NationStates

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:08 pm**

Second Blazing wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
over 200 people have died in training/in the ring since 1980 alone

a lot more people have suffered non-fatal but still serious brain injury, trauma, and other long-lasting health problems

furthermore, it condones and promotes an attitude of profiteering over violence

see the sources in the OP

What's wrong with profiting from violence?

its fundamentally unethical because you are profiteering from people taking risks in which they could be harmed/killed

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:08 pm**

The Republic of Pantalleria wrote:
Ragnarheim wrote:I would like to propose a ban on banning things.

Murder and rape are banned...

Take your chances, mate.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:08 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Lancaster of Wessex wrote:
...I'm not sure to what extent boxing harms society as you seem to claim. Please support this statement as to what extent and severity the existence of boxing is detrimental to society.

over 200 people have died in training/in the ring since 1980 alone

a lot more people have suffered non-fatal but still serious brain injury, trauma, and other long-lasting health problems

furthermore, it condones and promotes an attitude of profiteering over violence

see the sources in the OP

5.71 people per year? Please, more people die due to bike riding per day than how many would die due to boxing related injuries per year.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:08 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Lancaster of Wessex wrote:
...I'm not sure to what extent boxing harms society as you seem to claim. Please support this statement as to what extent and severity the existence of boxing is detrimental to society.

over 200 people have died in training/in the ring since 1980 alone

a lot more people have suffered non-fatal but still serious brain injury, trauma, and other long-lasting health problems

furthermore, it condones and promotes an attitude of profiteering over violence

see the sources in the OP

Like I said, people will do it regardless of whether it's legal or not. The people knew what might happen to them when they decided to do boxing, and for whatever reason motivated them, they decided that those outweighed the risks. They aren't children, they're adults. They know they could be seriously hurt boxing, but they want to do it anyways.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:09 pm**

Chessmistress wrote: because it's even very sexist, and it offends women.

Please do not presume to speak for me or other women. Speak for yourself all you like, but do not presume that any or all women even remotely agree with your misandrist drivel.

Women box. Women wrestle. Women play hockey, women play soccer, women race, women compete in MMA. Rather than banning something because it's ohnoes teh violents, we ought to be pushing for equal treatment and media coverage of women in sports.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:09 pm**

Napkiraly wrote:
Xanama wrote:I'm allergic to banning things

I'm allergic to people who are allergic to banning things.

It seems we have reached an impasse.

Dammit!
I'm allergic to that too

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:10 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:
That's pretty much what IMs logic in these threads boils down to.

"I don't like X. I'll manufacture some dastardly reason why X should be banned. I don't like it so no one else should be able to do X."

if you read the OP carefully, you would see that your statement is a misrepresentation of my position

Nah, it's spot on. This is just another idiotic rehash of quite a few of your threads. Same shot, different thing you hate and want to ban.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:10 pm**

Am I the only one finding it funny that the future lawyer is decrying profiting off of other people's misery?

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:10 pm**

This brought to you by the libertarian who thinks taxation is theft. viewtopic.php?f=20&t=354375

Ideological consistency. You might want to try it some time.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:11 pm**

Napkiraly wrote:Am I the only one finding it funny that the future lawyer is decrying profiting off of other people's misery?

Isn't it their job? Afterall, in a court of law there's only one winner or both losers right.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:11 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Second Blazing wrote:
What's wrong with profiting from violence?

its fundamentally unethical because you are profiteering from people taking risks in which they could be harmed/killed

How is it unethical? Everyone involved knows the risks. It's no more unethical than sending in a video of a toddler hitting his dad in the nuts with a wiffleball bat to America's funniest home videos.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:12 pm**

Tavok wrote:This brought to you by the libertarian who thinks taxation is theft. viewtopic.php?f=20&t=354375

Ideological consistency. You might want to try it some time.

He also worships Tywin Lannister. A guy who had his youngest son's wife gang raped in front of him and orders the death of two children.

And yet boxing is bad.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:12 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Second Blazing wrote:
What's wrong with profiting from violence?

its fundamentally unethical because you are profiteering from people taking risks in which they could be harmed/killed

This isn't cage fighting or prostistution we are talking about. Most people don't get into boxing because they are undereconomic compulsion to do so but because they have a great passion for the sport. Why not direct you sympathies toward people who are actually being exploited like children in sweatshops?

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:12 pm**

Napkiraly wrote:
Tavok wrote:This brought to you by the libertarian who thinks taxation is theft. https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopi ... 0&t=354375

Ideological consistency. You might want to try it some time.

He also worships Tywin Lannister. A guy who had his youngest son's wife gang raped in front of him and orders the death of two children.

And yet boxing is bad.

So are dogs.
Suits.
Kids.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:13 pm**

Also, this is good summary of my opnion here:

Frisbeeteria wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:its for their own protection

I'd just like to state for the record that I have no desire or intent to let Infected Mushroom define what is right or wrong for me, or anyone else. Anyone suggesting anything is "for their own good" needs to learn to mind their own business.

I'd like also to add that while the state can/should have a role in safeguarding its citizens from what they would do if unregulated (somewhat related to the positive/negative externality argument, and demerit goods), clearly blanket prohibition is not the answer - this goal is best accomplished through 'nudges', which mostly consist of raising awareness of the issues, and perhaps some increased regulation.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:13 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Lancaster of Wessex wrote:
...I'm not sure to what extent boxing harms society as you seem to claim. Please support this statement as to what extent and severity the existence of boxing is detrimental to society.

over 200 people have died in training/in the ring since 1980 alone

a lot more people have suffered non-fatal but still serious brain injury, trauma, and other long-lasting health problems

furthermore, it condones and promotes an attitude of profiteering over violence

see the sources in the OP

286 coal miners died in 1980 and 1981 alone.

http://www.msha.gov/stats/centurystats/coalstats.asp

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:13 pm**

Asyir wrote:
The Two Jerseys wrote:Theoretically you can, but it's as boring as hell.

Just like women's basketball.

I used to watch the girl's high school team. It was quite entertaining.

Yeah, my high school girls team is entertaining as well, but then we're also state title contenders every year.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:13 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Second Blazing wrote:
What's wrong with profiting from violence?

its fundamentally unethical because you are profiteering from people taking risks in which they could be harmed/killed

Welcome to the wonderful World of selling guns.
Oh wait... Meh tomato toemato

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:13 pm**

Napkiraly wrote:
Tavok wrote:This brought to you by the libertarian who thinks taxation is theft. https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopi ... 0&t=354375

Ideological consistency. You might want to try it some time.

He also worships Tywin Lannister. A guy who had his youngest son's wife gang raped in front of him and orders the death of two children.

And yet boxing is bad.

But he's Tywin Fucking Lannister.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:14 pm**

Napkiraly wrote:
Tavok wrote:This brought to you by the libertarian who thinks taxation is theft. https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopi ... 0&t=354375

Ideological consistency. You might want to try it some time.

He also worships Tywin Lannister. A guy who had his youngest son's wife gang raped in front of him and orders the death of two children.

And yet boxing is bad.

But Charles Dance tho

That glower.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:14 pm**

Galloism wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
over 200 people have died in training/in the ring since 1980 alone

a lot more people have suffered non-fatal but still serious brain injury, trauma, and other long-lasting health problems

furthermore, it condones and promotes an attitude of profiteering over violence

see the sources in the OP

286 coal miners died in 1980 and 1981 alone.

http://www.msha.gov/stats/centurystats/coalstats.asp

Well, I suppose that means we must ban coal mining as well!

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:14 pm**

Daburuetchi wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
its fundamentally unethical because you are profiteering from people taking risks in which they could be harmed/killed

This isn't cage fighting or prostistution we are talking about. Most people don't get into boxing because they are undereconomic compulsion to do so but because they have a great passion for the sport. Why not direct you sympathies toward people who are actually being exploited like children in sweatshops?

and maybe part of my sympathy should be directed there (and who knows, its likely already there)

part of it though, rests with the victims of this sport

your point?

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:14 pm**

The Two Jerseys wrote:
Asyir wrote:

I used to watch the girl's high school team. It was quite entertaining.

Yeah, my high school girls team is entertaining as well, but then we're also state title contenders every year.

We went to state once and lost when I was in High School.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:15 pm**

Infected Mushroom wrote:The evils of Boxing cannot be understated. Since 1980, around 200 people involved in boxing have died during training or battle in the ring. Contrary to popular belief, protective headgear does NOT prevent the long-term and short-term high risk of brain damage.

It is abhorrent that we have gotten rid of the Colosseum but maintain boxing. The fact that it ''entertains'' people is a very dark commentary on what Western society has devolved into. Society should not allow profiteers (match hosts, corporations, advertisers etc) to make big bucks by encouraging and promoting people to fight each other as a spectacle. People have gotten hurt and will continue to get hurt; it is also a shameless promotion of violence and physicality, tasteless in all respects.

http://www.livestrong.com/article/54187 ... of-boxing/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxing#Medical_concerns
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... dangerous/

I believe that boxing should be banned. It would be for the boxers' own good.

What do you think?

Okay fine, ban boxing. But also realize that you'd also have to ban:

Hockey
Football
MMA
UFC
Rugby
Lacrosse
And all other contact sports.

Because you claim that

" protective headgear does NOT prevent the long-term and short-term high risk of brain damage. "

has been used against the NFL and the NHL. In reality, shame on you for only targeting one sport instead of attacking the entire sports industry.

"People have gotten hurt and will continue to get hurt; it is also a shameless promotion of violence and physicality, tasteless in all respects"

People will always get hurt, people will always want to fight, it is literally part of being human and our bodies have evolved to take and withstand substantial damage from others. And why just target boxing too? Why not target the entertainment industry in general for over valuing violence?

You can't cherry pick your fights, if you want to ban boxing over the claim that it only benefits the corporations, that it promotes violence and physicality because let me tell you right now there is a laundry list of things that you'll have to ban as well.

http://news.discovery.com/human/evolution/human-hands-evolved-for-punching-121219.htm

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2015 4:15 pm**

Boxers are well aware of the risks involved and the only person harmed is those participating.

NationStates

Boxing should be Banned