Should Gladiator Matches Be Legal?

I seen something interesting on the DW, 6 Mercenaries consented to a 3v3 death match for a rather large stack of money.

It made me ask myself, should this be legal?

They all gave verbal and written consent to do it? So why not?

What are your opinions on the matter?

 

Definitely with death row inmates. And maybe with politicians, too.
Enjoy!

 

I voted yes but am still uneasy about it. On one hand, it's basically a duel between two consenting adults (or 6, w/e). On the other hand, I don't think we should legalize killing just because the party being killed consents. There are far too many problems that could arise with that.

So yeah, I'm actually mixed on this, but I voted yes based on individual autonomy.

 

These men take," Get rich or die trying" rather seriously.

I don't see any problem with duels do you? They've always been considered an honorable practice and should remain such.

I think it would be better with inmates, what's a man willing to do for his freedom?

 

Gladiator matches are already legal!

Any fighting sports like boxing is a kind of gladiator matches!

Often ancient gladiator matches were not deadly.

 

Yes its a way to remove the human idiot gene from the gene pool.

 

By no means were the people in the match I'm speaking of idiotic. These were heavily trained Mercenaries, one I believe was ex-Army? He had a "Uncle Sam's Misfits" tattoo.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm speaking of Death Match terms, should it be legal? If both parties consent I do not see a problem, do you?

 

Being heavily trained doesn't negate being an idiot. If you choose to fight to the death, you fit every definition of the word.

 

Not to mention if these matches were taxed dear lord the amount that could be taken in. (These people were betting 30,000 BTC against each other without a care in the world). It's a ridiculous thought that could actually benefit society.

- - - Updated - - -

Unless you win, then you're rich and heavily trained.

 

No, if you win you are still an idiot, youre just more trained than the people you agreed to kill for personal profit.
Only an idiot would agree to kill another human being for personal profit.

 

That's why instead of profit, we make it for freedom. Deathrow inmates will do anything for freedom

 

What is it with Nazis and dueling? That's how George Lincoln Rockwell died.

(I have this vague recollection that you said you see yourself as a sort of benign one. No offense intended)

Dueling, no. Even given the elaborate customs that surrounded it, and were supposed to prevent bullying, it still often happened that there were terrible mismatches and people who made a career of strategic serial murder. (Lincoln was once challenged to a duel, he chose the weapons of cow patties in a pasture. When his opponent demanded real weapons he chose swords, but specified a location by Lat/Long that was in the middle of the Mississippi. The opponent gave up but he would have probably lost, Lincoln was not called the Rail Splitter for nothing)

As to gladiator matches, why not. If you believe for one second that anyone really dies in them you probably think that the Friday 13th movies are documentaries. Then again, you did act as if a tough guy tattoo guaranteed veracity beyond all question, or is this whole post a joke?

Keep in mind that it's been estimated that fewer than 10% of all the old Roman gladiator matches ended in death. Gladiators were expensive and good ones could be the basis of a sizeable business. The majority of the matches were staged as, again, it usually made a better show.

 

Oh, great, now we're releasing heinous murderers because they killed someone else again.

You've really got to stop watching movies altogether. They DON'T depict reality, or even anything like it

 

As long as the gladiators involved agree to it then why not? As long as the gladiators aren't hurting anybody else then they should have the freedom to do what they want just like anybody else. If people want to watch it then they should have that freedom too.

 

It's only your opinion that it's idiotic. For the winner, all they had to do was use their training and win tons of money, which isn't idiotic since they are highly trained. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's idiotic.

 

What about the losers....were they idiotic?

 

Maybe, maybe not. Probably in your opinion. I'd call them losers, and leave it at that. They could be highly trained and had a good chance to win, but just didn't.

I mean, yea I guess it is pretty idiotic. I don't know, lol, my opinion keeps changing.

 

I would love to have Gladiator fights, it would be epic. We could have real full contact football, no worries about concussions worry about decapitations.

 

No, they honorably lost a duel. It has always been an honorable practice.

 

Who pays to repair the bodies of those who did not die precisely as planned or did not get their windpipes completely closed off sufficient to suffocate until the heart stops because a gladiator did not finish his work in a timely basis? We got one non-dead man with lots of expensive medical needs and another who just does not follow his job description well enough to be re-employed for future tasks. We collectively now have a bit of a moral and ethical quandary, don't we?

 

No, Capitalism, it has not 'always been an honorable practice' It was once seen as an honorable practice and then it was seen as highly controversial and debatable. it was eventually seen as mostly dishonorable,
different societies decided it was less and less frequently honorable, in different time frames and in different circumstances and in different quarters or classes.

In society after society in the course of the last two centuries the debate ended all over this planet, and the duel supporters did not normally win the debate. I suspect we'd find the conduct and consequences of legalized mortal combat less honorable rather than more honorable, just like everyone else did. Society defines 'honorable conduct' in large measure through its laws and its social custom and sanction. When the evidence shows it changes it's mind, we have to pay attention to that the evidence.

 

Dueling for money or your life has always been an honorable practice? Ive never read that anywhere before...ever.

 

You duel for honor, money is just a benefit.

You duel to prove you're the best at something.

If you lose you should be shown the same amount of honor as the victor.

 

Thispost is an assertion that begs for evidence. I see lots of potential motives beyond for a validation of innate skill. ( the best man wins) You are confusing the result of a behavior with the motive for the behavior. You then fail to compare what you think the long term consequence ought to be, with what it frequently is.

 

Should the gladiators' health or life insurance carries pay when they get killed or injured?

If you are a socialist that thinks the national government should own healthcare, then should they pay for that as well?