11 votes

Honor, long gone. Restore the duel.

My contention is honor went out the window when the duel was outlawed. Now the bankers can be crooks and there is no recourse, they have the police state to guard them and the courts to bribe. I hear tell, People couldn't continue in their lie as they do now, historically it would cost them their lives or their honor.

Pistol dueling was employed many times in the Colonial United States until it fell out of favor in Eastern America in the 18th century. It was retained however in the American Old West for quite some time due to the absence of common law.

Kinda sounds like what we got now. check out the history.

Restore the duel, see if things wouldn't change fast.

Peace.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I like this idea and have the same sentiments about duelling

I think there used to be a sacred honor that was valued more than death...and in defense of that honor, more often than not justice would be served. I think those that had the most spirit behind upholding their sacred honor or upholding justice would be more likely to win in a duel. It is a free market approach to solving problems about principle.

9-11 Media Fakery: Did anyone die on 9-11?
http://www.cluesforum.info/

http://www.septemberclues.info/

9-11 Actors:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aPvJSQtmoE

Pysops.. media.. actors.. propagandists... disinfo agents.. fake videos.. fake photos

Davod & Goliath,

the outcome of the duel was amazing.
1 Samuel - Chapter 17:45-46
Davod answered Goliath who uttered insults & blasphemy = 45 Thou comest to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a shield: but I come to thee in the name of the LORD of hosts, the Eloh of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied.
46 This day will the LORD deliver thee into mine hand; and I will smite thee, and take thine head from thee; ~ ~ ~

Great post. One of the

Great post. One of the things I love on Daily Paul is an apt Biblical story.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

cool story, very similar to Harry Potter.

.

I don't know how

dueling makes people any more honorable. I think your understanding of the reality of the past is skewed.

banker....

It did get rid of one BIG BANKER..i tad late sadly.

T.Rogers

The duel mandate

Let them duel with dynamite. Pistols can miss.

Ĵīɣȩ Ɖåđşŏń

"Fully half the quotations found on the internet are either mis-attributed, or outright fabrications." - Abraham Lincoln

Debate dueling...

...would be the best! Paul cleans them up every time!

Thoughts along the same lines have been going through my mind

There seems to be a vast chasm of heroism. That is why Ron Paul has attracted the following that he has as well as why we saw the severe backlash against Rand. People are desperate for REAL people who are able to lead in this hour.

I know there are heroes are out there(right here on this forum.) Hopefully in the Lord's time, He will let them shine really, really bright.

The lyrics to this Bonnie Tyler song sum up a lot of what I think a lot of folks are longing for: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBwS66EBUcY

I am for peace: but when I speak, they are for war. Ps 120:7
--
Better to be divided by truth than united in error.
--
The local church(not a building -a people) is the missing link. The time to build is now.

Dueling is simply two men

comparing penis size. The only thing it demonstrates is that the duelists are short on brain and long on testosterone. You want to impress me? Compete in the Tough Mudder, box each other or write a 20,000 word essay on the effects of testosterone on the psyche of the human male. Pulling a trigger is (comparatively) easy. Dealing with whatever the core problem is much harder.

Dying for what you believe in....

Is certainly easy enough for patriots, just not easy enough for Tyrants. But I have a small penis, so what would I know.

Share this:

http://youtu.be/yuC_4mGTs98

I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

Its much harder

living for what you believe. Dying is easy, any fool can do it.

Yeah, down-vote the sane guy in the room.

Astonishing intelligence.

Let go of what you have been

Let go of what you have been taught, and look at history. If it worked before, it works.

Edit: Let's look at what you just wrote. You insulted us. Now, by right, we don't have to take that from you. So we challenge you to a duel. You decline.

What this shows is that you have no honor, and are a sneaky coward that thought you could get away with it. In fact, you *did* think you could get away with it, which is the cause of much of what goes on. But under fair fights and more formal dueling, you can't.

You've lost nothing. You don't have to defend your insults, and you won't. But the point is, we haven't lost anything by your cowardly insults, and you've shown yourself unwilling to defend them. That is keeping our honor from your coward insults.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

So me

stating the obvious means you have the right to shoot me? How is identifying immature and hormone-driven foolishness "cowardly"? I see a couple of problems with that. First, you assume that you would win the duel, if I so chose to accept. You have no way of knowing. Second, you assume that words are worth killing. Here's what you would get; The Quick, the Quiet and the Dead. Third, you obviously have a poor self-image if you are willing to pull a gun to defend it.

Do you see the problem?

Ever read about abe lincoln's duels

Lots of room for word play before everybody is quick dead or slilent, but if you are talking sheist (about me) I would have the right to challenge you to a duel, if your were not willing to back up your statements with your life, you can withdrawal them or lose your honor, I can't just shoot you. Why would you even suggest "stating something obvious = right to shoot" You are either tremendously ignorant, in which case , I suggest study, or you maliciously are trying to muddle an arguement you want to win but can't. That's cowardly. I'll challenge you to study how duels work, rather than insult your honor. What's your plea? You can admit your ignorance or claim I am insulting your honor, if I am insulting without cause, I can then apologize and claim I was mistaken, or show you to be ignorant, what do you want to do? See how this works? Nobody getting shot yet? The vast majority of duel challenges never came to shooting or stabbing, study up honorable sir.

Share this:

http://youtu.be/yuC_4mGTs98

I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

No. I demand satisfication.

No.

I demand satisfication. You could apology, or you could choose to duel me. You don't have to duel me, you could decline.

The only thing you lose is face, because you made an insulting comment, and you wouldn't even defend it. You could also just sincerely apologize for being offensive.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

I concur with the original

I concur with the original poster having thought about it. We need to bring back honor.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Seriously?

You're calling for the return of a scenario where the fastest or more accurate person wins? You've got to be kidding me. How about simply calling for fraud and contract law to be enforced? Perhaps a call to stop crony-capitalism?

My answer to your question would be..

Yes, because a reply to your suggestion would be" how's that enforcement plan seem to be working out for us"

If they were prosecuting criminals, I wouldnt recommend the duel , get it?

Peace

Share this:

http://youtu.be/yuC_4mGTs98

I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

Bring back trial by combat

I've said this for about 20 years. Adding comment so I can find it in my archive.

Technically, trial by combat is not dead because it isn't dueling. Every once in awhile, you'll see a newspaper article with the government finding this out, because it is a common law right.

Trial by combat is more important than dueling. Dueling is about honor, but trial by combat is about an even more fundamental right that you always have a right to protect yourself and not get mobbed. When you have trial by combat, 51% of the people can't decide to take away your rights as a mob, because you have the right to challenge your specific accuser - the prosecutor representing the fictional "state", to combat.

As a side note, the term "craven coward" comes from trial by combat.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

So

if your accuser is lying but an MMA champion you are just SOL? Great system.

But can the mma guy joust?

The challenged usually get the choice of weapons , see Abe lincoln's choice.

Share this:

http://youtu.be/yuC_4mGTs98

I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

Our current system is just murder

You can get champions to fight for you.

The details are complicated, but Blackstone commentaries go into part of them.

And no, it isn't primitive. It worked all the way into the 1800s.

What is primitive is if someone passes an arbitrary law like preventing you from selling lemonade, and you disagree that your UNALIENABLE right can be taken away, and then a bunch of police come - in unlimited numbers, and threaten you, and if you don't go along with them, they kill you. With guns, and you are unarmed. That is primitive.

This has degenerated all the way to remote drone attacks and assassination of Americans without trial as it stands as of this year.

*that* is primitive.

Trial by combat recognizes that in a state of nature, you always have the right to protect yourself, and furthermore, prevents a person from being ganged up on by, say, snippers in helicopters, drone attacks, and an army of police. that is civilized

You have your systems backwards. We're living in the cowardly murdering system today.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

The problem

is that you're associating dueling with law and order. You can't duel your way to a better society if much of that society doesn't believe in what you wish. Tell you what. Go over to Southside LA and talk to them about how dueling has worked out for them.
What you want is the right to shoot people with whom you disagree. What I want is the Constitution to be followed.

Trial by combat is not

Trial by combat is not dueling, as explained above.

Trial by combat is recognizing that you always have a natural right to defend yourself, that the "State" isn't above all, and the civilized idea that you shouldn't use overwhelming force against someone, they should have a fighting chance.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Fides et Honor, RMoney style

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=we_t5o5eHOQ

And three from Robert:

An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
Robert A. Heinlein

Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors... and miss.
Robert A. Heinlein

Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.
Robert A. Heinlein

Share this:

http://youtu.be/yuC_4mGTs98

I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

With the end of the duel, the

With the end of the duel, the dress sword also lost its position as an indispensable part of a gentleman's wardrobe, a development described as an "archaeological terminus" by Ewart Oakeshott, concluding the long period during which the sword had been visible attribute of the free man. beginning as early as three millennia ago with the Bronze Age sword.

Fides et honor terminus.

Peace

Share this:

http://youtu.be/yuC_4mGTs98

I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

The sword is obsolete.

Just as the horse and buggy were replaced by the automobile, the sword has been replaced by firearms.

Common use of swords disappeared because of their technological obsolescence.

I would say that firearms fill the spot that swords used to.

Many of us free men carry firearms.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

The sword still existed a

The sword still existed a long time after firearms were invented.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.