Are there any good reasons why pro boxing in its current form should not be banned?

Most fans I know, including me, want to see good contests with fighters at similar levels who will match each other, at least to some degree. I don't know many people who want to see anyone getting the **** kinocked out them when they can't defend themselves.

 

Well bro I went to a few dog fights when I lived in Cuba and they all ended with one of the dogs dead, I guess it was just there but thats what I saw.

 

Whilst damage does occur to boxers, when correct safety procedures are applied to a boxing match and the corner, referee and doctor do their job, damage is not sufficient enough to warrant a ban. The effect of brain trauma on a persons life will be minimal if a career and boxer is correctly managed.

Consenting humans choose to participate in a sport that has its dangers, as any other sport does, in order to challenge themselves, earn money and make a life, with the potential for stardom and fortune.

Choosing to box is often safer and more beneficial than living a life of crime, poverty or drugs.

It has a rich history with only a small percentage of deaths and serious injuries when compared to many other sports.

 

Reaching a bit here Decebal.

Firstly, why should it be banned? Its a consentual undertaking from two parties who are aware of the possible (but highly unlikely) severe physical consequences. Most people who partake in the sport enjoy it, and live for it, some do it because they are good at it, and it is how they support their way of life. Who are we to say they shouldn't be able to do that? Unless a fighter is going into the ring in an attempt to kill their opponent, i see no problem. This is why we have referees, a fighter's goal is to establish dominance to the point of stopping their opposition, either by knockout or a dominant beating up until the point that the referee judges it physically dangerous to continue (therefor avoiding unnecessary punishment).

Why not ban motorsports, people are knowingly pitting themselves against each other in competition, with very real risks of fatal injury. These sentiments apply to many sports.

The dog fighting comparison holds no merit really. It is relevant only in the method that it is two beings seeking to establish physical dominance over the other, although to a far greater degree than boxing or other sports that you could apply this theme to such as wrestling etc. A domestic animal doesn't have the ability to control its own destiny to the extent of a human. If a human was taken from birth, beaten and deprived of all of its rights, raised in solitude and anger, refused its' ability to communicate, then physically forced into a ring with an equally savage opponent and forced to fight to the death, only then would the comparison hold serious merit.

There are far fewer fatalities in boxing than a number of other sports, should they be banned too? No, of course not. As free willed people we have a right to take calculated risks within reason to be rewarded with adrenalin and all sorts of enjoyment. Boxing is no different.

 

Let's first ban war and then abortion before we tackle a tough issue like banning boxing.

 

Should we ban human sentiments? if scientists find a way to disable the part of the brain that is carnal and savage, should they do it?

 

Its an interesting topic anyway. :good

 

People have been fighting for decades....we all die sooner or later.....some are destined for greatness some are not.