I'd like to post a pet idea of mine in the spirit of having some discourse. This is geared more to a United States setting given the nature of U.S. prisons. Not trolling, I consider this a viable idea at the time of this posting but I'm not set in my ways, hence it being placed here for scrutiny.

A brief outline:

AMEND: The entertainment aspect of this idea is rather superfluous so I amend my idea to simply allowing prisoners to fight under controlled conditions as an alternative to their usual methods. Whether this is public spectacle or behind government-funded closed-doors is less important to my point as it is now.

I propose(hypothetically since it obviously wouldn't happen)that a revival of mainstream bloodsport in the form of armed combat between consenting incarcerated individuals which allows the use of melee weapons and lethal force(but does not require combat or weapon training to already dangerous individuals) and designates a winner based upon the opponent being dead, surrendering or otherwise unable to continue. Rewards could include money, items for cells, or other desired payments(within reason of participants. Waivers would be signed and laws would be amended to allow otherwise felonious actions to be perpetrated under the circumstances of the sport. The sport would be held under secure conditions to prevent escape attempts or violence against non-participants.

Reasons:

1: Provides a source of spectator entertainment either for the general world or nation public, or the prison population itself.(I presume. I know I'd pay-per-view without hesitation. It was definitely popular for the Romans, but it has been a while since then.) Thus a viable source of income for any corrections system that organizes such events. Violent entertainment is popular, at least here(U.S.) and taking several steps further into this territory may be wildly profitable, or at least provide a manageable income. Even if this isn't the case the other reasons may compensate.

2: Provides an outlet of violence and aggression to violent inmates which otherwise have a life sentence to look forward to and otherwise are involved in violence within the (United States)prison system already.

3: Provides a means of reducing prison populations via the high likelihood of participant deaths. Reduces tax burden of permanently segregated convicts and reduces overcrowding burdens. (Presuming that participation would be high, which I think would be possible given the nature of prison populations, especially if teams are allowed to be formed along racial or gang affiliation lines. Also presuming income from spectators can cover medical costs of non-lethal injuries, although this may be remedied by a denial of emergency medical assistance or a requirement of finishing blows in games)

4: Dropping the above reasons and prison setting, I'd still favor making voluntary bloodsport legal with regulation.

Edited on and off, refresh to be sure.

Under those SPECIFIC GROUNDS I would have no issue.

However, then you're left with the human factor - the one where humans like money and would happily smudge a few documents' and throw you into a ring against your will for entertainment purposes.
Say I was an amazing killer in Life-Term for something unrelated, and the system simply forged my signatures and told me that I had to fight or the rest of my life in Prison would be a living hell? If I were to die (which I surely would) who would lodge a complaint?

The prison would make money, and there would be a decent show.

That entire system itself is basically a grounds for human-rights violations. To make it a steady source of income, things would happen and the rules would be bent in ways where they definitely should not be (which they will be). It's not too-far a pass from raising convictions to life sentences on persons who are morally repulsive and violent for even small things in order to raise the odds that this year will have a promising, violent show.

It would be easier to remedy one of those by providing the inmates with the option of Assisted Death after the age of 50.

)O( Hytegia )O( wrote:Under those SPECIFIC GROUNDS I would have no issue.

However, then you're left with the human factor - the one where humans like money and would happily smudge a few documents' and throw you into a ring against your will for entertainment purposes.
Say I was an amazing killer in Life-Term for something unrelated, and the system simply forged my signatures and told me that I had to fight or the rest of my life in Prison would be a living hell? If I were to die (which I surely would) who would lodge a complaint?

Yes, this is an issue I recognize. My idea would be a system that rules out coercion and such.

The prison would make money, and there would be a decent show.

That entire system itself is basically a grounds for human-rights violations. To make it a steady source of income, things would happen and the rules would be bent in ways where they definitely should not be (which they will be). It's not too-far a pass from raising convictions to life sentences on persons who are morally repulsive and violent for even small things in order to raise the odds that this year will have a promising, violent show.

It would be easier to remedy one of those by providing the inmates with the option of Assisted Death after the age of 50.

I'm cool with assisted death as a right, and considering the state of our prisons already I don't think this is a huge leap. I fully agree though about it being a matter of preventing someone who doesn't consent or doesn't have the faculties to consent being involved. I'm not in favor of death penalties by the government and so I'd not support this if it did contribute a loophole for death penalties and the like. Obviously my proposition would be practical in a more idealistic world(But somehow not idealistic enough where there'd be no need for prisons)

I want to hate this idea so much! I have been thinking for the last two days as to why it is the worst idea in the world but so far have come up fairly empty.

I suppose my beef with this is I can't see any entertainment value in death, violence, blood sport, whatever you want to call it. I don't know why the loss of a human life should enjoyed by viewers and the killer rewarded, we're better than that aren't we?

But then if people want to kill each other for the entertainment of many who are we to stand in their way? Murderers do that anyway with or without our eyes on them.

I suppose this for me is a philosophical cul-de-sac, if I follow my road of hating the idea I come against a brick wall where I can't find any particular reason other than "nope, not for me thanks".

I like to think that we as a species have moved beyond the idea that watching people kill each other for real is entertainment. If it is fake violence in the form of video games, movies, reenactment, and LARP, (or non-lethal violence such as certain sports) I have no issues. However, putting prisoners against each other for profit seems too extreme. I prefer this idea. Give the prisoners a job. Put a factory on prison grounds, and let the prisoners work. That way the prison can get money (some of which will go to the prisoners as pay) and no one needs to die. The money the prisoners get can be used to buy perks, cigarettes, better food, tv in cell, and profits can be used to maintain the prison. Why not have that instead?

If you wanted to reduce the tax burden of the prison system in the US you could try stopping sending ridiculously huge amounts of people to jail compared to every other developed nation...

Your Funny Uncle wrote:If you wanted to reduce the tax burden of the prison system in the US you could try stopping sending ridiculously huge amounts of people to jail compared to every other developed nation...

We're number one! We're number one!...

A few states proceeded in that direction by legalizing marijuana.

Frenger wrote:I want to hate this idea so much! I have been thinking for the last two days as to why it is the worst idea in the world but so far have come up fairly empty.

Inducing thought is one of the points of posts such as this.

I suppose my beef with this is I can't see any entertainment value in death, violence, blood sport, whatever you want to call it. I don't know why the loss of a human life should enjoyed by viewers and the killer rewarded, we're better than that aren't we?

Bloodsport is the 'dictionary' term for violent sport, including gladiatorial fighting, animal fighting, etc. It's also a KMFDMvsSKOLD song.

Most mainstream entertainment today involves violence. The more violent and deadly an incident, the more media interest. There's plenty of violence and death enjoyed by people today, the only difference from this being that it is fictional and romanticized. Look at the last Grand Theft Auto, SAW film, or installment of Call of Duty. Animal fighting is popular in many areas of the United States and world in general. General war, violence, genocide, lynching and etc are still common in the world depending on the location, albeit at lesser scales compared to the last century. I'd say there'd be a definite market of some kind.

But then if people want to kill each other for the entertainment of many who are we to stand in their way? Murderers do that anyway with or without our eyes on them.

Yes, dozens of fights, assaults and murders occur within the U.S. prison system yearly. The efforts to prevent this costs plenty of money and risks harm to correctional staff(guards).

I suppose this for me is a philosophical cul-de-sac, if I follow my road of hating the idea I come against a brick wall where I can't find any particular reason other than "nope, not for me thanks".

I think a better way to put your point is that it's quite likely that the vast majority of people share your subjective aversion to this idea, which is a valid point.

----------------------

Your Funny Uncle wrote:If you wanted to reduce the tax burden of the prison system in the US you could try stopping sending ridiculously huge amounts of people to jail compared to every other developed nation...

Presuming the anti-drug-crime policies of the U.S. Justice System were done away with the overcrowding problems could very well be solved.
----------------------

Duvelthehobbit666 wrote:I like to think that we as a species have moved beyond the idea that watching people kill each other for real is entertainment. If it is fake violence in the form of video games, movies, reenactment, and LARP, (or non-lethal violence such as certain sports) I have no issues. However, putting prisoners against each other for profit seems too extreme.

This is not what I said, my idea was allowing prisoners to participate if they choose to. Most did not get to where they are now by being hesitant to shed another human being's blood. Of course this brings the issue of eliminating coercion.
Also this comes down to a difference in our perspectives, as I'm a cynic who would expect such a thing as modern bloodsport to be nothing less than a hit with most humans and see little fundamental change in our savage, vain species between now and the time of the Roman Empire.

I prefer this idea. Give the prisoners a job. Put a factory on prison grounds, and let the prisoners work. That way the prison can get money (some of which will go to the prisoners as pay) and no one needs to die. The money the prisoners get can be used to buy perks, cigarettes, better food, tv in cell, and profits can be used to maintain the prison. Why not have that instead?

This is already implemented. Gang violence, assaults, murder, overcrowding and so on persist. Bloodsport would provide an outlet for conflicts and warm(cold) bodies.

----------------------

The entertainment aspect of this idea is rather superfluous so I amend my idea to simply allowing prisoners to fight under controlled conditions as an alternative to their usual methods. Whether this is public spectacle or behind government-funded closed-doors is less important to my point as it is now.