Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!panda!genrad!decvax!bellcore!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!XX.LCS.MIT.EDU!WLIM From: WLIM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Newsgroups: mod.politics Subject: Re: Dueling and other unreasonable behaviors Message-ID: <12237853276.41.MCGREW@RED.RUTGERS.EDU> Date: Wed, 10-Sep-86 12:55:49 EDT Article-I.D.: RED.12237853276.41.MCGREW Posted: Wed Sep 10 12:55:49 1986 Date-Received: Thu, 11-Sep-86 07:27:35 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Reply-To: WLIM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 25 Approved: poli-sci@red.rutgers.edu From: "Keith F. Lynch" Can we stick to debating about plausible things? Whether something is plausible or not is a subjective thing. In this case, it is very dependent on exposure to other cultures. There are people who feel that a libertarian system is highly implausible. Would you stop discussing libertarianism just based on their gauge of plausibility? Whether duels will be more common or not depends on the society. In a society like Japan where family honor very often ranks higher than life itself, I can see duels becoming more common. Unlike other things, there is always a loss of at least one life in a duel. Ingenious individuals can devise clever ways of committing murder via duels. Emotional arguments can very easily end up in duels. Gangs can use duels as a way of legalizing their gang wars. Also who is liable when an innocent bystander is killed by the loser in a duel? The central question is whether there will be more laws to control the abuses as a result of removing a law against duels. Willie -------