WI: Dueling never outlawed?

Armored Diplomacy

Suppose that lawmakers decided, "meh, if two people want to kill each other, it's not our business", and that public opinion was firmly behind this law of thinking? Suppose that dueling stays legal, even up to today.

What effect would this have on society? Also, what historic disputes would likely have led to duels?
 
BBadolato

BBadolato

you might see less arguing as people would wise up to the risks. To quote Charlie Murphy from the Rick James skit of the Chappelle's Show "Ok. I mean, even when slapping was fashionable, ya know, they did it in Paris, some guy would come up, "I challenge you to a duel." They would have a gunfight after that, somebody had to go!"
 

Remicas

Funny thing, dueling in France is not forbidden per se. Of course, killing someone else is a crime and punished, but if it's only to the first blood, then it seems to be permitted. For exemple the last duel in France was in 1967, between Gaston Deferre and Rogier Robière, two members of the Assemblée Nationale (France Parlement's lower chamber).
defferre_duel.jpg

(fun fact, Deferre was aiming to Robière crotch, the latter being at that time recently married)
 

Herzen's love-child

Remicas said:
Funny thing, dueling in France is not forbidden per se. Of course, killing someone else is a crime and punished, but if it's only to the first blood, then it seems to be permitted. For exemple the last duel in France was in 1967, between Gaston Deferre and Rogier Robière, two members of the Assemblée Nationale (France Parlement's lower chamber).
defferre_duel.jpg

(fun fact, Deferre was aiming to Robière crotch, the latter being at that time recently married)
Click to expand...

Who won? And was the crotch shot successful? :D
 

Remicas

Deferre (the old one on the right). I was mistaken about Ribière. He wasn't married then, it was the next day that he was supposed to be married. Ribière was first hit in the arm, and the duel was supposed to end then, but he ask to try again, before being hit in the arm again. I suppose Deferre had a terrible aim ^^

If you want there's a video on youtube here (in French)
 

aktarian

One of fun facts that circulate the internets is that it's dueling is perited in Ecuador if both duelists are blood donors.
 

tallthinkev

Remicas said:
Deferre (the old one on the right). I was mistaken about Ribière. He wasn't married then, it was the next day that he was supposed to be married. Ribière was first hit in the arm, and the duel was supposed to end then, but he ask to try again, before being hit in the arm again. I suppose Deferre had a terrible aim ^^

If you want there's a video on youtube here (in French)
Click to expand...

My opinion of the French has just gone up a few notches.:eek:
 

Dathi THorfinnsson

One of the real problems was with military officers. Officers were noble and nobles dueled. But any military that let disputes be settled with duels was going to have serious problems.

First, of course, you couldn't duel with anyone up or down your chain of command. But that still left lateral duels, which was problem. So they had to outlaw dueling completely.

Then dueling was outlawed in society in general.

It's a very mediaeval thing to allow, really.

I suppose that if it simply fell out of favour, it might never be officially outlawed. (See the cited example of France, maybe?)
 
RMcD94

RMcD94

BBadolato said:
you might see less arguing as people would wise up to the risks. To quote Charlie Murphy from the Rick James skit of the Chappelle's Show "Ok. I mean, even when slapping was fashionable, ya know, they did it in Paris, some guy would come up, "I challenge you to a duel." They would have a gunfight after that, somebody had to go!"
Click to expand...

I don't that will be likely.

After all you can't just say "I duel you" and then automatically the other person agrees. So you could just repeatedly argue and refuse to accept a duel.

Be rare circumstances two people would be up for it. And I wonder if there would be an officiator, and how it would adapt for the modern world (cameras, paid tickets), whether it would be with guns/swords/fists/cars/jousting.

I imagine the two people would be seen to be medically fit, they'd both sign contracts where it explicitly states what is what (example if one of them shouts yield, then the other has to stop (assuming feasible)).

Then an officiator makes sure both obey the rules as reasonably as possible, and if not then you get stuck in jail for manslaughter at least.

It's a very mediaeval thing to allow, really.
Click to expand...

Hardly. Two people saying "I'm right if I win", yeah sure, that's obviously nonsense, how good you are duelling has no affect on you being right (which is why officers should never have accepted a duel, their own fault for doing so). But if two people are just mad at each other and want to fight to the death, whatever that's there prerogative.
 

Cryptic

The Kiat said:
Pistols? Pal, this is America! Pistols are for boys; real men duel with shotguns. 12 gages at as many paces.
Click to expand...

Yikes, that would defeat the purpose of dueling - dueling in the USA was supposed to be dangerous enough to attract admiring chicks, but not so dangerous that too many upper class got killed while doing it.

Thats why there were many unwritten rules to limit casualties. A big problem was that pistols got more accurate, reliable and powerful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top