Poll of the Day > Freedom of speech was put in the constitution at a time when dueling was legal..

(+) Yeah! (+)

There were also fewer avenues by which public opinion could be expressed. If a person 200 years ago wanted to publicly tell a woman they would be fixed by a bullet, they would have to have it published somewhere. If it was inflammatory enough, this would result in a duel. Today we don't have duels, and we have Twitter and Facebook to publish such opinions. This is why tensions between competing ideologies are so high.

I vote we bring back the duel. Let the Yiannopoulos's and Spencer's of the world back their words up and put it all on the line in a legal, public venue

Why do I poop little balls it's a bunch of them

SkynyrdRocker posted...

Why do I poop little balls it's a bunch of them

That's common with herbivores in nature. IDK what causes it in humans though. What is your diet like?

Seems like a stupid idea

---

We love violence. It might satisfy our appetite for it. You don't know until you try

Except we did try it and it was abused rampantly by politicians and the elite to instill fear into anyone that disagreed with them

---

Yeah so I could duel you for making this dumb topic

---

EvilMegas posted...

Yeah so I could duel you for making this dumb topic

Not yet

Mead posted...

Except we did try it and it was abused rampantly by politicians and the elite to instill fear into anyone that disagreed with them

That fear is what kept people's language and demeanor civil. With nothing to incentivize civility, freedom of speech isn't a good idea

A wonderful idea. At the end of the day, all that matters is "Will" and who has the strongest. Battling is the most direct method of testing one Will against another and the most decisive.
---

Let's also bring back trial by combat meaning that anyone can get away with anything if they can win a or get a champion that wins a trial of combat.

Canada has active dueling laws.....except most of us are too chicken shit to follow through.
---

Dreaming_King posted...

A wonderful idea. At the end of the day, all that matters is "Will" and who has the strongest. Battling is the most direct method of testing one Will against another and the most decisive.

---

Joker_X_II posted...

Canada has active dueling laws.....except most of us are too chicken shit to follow through.

See this is the issue that makes this sort of suggestion totally moot. A duel challenge must be accepted for it to be a duel. Otherwise it would just be murder. All the challenged has to do is refuse the duel and continue on with what they were doing.


---

Bugmeat posted...

All the challenged has to do is refuse the duel and continue on with what they were doing.

But back in the day refusing a challenge means you look like a wuss in the public eye. Reputation was and is important.
---

People would talk a lot less shit if there was a decent probability of getting punched in the face.

Now we have Twitter and safe spaces.

This is not the best timeline.
---

I have a friend who says fist fighting legal where he lives if both parties verbally agree to it first. So dueling without weapons basically.

Edit: he lives in a high crime city so I just had thr thought that perhaps said law was an attempt to lower gun violence by giving people a legal way to physically settle disputes
---

Zero_Maniac posted...

Bugmeat posted...

All the challenged has to do is refuse the duel and continue on with what they were doing.

But back in the day refusing a challenge means you look like a wuss in the public eye. Reputation was and is important.

But that was then. The subject is about duels in modern day. Allowing duels in modern society wouldn't achieve the desired effect since the people talking shit on Twitter and Facebook wouldn't care what anyone thought about them ignoring a duel challenge. They'd just talk more shit and laugh about the guy that challenged them.


---