This is a decent article lol
So we now know all about the history of duels thanks to my post earlier this week but what if we want to duel ourselves?
There is always some idiot out there who flames you on Twitter, leaves a rude comment on our blogs or a frankly nonsensical review on Amazon about our books. Conventionally we are demanded to ignore them or commence hostilities in a pointless and insulting flame war over the internet.
I say our honour has been impuned and we demand satisfaction. Now, who is with me? I’m not altogether encouraging anyone to go out and duel as that would be (sadly?) highly illegal but suppose, just suppose that it is the only way then where do we start? Let’s journey back to the days where the answer to almost every insult, perceived and real, could be solved by way of a duel.
There is no reason too big or so petty that it is not worthy of a duel. On 23 March 1829, the Duke of Wellington and Earl of Winchelsea fought a duel at Battersea Fields in South London simply because the Earl had reproached the Iron Duke for not being tough enough on Catholics.
The first thing to do is of course to
1: Choose your rules
It is 1820. You are a handsome young Northumbrian travelling through London named Robert Broadale and you want to duel somebody. But how?The Wild West may indeed all ready by wild but a quick-draw shoot-out at High Noon is completely out of the question for a gentleman. How about the French Code? With 85 rules, it would be hard to find a more gentlemanly code to duel by, but it is hard to concentrate enough to remember everything when all you know is that you want to give that cheeky rapscallion James Pinkerton his comeuppance.
Thankfully there is no need to worry now that we can go by the Luckily, the streamlined Irish Code Duello (1777) It only has 25 rules, plus a couple of footnotes about knee-bending. Huzzah! But one of those rules is that your opponent, the challenged party, gets to choose the weapons. Damn it!
What happens if that oik Pinkerton might pick swords. You hate swords. You bunked off fencing lessons at Eton to smoke and play cards. Luckily, rule XVI says you can avoid a swordfight by swearing on your honour that you are no swordsman. Pistols it is! Huzzah!
Most Helpful Opinions
No.
Violence begets violence.
Google "Hatfields and McCoys".
Google "Arabs and Israelis".
Nothing is settled in a duel because if the family of the loser does not have control of their emotions or if they are domineering like Trump, a family member will want vengeance for the loser. And then THAT family will want vengeance... and it goes on and on just like in "The Godfather".
https://www.youtube.com/embed/D_5IZ3CZ248
If two armies stand in front of each other and generals on both sides decide to resolve their conflict with a duel instead of a bloody battle, I'm for duels. If two drunk fools decide to fight against each other with swords or pistols just to caress their own egos, I'm against duels.
Probably no, but it's a badass way to settle arguments, that's for sure..
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
23Opinion
What is the point in having a duel? Do you really want to encourage people to settle their differences with violence that could cause death?
One of my ancestors was in a duel. He got arrested for murder for blowing some guys head off with a pistol. He went to court and proved that it was a legal gun fight and was released free. People like to run their mouth until it gets real. I don't think duels should come back, but understand some people only learn the hard way. The rule of law is better for average people, but the people that are slow in the head and physically disadvantaged seem to want to abolish the police and start a civil war. You can't fix stupid.
There's more to it than most people think of:
I would/could not ''duel'' a person below my social standing.
A duel is (or was) among ''worthy'' people to settle ''worthy'' disputes.
It never was about nowadays' typical spontaneous feelings of being pissed off.
Wild West style Cowboy/Gunmen ''duels'' were a quarrel between the rabble. No one sheds a tear when such a crude person is removed. And only people with little cultural background would even CALL that a duel.
Therefore - as ''culture'' (as in: cultured) has become little meaningful in this century specifically, a legalization of ''duelling'' will only produce more of the Kyle Rittenhouse idiots.
If the plebs is uneducated - you better don't give them ''rights''.
Absolutely. Why? Because back when you could punch somebody in the mouth for being rude people were much more polite. Now most people trash talk & then run to the cops or the media the second they feel they might be held responsible. People are way softer now than when I was growing up.
In some places it's legal to have an agreed fist fight for any reason.
Why would anyone say no to this?
It should be for sure!
What two consenting adults agree to do to each other is perfectly fine lol. If two adults actually sign an agreement to a duel in which only them is going to get hurt that's totally fine. Don't effect me or anyone else.As sport with that face mask.
I want duels with pistols as sport. replace the lead with beeswax with the same face masks. Go 80 feet out aim for the core until the other gives up. The judges count every spec of powder then makes the wax bullet randomized both gun, powder bullet.
Half the fun is it takes forever and a half every shot. Just them staring each other down. That's also 1/3 the points.
What about the duels that happened with guns?
If duels were legalized today, I think a lot of people might opt for a fistfight, or something with MMA-type rules.
The person who's challenged gets to choose the weapon, right?
How would it work? Like would you have to go to a government office somewhere, fill out a form, and pay a fee?
yes i think only with mutual consent, they should be allowed. i am in favor of each way that can quickly and effectively sort dunces out of the gene pool by natural selection and help making humanity better in the long term.
like i would never consent to a duel. i'm not an idiot willing to lose their life over something stupid. but everyone who wants to do that, should be granted the right to do so.They had duels for all kinds of stupid reasons. Trump or Biden would already killed one or another. It was common with politicians. If you caught your spouse in bed with another it shouldn't be a duel but an acceptable murder. That's one of the big issues with the East. If your wife commits adultery she is put in a hole and stoned to death. Where do we draw the line?
No it's a silly way to settle an argument. Being good with a sword doesn't make you right, it makes you a bully.
Yes, but with pistols, not swords. And it shouldn't be a sport reserved only for the men; women should be allowed to do it too.
Yes, there should be able to sighn a release and engage in swordplay or have a shootout. It would. E a great way to end a dispute. Quick and greasy
Duels are stupid. Settle your arguments like a rational person
No, since today they would use the excuse for killing by using he/she said she/he said
Someone has been watching too many Medieval movies. Get back to 21st century.
Yes, because you should own you, you should not the property of the government.
Safer than guns. But more taxing and sweaty. Need to stay fit, blade sharp... one and on.
Imagine two grown men duelling in 2024 😂😂😂😂 jolly good show 👏😭
Duels yes, just not with a risk of serious injuries.
Of course not! This would be legalized murder.
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!