• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Bring Back Dueling?

Should dueling be re-instated under extreme conditions

  • Yes, maybe a little civility and honesty will return to politics

    Votes: 10 58.8%
  • No, because legally sanctioned violence is wrong

    Votes: 4 23.5%
  • No, because we still need Democrats as an alternative party

    Votes: 3 17.6%
  • No, because we still need republicans as an alternative party

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    17

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Alright, I am semi-serious about this. In the founding days of our country, when a debate got personal, defamatory, liberlous, or otherwise out of line, the two in contention would sometimes challenge each other to a duel. Sorry if that sounds like pandering, just setting up the pole question.
Now that that has been established, what if,....now here me out, what if we brought back legalized political dueling on certain ethical issues like slander, or defamation, etc. The catch being that once the challenge is made we use single shot muzzleloaders at 50 paces, and keep it fair with a likewise armed "moderator".
--All opinions welcomed.
 

curt

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
Location
Ont, Can
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
LaMidRighter said:
Alright, I am semi-serious about this. In the founding days of our country, when a debate got personal, defamatory, liberlous, or otherwise out of line, the two in contention would sometimes challenge each other to a duel. Sorry if that sounds like pandering, just setting up the pole question.
Now that that has been established, what if,....now here me out, what if we brought back legalized political dueling on certain ethical issues like slander, or defamation, etc. The catch being that once the challenge is made we use single shot muzzleloaders at 50 paces, and keep it fair with a likewise armed "moderator".
--All opinions welcomed.

My opinion in 2 words: Hell Yeah!!

Darwinism at it's finest. If two willing people have a problem and want to settle it by agreed upon means, the state should have no right to tell them they can't solve it in the manner that seems best to them. All controlable weapons should be an option as well. No hand grenades or molotov cocktails, but guns, knives, fists and similar means. I could see a problem with collateral damage, so there would have to be a selected area for this. All parties involved would have to sign a contract, so as to prevent litigation on behalf of friends, families etc. They're would also have to be an arbiter to determine rules, and see that they're kept.

With some minor reservations aside, sounds like a plan for all citizens, not just the politicians. Hip-hip Hooray for Darwin.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Back in the day, it was considered very dishonorable to not fight a duel once you had been challenged, even if you expected to lose. The "what consenting people do is not the government's business" argument doesn't really apply here, because the consent was most likely made under duress.

If two people REALLY want to fight a duel to the death, the fact that it's illegal is certainly not going to stop them. The government wouldn't even be able to enforce the law against half of the duelists anyway...
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I'd go with swords or other close-quarter weapons...

Missing because you didn't calculate wind conditions just seems pansy...

If you're gonna kill someone, be close enough to look into their eyes and watch the life sink away...
 

GarzaUK

That European Guy
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
3,682
Reaction score
625
Location
Belfast, Northern Ireland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
You yanks are crazy!!! lol. Although we Europeans did a fair amount of dueling back in the day, but nowadays... come on!
 

kal-el

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
LaMidRighter said:
Alright, I am semi-serious about this. In the founding days of our country, when a debate got personal, defamatory, liberlous, or otherwise out of line, the two in contention would sometimes challenge each other to a duel. Sorry if that sounds like pandering, just setting up the pole question.
Now that that has been established, what if,....now here me out, what if we brought back legalized political dueling on certain ethical issues like slander, or defamation, etc. The catch being that once the challenge is made we use single shot muzzleloaders at 50 paces, and keep it fair with a likewise armed "moderator".
--All opinions welcomed.

Well, if 2 people are willing, I don't see a problem with it, I mean, it's not causing harm to innocents or anything.:2razz:
 

curt

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
Location
Ont, Can
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Kandahar said:
The "what consenting people do is not the government's business" argument doesn't really apply here, because the consent was most likely made under duress.

To believe that you would have to believe that mental coersion is the equivalent to physical coersion. It's just another form of determinism; our actions are not of our choosing, but are brought about as a result of external stimuli. It comes remarkably close to a denial of free will.

To claim mental coersion as similar to physical coersion is to call all forms of advertising as nothing but attempted duress. A company doesn't hold a gun to your head when they want you to buy a product. They use advertising as a means of mental coersion to make you buy the product.
 

Polish Rob

Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
Location
Amherst, NH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Politicians will be much less likely to poke fun at the other if fist fighting style dueling would be involved later on.
 

GarzaUK

That European Guy
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
3,682
Reaction score
625
Location
Belfast, Northern Ireland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Polish Rob said:
Politicians will be much less likely to poke fun at the other if fist fighting style dueling would be involved later on.

Your assuming politicans have spine to duel. These are the people who write away young men and women's lives with ink.

Woohoo 700th post. Have that Azerbajian..... :mrgreen:
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Messages
929
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This is an excellent topic.
I wholeheartedly welcome the return to duelling and have indeed challenged several individuals in the past who have all backed down.
It is THE Aryan way for men to settle their differences in time honoured fashion.
The result would be a return to good manners,which is a commodity in short supply in cyber space!
 

Deegan

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Aryan Imperium said:
This is an excellent topic.
I wholeheartedly welcome the return to duelling and have indeed challenged several individuals in the past who have all backed down.
It is THE Aryan way for men to settle their differences in time honoured fashion.
The result would be a return to good manners,which is a commodity in short supply in cyber space!

I then challenge you to a duel, you set the time and place, and the manner of your demise sir!;)

There are certainly some chaps I would not mind challenging, but I fear those days are long behind us, it just does not seem civilized, and there are far more ways to settle a dispute.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Messages
929
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Deegan said:
I then challenge you to a duel, you set the time and place, and the manner of your demise sir!;)

There are certainly some chaps I would not mind challenging, but I fear those days are long behind us, it just does not seem civilized, and there are far more ways to settle a dispute.

But you have to admit that it is a good and effective teacher of manners.
In fact the concept of duelling can be traced back at the very least to the Viking Age and I suspect even earlier.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,264
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Aryan Imperium said:
This is an excellent topic.
I wholeheartedly welcome the return to duelling and have indeed challenged several individuals in the past who have all backed down.
It is THE Aryan way for men to settle their differences in time honoured fashion.
The result would be a return to good manners,which is a commodity in short supply in cyber space!

Yeah, man! After a few hundred duels, the neo-nazi wannabes would be extinct. Then after a few thousand more, we will have removed from the gene pool the truly stupid, and quite possibly raised the average IQ of the human race about 20 points.
THAT is Darwinism at its best. Kill off the stupid first!
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Messages
929
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
UtahBill said:
Yeah, man! After a few hundred duels, the neo-nazi wannabes would be extinct. Then after a few thousand more, we will have removed from the gene pool the truly stupid, and quite possibly raised the average IQ of the human race about 20 points.
THAT is Darwinism at its best. Kill off the stupid first!

On the contrary to be a convinced National Socialist in Europe today takes great courage as to declare oneself to be of such a Weltanschauung results in negative attention.One needs great fortitude and strength of Will to perservere.
In my experience most National Socialists tend to be well eduacted people or at least well educated in the principles of our ideology.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,395
Reaction score
79,370
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Aryan Imperium said:
On the contrary to be a convinced National Socialist in Europe today takes great courage as to declare oneself to be of such a Weltanschauung results in negative attention.One needs great fortitude and strength of Will to perservere.
In my experience most National Socialists tend to be well eduacted people or at least well educated in the principles of our ideology.

ROFLMAO

We will teach our twisted speech
To the young believers
We will train our blue-eyed men
To be young believers

Joe Strummer (RIP)
 

Donkey1499

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
3,945
Reaction score
56
Location
Under The Northern Star, Alaska
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
LaMidRighter said:
Alright, I am semi-serious about this. In the founding days of our country, when a debate got personal, defamatory, liberlous, or otherwise out of line, the two in contention would sometimes challenge each other to a duel. Sorry if that sounds like pandering, just setting up the pole question.
Now that that has been established, what if,....now here me out, what if we brought back legalized political dueling on certain ethical issues like slander, or defamation, etc. The catch being that once the challenge is made we use single shot muzzleloaders at 50 paces, and keep it fair with a likewise armed "moderator".
--All opinions welcomed.

This would definately be a brilliant idea. Then again, the old ways were better. But the liberals would gnash their teeth trying to stop such a thing. But dueling would be great. C-Span would actually be worth watching.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,264
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Aryan Imperium said:
In my experience most National Socialists tend to be well eduacted people or at least well educated in the principles of our ideology.

So, you admit to brain washing using propaganda as the detergent?
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Sorry it took me so long to get back to the poll, a couple of other threads required my time. The responses to this question have all been great and this is exactly where I'd hoped this would go. I am surprised though that there has been so much support for the idea. The way this came to me was actually a joke at the time between myself and a group of mixed ideological friends; I thought about how hard it is if one is a public figure to bring up civil charges when dirty politics are played(slander...et.al) and remembered how they settled it in the past, so I figured I'd throw the forum a curveball based on the groups discussion. I think the nicest thing about a potential re-instatement of the duel is that just the idea of a challenge could make people think twice about trying to damage a debator's reputation, and best yet, someone still has the option to lose a little face and turn down a duel, either way the challenger gets "satisfaction".
 

OdgenTugbyGlub

Active member
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
292
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I then challenge you to a duel, you set the time and place, and the manner of your demise sir!

Heh, you're set if he picks logic at dawn.
 

jallman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,913
Reaction score
11,282
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
cnredd said:
I'd go with swords or other close-quarter weapons...

Missing because you didn't calculate wind conditions just seems pansy...

If you're gonna kill someone, be close enough to look into their eyes and watch the life sink away...

Its when I read posts like this that I get a warm feeling about you cnredd! I read that last line and thought...now there is a guy I can agree with.

HELL YES...bring back dueling. And why should politicians be the only ones to get to have all the fun...I didnt win the men's collegiate fencing championship two years in a row for nothing...and screw an epee or a foil...sabers and dirks! I am all for a good brawl when both parties accept the challenge!
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,264
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
jallman said:
HELL YES...bring back dueling. And why should politicians be the only ones to get to have all the fun...I didnt win the men's collegiate fencing championship two years in a row for nothing...and screw an epee or a foil...sabers and dirks! I am all for a good brawl when both parties accept the challenge!
"dirks", at 6 inches.....
I have a dream, a dream that I will be shot by a jealous husband on my 99th birthday as I am climbing out of his wife's bedroom window.
Does that count as a duel?;)
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,395
Reaction score
79,370
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Hmmm now I can finally have a useful reason for that 6 K Howard Clark hand forged Katana with Fred Lohmann mountings. World Champion Aya LaBrie says it would really cut through live flesh like a buzz saw
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
Kandahar said:
Back in the day, it was considered very dishonorable to not fight a duel once you had been challenged, even if you expected to lose. The "what consenting people do is not the government's business" argument doesn't really apply here, because the consent was most likely made under duress.

If two people REALLY want to fight a duel to the death, the fact that it's illegal is certainly not going to stop them. The government wouldn't even be able to enforce the law against half of the duelists anyway...
AFAIK the duelers usually didn't try to kill each other. The pistols were so inaccurate it was hard to do so anyways. Showing up and firing the pistols at each other was enough to preserve both parties honor.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
scottyz said:
AFAIK the duelers usually didn't try to kill each other. The pistols were so inaccurate it was hard to do so anyways. Showing up and firing the pistols at each other was enough to preserve both parties honor.
That's a really good point, normally it was an arm or leg shot, I guess it all depended on how heated the argument got though.
 
Top Bottom