Boxing should be Banned

[The Two Jerseys]

What about jousting? Here in Minnesota we have a renaissance festival with live actual jousting.

That's pretty violent. Should we ban that too?

State sport of Maryland.

Fact.

[Infected Mushroom]

there is an intent to land punches, and the serious harm that can arise from punching others is reasonably foreseeable

therefore, intention can be imputed

Your jumps of logic are a bit too much - landing punches can create grievous bodily harm, but the intent is not there, so your comparison to gladiator combats falls flat.

if you intend to punch and you know that punching has reasonably foreseeable and harmful consequences, then any consequences that follow rightfully flow from your intention to punch; hence you intended the harm

[Napkiraly]

Yeah, sure as long as you do it as they did it most of the time, which was to first blood.

So in other words, gladiator fights are safer than boxing matches?

With modern medical advances - quite possibly.

[Infected Mushroom]

What about jousting? Here in Minnesota we have a renaissance festival with live actual jousting.

That's pretty violent. Should we ban that too?

I don't know.

But that would be a different thread topic now wouldn't it?

[Communist Volkstrad]

Yeah, sure as long as you do it as they did it most of the time, which was to first blood.

So in other words, gladiator fights are safer than boxing matches?

In that period, probably not due to the high chance of infection you'd probably have, so even a tiny cut could kill you.

Overall, if you used sharp blades, I'd say probably not a good idea and probably less safe overall. But if you removed the bloodletting aspect while retaining contact, and overall added stipulations to make it safer, it probably wouldn't be so bad.

[Napkiraly]

What about jousting? Here in Minnesota we have a renaissance festival with live actual jousting.

That's pretty violent. Should we ban that too?

State sport of Maryland.

Fact.

Really?

[Doom Legions]

So what's to stop us from opening up real Colosseums again? We could host Gladiator fights, and people fighting against animals again!

Mmm, I wouldn't mind watching it.

Me neither. But why stop with all this? Come on, this is the 21st century! We could pit men against machines! Or tanks against eachother in even larger colosseums!

[Asyir]

What about jousting? Here in Minnesota we have a renaissance festival with live actual jousting.

That's pretty violent. Should we ban that too?

State sport of Maryland.

Fact.

That's awesome. I tried jousting once, but got thrown off the horse (never ridden a horse until that day).

[Valderking]

must... resist... urge... to... drink.... bleach....

[The Republic of Pantalleria]

What about jousting? Here in Minnesota we have a renaissance festival with live actual jousting.

That's pretty violent. Should we ban that too?

Pff... That's nothing, in the Phils where I grew up, we have a festival where we literally nail someone to a cross to reenact Jesus' death, should that be banned?

[Valaran]

Your jumps of logic are a bit too much - landing punches can create grievous bodily harm, but the intent is not there, so your comparison to gladiator combats falls flat.

if you intend to punch and you know that punching has reasonably foreseeable and harmful consequences, then any consequences that follow rightfully flow from your intention to punch; hence you intended the harm

No, consequences like those are unintended. There is no hence.

Also, clearly this is the real point you were trying to make, not the gladiator reference (which seems to be a bit of glossy rhetoric).

[Jacobania]

So are dogs.
Suits.
Kids.

Of yeah, those threads.

Next up, physics is bad. Followed by Dinosaurs are bad. Then Count von Count is bad.

If we only knew how many victims gravity has claimed. Gravity needs to be banned, as it promotes violence as seen on Looney Tunes.

When you and your family watch Will E. Coyote plummet to his death from a lone and towering cliff as your child laughs maniacally, pause and ask yourself:

"Is this really the kind of world you want to live in?"

[Daburuetchi]

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?

There are victims of literally every sport and occupation. You cannot participate in any strenuous activity whatsoever without there being a risk. Boxers are not under coercion to be boxers and are fully aware of the risks they assume. This ban you are advocating isn't going to save some kind oppressed minority and is just stifling the creative energies of many people.

[The Serbian Empire]

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

There was a span where auto racing killed more people per year than boxing that was essentially from 1909 to 2003.

[The Two Jerseys]

So in other words, gladiator fights are safer than boxing matches?

In that period, probably not due to the high chance of infection you'd probably have, so even a tiny cut could kill you.

Overall, if you used sharp blades, I'd say probably not a good idea and probably less safe overall. But if you removed the bloodletting aspect while retaining contact, and overall added stipulations to make it safer, it probably wouldn't be so bad.

So basically we'd wind up with fencing.

State sport of Maryland.

Fact.

Really?

Yup.

[Asyir]

What about jousting? Here in Minnesota we have a renaissance festival with live actual jousting.

That's pretty violent. Should we ban that too?

I don't know.

But that would be a different thread topic now wouldn't it?

No it is the same.

Its a violent sport with the intend to knock your opponent off, which can result in death/injury.

[Communist Volkstrad]

In that period, probably not due to the high chance of infection you'd probably have, so even a tiny cut could kill you.

Overall, if you used sharp blades, I'd say probably not a good idea and probably less safe overall. But if you removed the bloodletting aspect while retaining contact, and overall added stipulations to make it safer, it probably wouldn't be so bad.

So basically we'd wind up with fencing.

Really?

Yup.

More like HEMA.

[Asyir]

What about jousting? Here in Minnesota we have a renaissance festival with live actual jousting.

That's pretty violent. Should we ban that too?

Pff... That's nothing, in the Phils where I grew up, we have a festival where we literally nail someone to a cross to reenact Jesus' death, should that be banned?

wait really?

[Valaran]

But that would be a different thread topic now wouldn't it?

Seems to be your get out card - if you dislike the legality of boxing then surely you can edit the OP to include a dislike of the legality of similar sports. Might as well stick to your guns and not cherrypick one sport as a scapegoat, while ignoring the similarities in others.

[Napkiraly]

Once again, Russia is ahead of us on the gladiator front.

[Bentrada]

Oh, look. Another IM thread about banning something.

Dude, really, get a life.

[ISAF-Usea]

its always a balancing act/contextual analysis on a case by case basis based on weighing the social/individual harm against the societal utility

in the case of a car, since it is overwhelmingly the primary and indispensable means of transportation (with essential functions for maintaining the economy etc), the societal utility far outweighs the harm and so regulation is the answer

in the case of boxing, the scales tip overwhelmingly in favour of banning. The harm to the individual and to society far outweighs the entertainment it provides and the unethical profits it provides some individuals with

you do this on a case by case basis, its not all or nothing

So is lacrosse, the UFC, US football, fütball, wrestling, rugby, and any other full-contact sport unethical? Since they can harm the player just as bad? US football players suffer brain damage, and have even DIED. Same goes for lacrosse players, who mostly die from cardiac arrest. UFC fighters can die from one wrong punch. Wrestlers can die with one wrong move. So on and so forth.
Boxing isn't the only sport which players suffer severe damage or even death. With people watching these other sports along with boxing, and people making loads of money off it.
You also have to stop being a liberal and look at the people playing the sport. The people CAUSING the injuries and deaths. An unexperienced or untrained player could kill someone if the coach or personal trainer hasn't prepared the player well. While some injuries in a sport are unavoidable, most of them are avoidable if the players were just experienced enough.

[Valderking]

Once again, Russia is ahead of us on the gladiator front.

How much does a plane ticket to Moscow cost?

[Napkiraly]

In that period, probably not due to the high chance of infection you'd probably have, so even a tiny cut could kill you.

Overall, if you used sharp blades, I'd say probably not a good idea and probably less safe overall. But if you removed the bloodletting aspect while retaining contact, and overall added stipulations to make it safer, it probably wouldn't be so bad.

So basically we'd wind up with fencing.

Really?

Yup.

Maryland has just got a fuckton of more respect from me. Mad respect rasta Maryland, mad respect.

[Dyakovo]

Your jumps of logic are a bit too much - landing punches can create grievous bodily harm, but the intent is not there, so your comparison to gladiator combats falls flat.

if you intend to punch and you know that punching has reasonably foreseeable and harmful consequences, then any consequences that follow rightfully flow from your intention to punch; hence you intended the harm

No, that's not how intent works.