Why was dueling outlawed? Was it due to a decline in Men caring about their honor or something else altogether?
>>261441
>muh honor
>>261441
Its not outlawed in some places. In others it was because too many people were killing each other and just claiming it was a duel causing alot of social unrest when no legal action was taken.
>>261457
didn't they have people watching for duel usually? i doubt you could just shoot a guy and call it a day
Because having the members of your ruling class butcher each other over petty bullshit is going to turn out poorly for you eventually.
>>261444
>>262000
>faggots
THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE
>>261489
It wasn't mandated by law everywhere and even where it was you could just pay someone to be a "witness"
>>261441
Because killing a man in an unsanctioned duel is no different in a court of law to premeditated murder. You might get away with an Old West style solution of trying to get the other guy to go for his gun first and then shoot him down claiming self defense but again this is shaky.
The biggest part of it is that it largely flaunted itself against judicial power. Read The Last Duel if you want to know more about the last legal judicial duel in France. There were many hundreds more but none actually sanctioned by the courts / the King
>>261441
Dueling still exists.
It's called worldstarhiphop now
>>261457
It's still around but a little more one-sided
Now they call it Deer Season
You take the guy that's banging your wife deer hunting.
2 go out I; comes bask
>>262434
real men love kekoldry
>>261441
Too many important people, like officers were dying
Why is lynching outlawed?
Maybe without blacks the state of the world would be better.
>>262000
pretty much this.
It's also one of the reasons you never really see sacrifice or ritualized murder across civilizations and when you do it's almost always either a) a society that is very, very desperate or b) the person about to be killed is a drain on resources in some way.
>Have vassal with no heir
>Call's some guys wife a whore
>Gets killed in duel
>Civil war over succession breaks out
Taking justice into your own hands isn't a very popular thing in civilized countries
>>261441
Why would you shoot a man before throwing his honor away?
Because you were never actually supposed to fucking kill anyone in a duel. You were supposed to show YOU were WILLING to die for whatever bullshit you got into a duel over, but no one was supposed to actually die.
Look at the fucking pistols they used. You think you'd actually be able to aim these things worth a damn? Of course not. The point was, you and whatever chucklefuck you were "dueling" would go out, shoot "at" each other, miss by a goddamn acre, and then go home and talk about how huge your balls are. If you really wanted to get your cock hard, you'd actually want your opponent to shoot at you FIRST, because of course he'd fucking miss, and then you get to do that thing where you just fire your shot into the air and go "Oh, look how I'm the bigger man; suck on that, you violent shithead".
On the rare occasion when someone actually WAS hit, it was a huge fucking deal. Charges for murder were usually at least filed (though conviction was admittedly rare), and your reputation was usually wrecked for life if you actually killed the guy.
It was all just a fucking show, and everyone knew it. Duels are outlawed now because with a modern handgun, you could definitely still shoot a guy dead from twenty paces or whatever the fuck it was, and there's no ceremony in that.
>>261441
Because violence causes social issues? Do you think Draco made murder illegal because he just wanted to boss people around?
>>261457
Even under totally legal circumstances it could lead to blood feuds and vendetta killings.
>>261489
You can always intimidate people or pay them off.
>>262883
This. It teaches people they have a right to use violence to solve problems.
>>262891
Dueling wasn't just with guns and ranged weapons you giant fucktard.
>>261489
Modern version could be done at a courthouse or with a JP present.
>>262040
the last duel was a joust?
Honor is cancer and it has ruined our society. Not it's too late to get rid of its damages, we're ducked up and bound to live in a strength based society for ever
>>262891
...except you're wrong on every single count. People routinely got killed in duels, hence why they were outlawed. Read a bit about Puskhin and Lermontov, both of them dueled often.
>>262951
The last recorded duel took place in France in 1967.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e68nuAcSuWQ
>>262891
>people only used special dueling pistols that couldn't hit anything durrr hurr
>>261489
See, you could say it's incumbent upon the duelist to have a witness, but see, if it ever came to a trial, that would mean you were presuming guilt.
>>262969
>no one died
Not worth watching
>>263016
Are you by any chance this fine young man?
>>261444
>>261441
>Was it due to a decline in Men caring about their honor
no, it was due to men from upper middle class and nobility caring too much about their honour and getting killed too much
>>262891
I was going to refute this point for point, but then I remembered that Mark Twain had aready satirized your bullshit in A Tramp Abroad, so stick this in your bong and huff it:
http://twain.thefreelibrary.com/Tramp-Abroad/0-8
>>263742
That was gold.
>>261441
It was because the law started caring a lot more about people were shooting each other to settle petty arguments.
>>262951
The last Trial by Combat was a joust and then after one horse died and the other guy was knocked off his it was a sword fight on foot.
>>262042
Underrated post
>>261441
Duels were outlawed because they were fucking dumb.
I'm mostly going to talk about France there :
All the officers were noble. They were expected to serve their country and followed martial education. They could lead soldiers and win wars.
Then you have a stupid silly feud between them, and they start to slash swords, and then one of them is going to get disabled or killed. You just lost one of your best officer simply because of some trivial shit like one being c*ucked or I dunno.
Duels were always a pain in the ass to deal with. From Richelieu to Napoleon, all the head of states of France tried to stop them from killing each other so that they could die a useful death on the field.
>>265894
>trivial shit
Weak.
>>263742
>http://twain.thefreelibrary.com/Tramp-Abroad/0-8
>"Sixty-five yards, with these instruments? Squirt-guns would be deadlier at fifty. Consider, my friend, you and I are banded together to destroy life, not make it eternal."
I Lol'd but good
>>261441
>Was it due to a decline in Men caring about their honor
Yes, entirely. Men became entirely too pussified to allow killing each other other perceived slights.
>>261441
The very nature of dueling was such that it served to gradually extinguish honor among the ruling classes.
>honorable gentleman accepts duel, dies
>cowardly fop refuses to duel, lives
>repeat for centuries
>now all we have are cowardly fops
>>267705
good post
>>262042
holy shit underrated post
>>263720
>his nobles agreed too much
funny
>>268310
Refusing to duel usually meant defamation and mockery.
>>261441
Maybe people just realized that getting lucky or having a little bit more skill with a pistol does not prove shit and that dying because of something silly like offending someone's wife was pointless and even then the guy who got offended was just as likely to die, I think it also has something to do with religious belief like trial by combat where people assumed that God would give victory to the good person and generally speaking around the time duels stopped being a thing, religious beliefs and the guilt and justice principle was something that the state enforces rather than some deity.
>>271229
This. People usually couldn't refuse to duel because of what it meant for them socially. Just look at Alexander Hamilton. He was challenged to a duel because Aaron Burr hear that Hamilton might have said something about him at a party. From his letters, Hamilton thought it was stupid and didn't want to do it, but couldn't refuse because of the social implications.
>>274901
>>262891
So if I had a duel today could I use a 17 round Glock and just mag dump my opponent?
>>275821
That's why it's not done anymore, yes. To bring it back would surely mean flintlock pistols at best, and melee weapons most of the time.
The latter is a much better way of dealing with things anyway. Third blood from the torso is certainly more final and deciding than both men missing several times then shrugging it off.
>>275878
this
I would love some good old fashioned flyting
>>275878
Or Prussian dueling! First facial scar wins!
>>276642
Rad, but too many lost eyes. It'd be a pain for everyone.
>>276661
How long did it take for eye masks to be introduced in academic duels?
Shame it's pretty much only the nationalistic and exclusive student corps that practice academic duelling still, they are pretty dope.
>>262938
>This. It teaches people they have a right to use violence to solve problems.
This right should only reside with the state. No thanks.
Werent most of the duels first blood only?
>>275821
Yes. That happens all the time.
For the best source on modern dueling customs and practices, watch the 'Nigga moment' episode of the Boondock's.
>>262042
>>262000
This guy got it.
