I don't know if dueling with pistols should be legal, but I think it should be legal for two adults who want to settle their dispute with physical combat to do so without the worry of criminal consequences, or civil suits following the duel. There should be some space for that to happen. The reason I'm not so sure about weapons is because of the real risk of someone dying. Because that doesn't just effect the combatants. It effects the wives and children, and potentially sets the stage for retaliatory action by surviving family members. I don't think you should be able to subject your family to that.
Discussion
I agree with this, if it's a fist fight and both are wanting to do it, then it should to a degree.
Yeah, I just think family is too important to gamble with, on both sides of the duel. It should be something where these people can fight and brawl and the conflict is over and everyone can get together for a BBQ and be friends. Maybe that's a sentimental idea, but I just think about a young kid learning his father was killed in one of these duel, and the tragedy and horror that must feel like for a boy who did nothing wrong, and doesn't understand what it's all about.
True
But for example, if someone does something against you, and you slap them or something, I don't think you should be charged with assault for that.
The problem with that sort of pre-fight tit-for-tat is that many times it's never really clear who did what first. Even when you've got witnesses, there's a different story from everyone, and it just isn't clear who the true instigator is. I think the best you can do is treat it as a regular interaction. People who were clearly defending themselves get a pass, but if it's one guy who starts it, but the other guy retaliates, they both get their wrists slapped. I think it's the only fair way to handle it.
Yeah that's a valid point.
Dueling is usually conducted with a weapon MOT a fist fight.
That's the whole point of dueling. Usually one dies. Who the hell does a duel without knowing you will die.
Yeah, I'm not down with it. The consequences are too far reaching, and it results in ongoing conflict between friends and family of the duelers. I think a less lethal combat would be better. Something where the opposing parties fight and brawl, and when it's over they hug it out and then everything is OK again. I like that more.
This isn't about what you want or what you like.
It's about what the two consenting adults want.
Dueling consists of 2 people with equal weapon. The goal is to kill the one before the other.
It has nothing to do with you being down or up with it.
Your duel would be lame a fuck
I just thought of something. You must be thinking of dueling in the western times when one person was forced into dueling. So if that's the case then I can see why dueling would affect the family.
I was thinking of two consenting adults.
The dog guy didn't specify what dueling was in his opinion. If one doesn't consent to the duel but if forced to then it's murder.
This is what dueling means:
Historically, dueling was typically between consenting adults, often aristocrats, military officers, or gentlemen who agreed to settle disputes over honor. It followed strict rules, like the Code Duello, which ensured fairness and mutual agreement.
In the traditional sense—dueling historically involves weapons, like swords or pistols, and follows a structured code of honor. If it's just fists, it leans more toward a fight, brawl, or boxing match rather than a formal duel.
I didn't make the rules.