| The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
| Should consenting adults be allowed to fight to the death? https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=8534 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | RangerDave [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | Should consenting adults be allowed to fight to the death? |
Loosely inspired by Junior Seau's apparent suicide and the related discussions of long-term brain damage in football players (not to mention boxers). |
|
| Author: | Talya [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Should consenting adults be allowed to fight to the deat |
I haven't given this enough thought or study to make any sort of informed opinion. |
|
| Author: | Hopwin [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't see the sports tie at all. Fascinating question though. |
|
| Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Not within society's current framework. You'd have to legalize suicide first. |
|
| Author: | RangerDave [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hop - there's been a lot of discussion lately about the prevalence of long-term brain damage from all the head hits in football, and a few ex-players have committed suicide for reasons that are arguably attributable to that brain damage. Some commentators have begun to question the future of the sport and the ethics of watching it, and a recurring theme seems to be references to gladiators - the idea being that paying people to physically destroy themselves for our viewing pleasure is wrong. At this point, no one significant is suggesting that the game be banned, of course, but we obviously do ban explicit deathmatches, so I'm just starting from that extreme end of the spectrum as I work out where I think the line should be. |
|
| Author: | Diamondeye [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Should consenting adults be allowed to fight to the deat |
In and of itself, as long as there is A) no danger to bystanders B) a prohibition on killing an opponent you have rendered unconscious and C) surrender is permitted, then I don't have any particular problem with it. I think it should be a manner of permitting people to fight where the death of one participant will not be held against the other if it happens to occur; it should not be license to execute the other person if they cannot fight back. In practice; I think tight controls would be needed to prevent exploitation. I think people would rapidly figure out ways to manipulate people into fighting professionals that they have little chance of defeating. |
|
| Author: | Amanar [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I pretty much agree with Diamondeye exactly. |
|
| Author: | Kaffis Mark V [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
We allow consenting adults to jump out of airplanes. Just sayin'. |
|
| Author: | Rynar [ Thu May 03, 2012 12:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
RangerDave wrote: Hop - there's been a lot of discussion lately about the prevalence of long-term brain damage from all the head hits in football, and a few ex-players have committed suicide for reasons that are arguably attributable to that brain damage. Some commentators have begun to question the future of the sport and the ethics of watching it, and a recurring theme seems to be references to gladiators - the idea being that paying people to physically destroy themselves for our viewing pleasure is wrong. At this point, no one significant is suggesting that the game be banned, of course, but we obviously do ban explicit deathmatches, so I'm just starting from that extreme end of the spectrum as I work out where I think the line should be. The NFL, and American football won't be legislated away. It won't need to be. We're watching the beginning of it's natural death due to economic reasons. Wait until the first lawsuit is brought forward, and won, from an amature youth athlete. The organizations that feed the NFL don't have the resources to survive the coming storm, and will become uninsurable. After a few years, you'll see the sport vanish. |
|
| Author: | Foamy [ Thu May 03, 2012 12:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Should consenting adults be allowed to fight to the deat |
More players file concussion lawsuits against the NFL |
|
| Author: | Lenas [ Thu May 03, 2012 12:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Should consenting adults be allowed to fight to the deat |
I chose 'depends'. I'd be okay with it if someone died in a sanctioned fight, but I wouldn't be okay with it if the intent was to go in and have one of the two people die. |
|
| Author: | Mookhow [ Thu May 03, 2012 12:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Two men enter! One man leaves! |
|
| Author: | Hopwin [ Thu May 03, 2012 12:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
RangerDave wrote: Hop - there's been a lot of discussion lately about the prevalence of long-term brain damage from all the head hits in football, and a few ex-players have committed suicide for reasons that are arguably attributable to that brain damage. Some commentators have begun to question the future of the sport and the ethics of watching it, and a recurring theme seems to be references to gladiators - the idea being that paying people to physically destroy themselves for our viewing pleasure is wrong. At this point, no one significant is suggesting that the game be banned, of course, but we obviously do ban explicit deathmatches, so I'm just starting from that extreme end of the spectrum as I work out where I think the line should be. That arguent is specious at best. It is the equivalent of arguing NASCAR should be banned because it originated with moonshine runners. |
|
| Author: | RangerDave [ Thu May 03, 2012 1:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Should consenting adults be allowed to fight to the deat |
Nah, it's more like saying, "We don't allow 'Death Race'-style races, but we do allow NASCAR, even though some drivers will inevitably get injured or killed in the process, so somewhere in between is an ethical line we don't want to cross. Now that there's growing evidence that the speeds in NASCAR have gotten to the point where the number of people injured or killed is just too high to ignore, we might be getting uncomfortably close to that line." For the record, the foregoing is just for illustrative purposes. I'm not actually making any claims about NASCAR speeds or accident rates, about which I have basically zero knowledge. |
|
| Author: | Aethien [ Thu May 03, 2012 1:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I voted no, despite my love of that sbject in movies and in the abstract. It's just a line I don't think should be crossed, although in my mind, I guess I assumed the question was should they be allowed to do it for paid entertainment purposes. You want to start a Fight Club, I guess, sure, knock yourselves out. But I'll stick with "No" for the poll. As far as football is concerned, I'm pretty sure there were calls to ban it back in the early days. Most of the rule changes back then were meant to avoid that, iirc. I think I even mentioned here that I came across a reference (in a Texas newspaper, I think) from the 1930s to "the first football death of the season," or something on that order. And that was 20 or 30 years after the really deadly period. I'm of the "go back to leather helmets and less padding school" for saving today's game. But I wonder what the Aussie rules football people go through; maybe they have as many injuries and concussions as our guys get, long-term. |
|
| Author: | Aizle [ Thu May 03, 2012 2:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Rynar wrote: RangerDave wrote: Hop - there's been a lot of discussion lately about the prevalence of long-term brain damage from all the head hits in football, and a few ex-players have committed suicide for reasons that are arguably attributable to that brain damage. Some commentators have begun to question the future of the sport and the ethics of watching it, and a recurring theme seems to be references to gladiators - the idea being that paying people to physically destroy themselves for our viewing pleasure is wrong. At this point, no one significant is suggesting that the game be banned, of course, but we obviously do ban explicit deathmatches, so I'm just starting from that extreme end of the spectrum as I work out where I think the line should be. The NFL, and American football won't be legislated away. It won't need to be. We're watching the beginning of it's natural death due to economic reasons. Wait until the first lawsuit is brought forward, and won, from an amature youth athlete. The organizations that feed the NFL don't have the resources to survive the coming storm, and will become uninsurable. After a few years, you'll see the sport vanish. Maybe then I can stop paying for their stadiums... |
|
| Author: | Lenas [ Thu May 03, 2012 2:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Should consenting adults be allowed to fight to the deat |
There's one big difference between gladiators and Terrel Owens: one of them isn't a slave, being forced to compete. Many football players can retire long before they actually do. There are consequences to the intense physical activity over a long period of time; they choose to ignore them for the sake of DOLLA DOLLA BILLS YALL. Or hubris. |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Thu May 03, 2012 2:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Should consenting adults be allowed to fight to the death? |
I think this ties into why we don't allow assisted suicide, that is the difficulty of determining when some one is no longer consenting. |
|
| Author: | TheRiov [ Thu May 03, 2012 2:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm torn. I want to be able to do as I want with my own body, but the idea of it as entertainment repulses me. |
|
| Author: | Lex Luthor [ Thu May 03, 2012 3:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
No. People who do this were influenced by the wrong sort of culture, and are "sick" in the same sense that you should kill children for being muslim, for example. I mean they should not think that a duel is a good idea. |
|
| Author: | Slythe [ Thu May 03, 2012 3:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Should consenting adults be allowed to fight to the deat |
If you rule on this issue, can you all at least be consistent? If it's okay to have the legal right to hurt yourself over time without hurting others in one way, then it should be okay in other ways. I shouldn't need to explain further, and I won't, but I fully expect those who have been entrenched in other particular long-standing views to reflexively lawyer some arbitrary difference out of ego. |
|
| Author: | Elmarnieh [ Thu May 03, 2012 4:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yes, of course. |
|
| Author: | FarSky [ Thu May 03, 2012 8:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
TheRiov wrote: I'm torn. I want to be able to do as I want with my own body, but the idea of it as entertainment repulses me. It repulses me too. So do The Jersey Shore and The Big Bang Theory, but I'm not willing to legislate against them (no matter how tempting such a proposal may be). Let them fight if they like. Their choice. |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Thu May 03, 2012 8:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Should consenting adults be allowed to fight to the death? |
The person who hurts himself gradually has every opportunity to stop. If two people enter and one of them must die, then the person can't change his mind once he's in the fire and and falling behind. |
|
| Author: | Raell [ Thu May 03, 2012 9:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Kaffis Mark V wrote: We allow consenting adults to jump out of airplanes. Just sayin'. It is better than sex. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|