man who rapes and murders young children does not deserve a peaceful death.

You wouldn't get many volunteers.

Many prisoners in the system today are violent by nature, hand them a sword and say "Ok, go kill that other guy and you wont get in trouble". I think that'll raise ALOT of interest.

But it would also give an "incentive" to sentence people to death, aside from anything else, and that would be an unacceptable distortion of the judicial process.

I doubt it, because ultimately it is the inmate's choice if he wants to participate, so a death sentence wouldnt mean the arena unless he chose it

Would it really generate THAT much money? i doubt it. if it did it would go to big corporations, probably owned by Murdoch.

How much revenue does WWF or the World Karate Tournament generate?

isn't American Football, World Football, Baseball etc, film, tv, etc enough, now you want to watch two convicts fight to the death.

This is violent, yes. But it also serves to teach a lesson about society and what happens when you break society rules. Besides, have you watched Court TV lately? Some of the things they put on there are pretty gruesome.

Is there that much rioting and unrest that public executions are nessecary?

http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/417/417lect17.htm The prisons are over-crowded, such over crowding makes riots much more likely. The inmates have pent up agression and no way to effectively release it, such fighting would be an opportunity to release it in a way that benefits.

I seriously doubt that. isn't the death penalty enough discouragment already? obviously not, but putting people in a ring and watching them hack each other to a bloddy and grusome death is monsterous.

The death penalty doesnt scare anyone because its far too gentile. Men that are executed by the state are so taken care of through the process that its not effective. These are brutal, violent men who arent affraid to die, a little needle prick isnt going to scare them.

merchandising? what, like action figures and lunch boxes with photo's of crushed heads? rental videos? ect.

I doubt we need to shoot for such a young market, but Im sure advertisement consultants could come up with some good ideas

you should not punish anyone with any form of weapon or torture.

Why give them any more of a freebie than they gave thier victim? If a man strangles women then rapes thier dead bodies, strangle that mother. The punishment fits the crime.

Films are fictitious, you know no one is really dying or being murded.

Doesnt matter, you still see it

the News is 'real' and depicts horrible events but these events are not condoned and marketed for entertainment but to show the problems of the world, or at least they are supposed to.

SUPPOSED to. The news has a fascination with bad news. They do report on good news, but its rare.

I doubt many criminals would go for it, and it would never be implemented anyway, but it would certainly be interesting if it were.

As I said before, if you handed a man who was condemned to die a sword and said "Go kill that guy, you wont get in trouble" Youd get a LONG list of volunteers.

Those who think it barbaric would be under no compulsion to watch or participate.

Agreed