Missouri rule change would allow senators to challenge each other to a duel
Missouri rule change would allow senators to challenge each other to a duel
www.newsweek.com
Missouri rule change would allow senators to challenge each other to a duel
75 comments
-
-
Politicians want to harm each other directly instead of harming millions indirectly? Fuck it, let em.
-
I think it's more of a "yes and" kind of thing.
-
More like they want to kill democrat or further left opponents we the people of the cities in Missouri (STL&KC) put up against them with impunity. They’ll just claim a duel was called and murder them
-
Some of them will overestimate themselves. It won’t be a Democrat-only bloodbath.
-
In this case, it's internecine conflict between the ordinary-grade-batshit Republicans that make up the majority of the Senate, and the weapons-grade-batshit Freedom Caucus weirdos who've been behaving with the sort of decorum and respect for good governance that we've all come to know and love from their fellow travelers in the national party, and I for one say we should let them fight.
-
-
More like, "I want to harm them, but not the other way around" kind of thing.
-
Hey, if they’re hurting and killing each other instead of us, that’s a win.
-
It won't be an "instead" though. Duelling will be used to get rid of those rare politicians that actually want to help people or improve the system.
-
-
I can't wait to see some senatorial rapier duels.
Actually, scratch that, I want to see some senatorial molitov cocktail duels!
Jason Mendoza said it best "just throw a molitov cocktail and then bang, right away, you have a different problem!"
-
Nit: Molotov
-
-
-
Alexander Hamilton called out Aaron Burr for defrauding new york city and died in a duel as a result. Aaron Burr was justified having won the duel and used the money to start J.P. Morgan bank and now we all have to pay $30 for being $0.01 overdrawn.
-
Ackshtually, Burr founded what became the Chase part of it, and the duel was over five years after that.
-
I love a good akkshually, well done
-
-
Hamilton was a federalist that started the Bank of New York
-
"Is that what you want our daughter to be? A big-government dual-loser?"
-
-
This should be higher in the list. This is a repeat the past moment, not a bad guys killing each other moment.
-
Lol what? JP Morgan was started, unsurprisingly, by JP Morgan
-
Have you tried not overdrawing your account?
-
Nah they gotta buy groceries AND the newest iPhone.
-
-
-
.... Why do I support this. Why did I instantly say okay this is good?
-
Bad guys killing bad guys?
-
If it ever actually got used, it'd be bad guys killing good guys (yes, they exist despite boomer level "All government is bad" bullshit) instead.
-
And maybe even on video!
-
It’s almost guaranteed that they’ll be calling duels only against the democrats we in STL or KC send to the state government. They probably won’t even bother trying to get witnesses to attest a duel was agreed by both sides, they’ll just murder Cori Bush or others for existing and claim a duel was called, then get away with it.
-
-
-
make it sabers, like real fucking men
-
Yugi, you idiot. We're not dueling with weapons. We are dueling with cards!
-
Also why not allow any two parties to duel?
-
Dueling is barbaric and can often start blood feuds: a cycle of violence. It's also a bad way to settle a dispute. The person best at shooting others has no correlation to how well their position was or whether the fault or insult should stand. Also killing for an insult is juvenile. There's lots of other real reasons history outlawed it, as well.
-
-
It's listed that the duelers decide on choice of weapons.
My vote is spears.
-
-
If they want to do the dirty work for us 🤷
-
I want to see two senators duel with a couple of trout as weapons, whoever gets knocked down first loses.
No shoving, the knockdown must be accomplished with the trout and the trout alone.
Just two grown adults slapping each other with fish.
-
-
I see you are a person of culture...
-
-
And at the end a nice fish fry and everyone's bellies are full.
-
-
I see nothing wrong with this. Let them kill each other.
-
DO IT
-
Who are we to deny two consenting adults?
-
Guarantee it’s just Jeff co fascists wanting to kill the politicians voted forth by those of us in STL or KC. I’d bet $100 they’ll kill a democrat and claim a duel was called but there will be no witnesses from both sides to back it up.
Well I would bet but Missouri has fucking archaic gambling laws thanks to these fuckheads.
-
It’s weird. When I moved from KS to MO, MO was less crazy but now that I’m here it feels like KS is calming down and MO is now losing its shit with all this stupidity.
Am I the problem?
(I know KS isn’t perfect either but they just seem less bananas, lately; with the gambling and abortions and what not)
-
-
-
Man, they are really rolling back the clock. What’s next, bloodletting? Alchemy?
-
I'd watch some trepanning done to fix Trump and or biden
-
-
Let that shit ride
-
This is terrible! It's 2024!
It should be a laser chainsaw battle in mechas
-
Sounds good for TV ratings I guess.
-
Yeah, CSPAN just got waaaay more watchable.
-
-
I'm all for it. You think assholes like Ted Cruz would still be around if this was the norm?
-
“If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you,”
Senator Graham
-
-
Wait, I don't think that's what he meant when he said he wanted to swordfight other guys.
-
-
-
Yeah and modernize the rules: they get ARs instead of those old dueling pistols
-
I'm DOWN! Some rules:
- Any AR-15 platform acceptable. Plain Jane Colt, Gucci'd out custom rig, top-line Daniel Defense, don't care. 16", 20", 24" barrel, whatever. Standard AR, standard controls, etc.
- No mag capacity limit. (Some idiot would roll with a 50-round mag, get jammed and smeared.)
- 100 paces. Make 'em walk it out for max drama.
- Iron sights only. Red-dots are almost IRL aim-bots. Make 'em work for it.
- No cover, no armor. Make 'em fight. Looking for a test of manhood here.
So how are we handling seconds? Just let them choose anyone for the role? Sounds fair.
-
On the contrary. The duel should be fought only with a rapier. I don't want Fatty McCorruption Face (R) win because the MIC gave him the latest shiny, for helping sell guns to the cartels or whatever.
They want to duel? They think they have it in them to rectify their "honor" this way? Make them work for it.
-
-
A win-win situation!
-
YEAH, COURT DUEL
-
As a citizen of Missouri, this is the best legislation I've seen in years. Hats off to them for finally doing something that doesn't directly make my life worse.
-
Dan Carlin's ai video was right
-
I wish it included the public and was in TX. Id be challenging the fat, cuck, dumbass, walmart wolverine, traitor Raphael crust to a duel
75 comments
The Republican who introduced this bill did so because his feelings were hurt. Wait, who are the snowflakes again?
And what happens when the Democrat tells him to fuck off?
"lol" said the Democrat, "lmao".
In truth, there were several reasons that one could decline a duel without loss of honor. For example if the duel challenge was issued with obvious quarrelous intent.
Eg:
"You're a liar"
"No I'm not. What are you talking about?"
"Ah, so you deny being a liar?"
"Yes, wtf are you getting at?"
"Then by your denial, you accuse me of being a liar! This insult shall not stand. I demand satisfaction."
"Lol, fuck off"
Another case would be if one duelist was not of sufficient station to match the honor of their opponent. A freshly-minted bourgeoisie vs a nobleman, for example.
Lastly, duels might be turned down if it were obvious to all that that a significant skill mismatch were at play. For example, a military officer might not be allowed to duel a civilian with sabres. Guns, however, were generally considered more egalitarian.