Dueling

Anyone else think dueling should be made legal again?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=e68nuAcSuWQ
sos.mo.gov/CMSImages/MDH/CodeDuello.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Yes, but only using swords.

Sabres are for faggots.

Epee is true master race.

>Sabres
>Epee

Both are for faggots.

Longsword is the real man's sword

In what sense, exactly? What should be the extent of contractual obligations on the victor or the victim? What offenses should be acceptable for a duel?

Fuck yours bouncy shit, classical foil.
Fiorre is fun, but most larping fags can't take a pommel to the face.

Yes

It was the finest of Southern traditions

This

>dueling should be made legal again?
Yes.
I want more freedom. I believe direct death threats should be protected under the 1st amendment.
Also, if someone denigrates your honor you should be legally able to challenge them to a fight to the death by whatever means can be agreed upon. Courts should arbitrate this process as a neutral party.

>Longsword is the real man's sword
This. Anything else is a toy.

i support this.

>swords
>post pansy sticks
Jew spotted

...

The past 2 world wars have already done enough to kill off all whites who possess a backbone. Currently, those who possess a combination of aggression, courage and pride just beat the shit out of each other and then afterwards if the fight was good they have a few drinks out of mutual respect. Don't deprive the world of that just because you don't hold value in the life of your fellow man and want to larp as a cowboy

>This. Anything else is a toy.

powerglove.jpg

I hope the gramma on the left won

>he doesn't want the legal right to shoot niggers that insult him
There's something wrong with you.

Whatever the two parties agree to.

But what would be the obligation of the challenged? If you were insulted and demanded satisfaction and the other party refused, what would be the recourse? Social ostracization would only be effective on the challenged in a society that actually values honor. We do not live that society, unfortunately.

>using swords
>posts bouncy plastic needles

Only sabres allowed, I dunno why the west started using that faggy shit.

>only sabres allowed
>posts schimitar
Back to Saudi Arabia, sandnigger.

The courts could decide on a case by case basis.
This would ensure professional duelers would be shut down for trying to take advantage of the freedom. As for this who refuse that aren't cripples I'd say monetary compensation or tar and feathering.

Because in the context of bouncy needles, sabre has become THE WORST. No real fencer takes sabre seriously

It's a polish sabre faggot.

>tfw all the fags itt dont know that dueling was never made illegal in the us

kek you retard.

Niggers and jews are not worthy of duels since they are honourless. Thats how it was. If we lived in that society and a nigger or jew insulted you you could just kill them in cold blood

Last duel in France 1967.
Rare footage.
youtube.com/watch?v=e68nuAcSuWQ
In b4 muh not 2 death

A rose by any other name is still a rose, sand nigger.

That sabre looks really fucking gay as well, m8

because it is Polish

Sabers are the weapons of choice for cavalry and officer fucktard. Everywhere including europe.

...

Dueling was legal until the Vème Republic?

That's surprising.

Call my sword faggy one more time and I swear on me mum I will duel you with it!

>sabres
A sabre is for horse back. Not really a dueling weapon.

It's a weapon of the nobility, Poland was literally the opposite of sandniggers if you haven't heard.

It does really, but I refused spending more than a minute looking through google images.

No, but assault should be legal in the case of verbal insult, provided that there are witnesses to what was said.

This idea that you can say whatever you like without facing any physical consequences in killing society, especially men.

Imagine a world where bullied adolescents could legally kick the shit out of bullies, even to within an inch of their lives. Imagine what that could do for the confidence of young men.

The abolition on justified male aggression is the worst ill that has ever plagued Western society.

Naval cutlass then.

You have to purge the land of cultural marxism and feminism and shit before you can get to the good stuff like this

Double 7's and a very good response, user. We'll done.

My question refers more to the intricacies. Should it be acceptable for one from the lower classes to challenge their social betters incessantly? Should duels be acceptable if the parties involved are under the influence of drugs or alcohol? Would it be considered abhorrent for a more skilled duelist to work machinations in the lives of a less skilled individual to lure them into the duel?

You're point is valid, but I'm curious in substantive sense.

yes

what I wouldnt have given for Trump to shoot Hillary dead on live TV

But what about the former obsession with LARPing as Sarmatians?

>he went full fedora and got a katana
oh no.

It wasn't since Richelieu forbid it. But it was condoned.

Yeah, as an ornament. Cavalry preferred long hafted weapons like pole arms.

Yes, but only for niggers :3

that's retarded. so a guy and his group of friends start harassing someone, he says one insult back, and then that guy takes that as an excuse to legally beat him within an inch of his life. then his friends would just be witnesses to the insult and the poor beaten bastard 's torment would continue,

Yes, with courts we have devolved into some abomination of a system based entirely on crowdsourced pity.

Nah it's the opposite of a katana almost. A rapier. Long, straight and pointy. Not sure if your post is sarcastic.

>a nigger or jew insulted you you could just kill them in cold blood
You can't just go around shooting other people's property. What the fuck is wrong with you. The white man has honor, so he can initiate proceedings for a duel. Period.

I always hated all those stabby stab swords with those weird crossguards(that's how you call it right?)
I like longswords more.

Tell that to polish nobility in the XVI, XVII and XVIII century. Duels like that always looked cool as fuck to me.

Literally a meme to make the nobility better than common people.

It's called Chicago.

>This idea that you can say whatever you like without facing any physical consequences in killing society, especially men.
This right here. Talk shit, get dueled.

this

Of course one may challenge their betters, but there's no dishonor in declining a duel from one's lessers.
The nature of seconds, and their role in setting up a duel should mitigate that issue.
Abhorrent, yes, but not illegal w/o false pretenses - then it's fraud and possibly manslaughter.

Im not just gonna stand there while someone points a gun at me

I mean, does a flintlock pistol even really hurt?

No, the lack of free speech, and the justification of violence with those of differing opinions is what's killing the western world.

Absolutely.

>so a guy and his group of friends start harassing someone

So require third party witnesses, simple as that. In this day and age, it shouldn't be too hard to even require recorded proof of the insult.

If the harassment originated with the group of bullies, then the justification is with the one who was first insulted. And it would be personal. The group as a whole could not claim justification for beating if he gave a general insult to the group, only a single individual can be so justified.

You are murdering people. Congrats. You Southern folks are hypocrites to the highest degree. If there's a hell, surely the collective bunch of you fake ass heathens deserve to burn at this point.

How quintessentially French.

Who the fuck cares if it's legal?
It's an agreement between two entities. The government has only authority that they write down and threaten with guns and imprisonment.

>we'll done
>you're point

m8 what are you smoking

Meh I love em. Would love to duel someone with a sabre with it also. Hard to overcome the reach. Literally gives you a 2-3 metres of control just point the tip at the right place at the right time.

Of course.

Societies where insulting a gentleman gives him the right to kill you with impunity are polite societies where riff-raff rarely tell lies about their betters.

you larpers just won't quit.

Just use fucking handguns ffs you autistic bastards.
it's fucking 2017.

James Yeager approved!

This is the most retarded shit.

The ability to say things while having the law on your side is the foundation of western civilization. It's what allows us to debate, tear arguments apart and make progress. Without freedom of speech to protect us, no one would say anything controversial out of fear of getting beat up or possibly killed. These paradises you wish for actually exist. Pick any country in the middle east and enjoy.

You faggots never saw real sabre in your life.

isn't he dead now?

this is retarded
dueling is the answer to the
>talk shit, nothing happens
problem

>someone talks shit to you
>challenge them to a duel
two possibilities
>they accept, you duel it out, the winner wins and the loser loses
or
>they decline, you can mock them mercilessly til the end of their days for being an absolute pussy

Yeah faggot larpers who want to take the skill out of a duel. How faggoty of them.

Fuck off shill nigger. zweihander is true master sword

>Implying jews would accept duels instead of going the (((legal))) route
Niggers probably would, though

>His weapon doesn't require 2 hands
What a faggot

Forgot the image like an idiot.

Cigarettes...... I sware.

>t. don't know how duels work

the challenger initiates the duel, the challenged sets the terms, including location, time, and weapons used.

fucking this.

The only reason why swords were used is because they didn't have fucking semi-automatic handguns.

you people are fucking fat, autistic larpers.

it's

pathetic!!

I can hear your heavy breathing from here, you cheeto breathe cock suckers.

Where do debates even come into this?

If you're issuing personal insults during a debate you need to be beaten just for using logical fallacies alone.

For that matter, public beatings for logical fallacies should be legal too.

I'm just saying that artificially restricting justified, natural male aggression has consequences. This is why there are so many school shooters. Too many weak kids who are insulted daily and have no legal recourse for their emotional pain. A good beating meted out to the bullies, issued by the bullied, would do great good.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with free speech. I'm not saying throw bullies into jail, just don't protect them with the law against those they victimize.

I can strangle you with my dick. Why don't you like skill bro?

I prefer my weapon fast and not made for stabbing. I doubt I would even be able to hold such a thing properly, probably would have to start hitting the gym again.

It had nothing to do with murder you stupid fucking nigger.
sos.mo.gov/CMSImages/MDH/CodeDuello.pdf

Duels weren't supposed to end in death.

No you fucking fedora retard

Why is everyone on this board such a cringelord? Where all the well-adjusted conservative adults?

My point still stands mayte. I would argue skill is a more important factor in a sword fight than the whole "walk ten pace and turn around and shoot or whatever you decide it to be." Sure both takes skill tho.

working and raising families

Who gets to decide what is bullying and what is not though? You're assuming the law is perfect in it's ability to differentiate between disagreements and insults. For example I could be arguing that niggers on average have lower IQ. A nigger could take that as me calling him stupid. If the judge happens to be black he could very well agree with said nigger and now this nigger will have the right to beat me to within an inch of my life.

why do you care what 2 consenting adults do you fascist

see

>what is skill ceiling
>why is one avtivity harder than a different one to master

Whatever you say come at me with your dick if you dare.

Please elaborate on the nature of seconds, I don't know what that is.

Would it be possible for an employer or a wife to intervene on behalf of the individuals involved? Would it be acceptable for a military officer to prevent a subordinate from engaging in a duel?

>muh consenting adults
The call of the degenerate

hope you get ass cancer faggot

Yeah his kayak or something flipped over

>In a duel, the second was a trusted person of the principal (or person dueling) who would negotiate the duel on their behalf. Often the initial challenge to duel would be sent by the second.

>Once a duel was decided, the second’s job was to do everything in their power to avoid bloodshed (if you know Hamilton, think “send in your seconds, see if they can set the record straight”). No further direct contact between the two principals was allowed until the actual duel, so any renegotiation had to pass through the seconds.

>Seconds also had the job of setting any rules and arrangements necessary for the duel, such as finalizing location, weaponry, and rules as to the duration and terms of the duel. Seconds also decided who would be there to witness the affair, and would ensure a doctor was on hand.

>Basically, the principals just showed up and fired; the seconds arranged everything necessary for them to do so.

>come at me with your dick if you dare.
Gentlemen, we have our first duel.

not an argument you triggered ren faire fat fuck.

Swords are cool and shit though and they actually require effort, practice and skill to use.

You can fuck off now thank you.

so much this

ass cancer