Search results for query: *

But this is out of cover, with people aiming for the chest. I expect that these could easily be fatal. And both people will be trying to kill to stop the other from shooting them.

But pistol duels are also very likely to result in death.

The class of people would be those who can duel well vs. those who can't. And involving the state in this just exacerbates the chance of political elites getting advantaged. Providing representatives would mean that the supposed conviction gained from dueling would disappear.

No, it's about creating a class of powerful that can't be safely criticized. This is why free speech and a culture of free speech is so important. Legal dueling would have a chilling effect.

No,there isn't enough separation between keeping honor and being correct, and time will blur these distinctions. In addition, duels will be used as a threat to silence people who disagree. It also mixes up conviction with skill at dueling. If you are very skilled, not much conviction is needed...

I don't think you have rebutted this point well enough. Ultimately, this could be exploited to basically batter people with different opinions, quashing free speech. Why should might determine right? Or why should might determine honor? It's not brave to beat up someone who you know you can...