The case for legalising duelling

Conservative Commentary ^ | 6 August 2002 | Peter Cuthbertson

[Travis McGee]

What sane society permits psychotic bullies to practice pistol shooting and swordsmanship 24/7, then go around calling average folks "yellow bellied cowards" in order to provoke a "legal" situation where they can pursue their hobby of cold blooded murder?

Sure, sometimes it was two decent men of matched skills in an unavoidable situation. But only rarely.

What it led to was psychotic killers strutting around calling everyone weaker than them bastards and whore's sons and spitting on their shoes. And most folks, not crack shots or expert fencers, had to just swallow this abouse and go on, hearing the laughter of the bully's friends behind them as they hurled abuse at him, his wife, his mother etc.

Or he could accept the challenge, and be killed for the sport of the bully.

Anybody who wants to go back to legal dueling does not understand how it worked in reality.

[wardaddy]

That reply reminds me of the film....The Duellist...a very nice period piece whereby indeed a bully does pursue the Keith Carradine character through several decades and wars.

Nashville was once a hotbed of such activity as was Natchez and New Orleans.

[Travis McGee]

Psychotic bullies loved it too. It was glory days for them, cold blooded sport murder and all legal.

Everybody else had to keep their head down and swallow their pride when insulted.

[Centurion2000]

What happens is that you develop a class of well practiced sadistic bullies who become expert with both sword and pistol, then go around spitting on folks shoes and saying "your mother is a whore". Then these cruel homicidal bastards get to commit legal murder when the insulted man feels honor bound to accept the bully's challenge to a duel.

That's when some rich insultee hires out the professional duellist to go ruin the other guy.

[ArrogantBustard]

You might find interesting this article from the Catholic Encyclopedia.

"This word, as used both in the ecclesiastical and civil criminal codes today, generally signifies every contest with deadly weapons which takes place by agreement between two persons on account of some private quarrel. "

It goes on at some length.

AB

[Jeff Gordon]

I had to look twice to make sure the source of this article was not The Onion.

[Travis McGee]

That's when some rich insultee hires out the professional duellist to go ruin the other guy.

What if you're NOT a rich guy, but just some average sodbuster with a wife and family to feed?

In the movies and dime novels, the insulted party is either rich and can hire a paladin, or he is some fantastic crack shot home from the war keeping a low profile.

But what if you're NOT Bruce Willis or Mel Gibson?

What if you are just "Joe Sixpack" who gets tripped by a psychotic bully walking down the sidewalk, and has his wife called a whore in front of the kids while the local jackels laugh and hoot?

What does that poor slob do? Suffer humiliation and shame, or take the challenge and die. Then who feeds his family?

Dueling was outlawed for a good reason. It was a psycho killer's fantasy come true. It was hell on earth for the rest.

[Shooter 2.5]

"The Duellist...a very nice period piece whereby indeed a bully does pursue the Keith Carradine character through several decades and wars."

Great movie. I think the Carradine character was still trying to figure out what it was all about at the end of the movie.

[Shooter 2.5]

There was a story about a tinhorn that strapped on a gun just because he was able to. The Sheriff grabbed him off the street and took him into an alley. The guy had no idea what he had done. The Sheriff placed a match box onto his firing hand, drew and shot the box before it hit the ground.
The Sheriff told the newbie that until he could do that and defend his life, he didn't want him pretending he was one of the big dogs.

[wardaddy]

Yeah...he should have just killed that nutjob the first chance he had when the guy was sleeping. Harvey Keitel played the bad guy....good work too.

[Centurion2000]

What if you are just "Joe Sixpack" who gets tripped by a psychotic bully walking down the sidewalk, and has his wife called a whore in front of the kids while the local jackels laugh and hoot?

What does that poor slob do? Suffer humiliation and shame, or take the challenge and die. Then who feeds his family?

Then said Joe SixPack needs to learn how to fight. If he cant fight in a straight up fight one on one then how will he fight against a home invasion from a cold standstill??
Fathers or family heads interested in their family's welfare do need to learn how to shoot or fight. Anything less is collectivist weakness.

An outlet like duelling does a few things
1) Instills a healthy interest in self-defense for anyone in public
2) Ensures an armed society.

[templar]

.Grenades at 100 yards.

Too much distance. You'd just get two holes in the field between combatants. But ... rifle grenades could be interesting.

[templar]

Thumbtacks at 1 pace

You, Sir, are truly viscious ;)

[Squantos]

With the level of martial skills our current crop of socialist elitist's possess this may not be a bad thing ........

Up side is those assoicated with all that is Clintonista like get's slapped with a glove across the yap. Down side is....is .....uhhhh ??????

Hey theres no downside !!

Stay Safe !~

[mamelukesabre]

IF they were limited to a pair of single shot pistols, I think the outcome would be the same today as it was back then regardless of the accuracy or power of the pistol and ammo. Most people would choke under pressure and miss.

[Squantos]

ROTFLMAO !!! ........Stay Safe Suh !

[mamelukesabre]

Screw all of these ideas. I vote for a duel with ballpene (sp?)hammers. I think I would fare pretty well in such a duel.

[Squantos]

OK .....Back to Back pace off 6 miles , turn and "fire"......:o)

Just kidding, but then I was taught early in life that theres no such thing as a fair fight.

Ya'll Stay Safe !!

[mamelukesabre]

NOt only that, why would the bullies of today suddenly begin to value their "honor"? They could get away with anything so long as they followed it up with a mock apology. The insulted party would be bound by his honor to accept the apology and would never get satisfaction from a duel.