Health Care Reform, tax free
by Carl Bussjaeger

September 28, 2009

I can take care of health care reform, tort reform, insurance rescission, product liability, libel, slander, and a host of other problems in one swell foop. And I can do it without a penny of tax money.

Re institute dueling.

Really.

Your baby girl died because your health insurance policy was canceled? You, Uncle Joe, Cousin Irv, Brother John, and the rest of the family invite the CEO out for coffee and pistols at dawn, one at a time. For as long as he lasts.

MegaEvilCorp, Inc's product injured a few thousand people? Let them work it out in fair arbitration, or the CEO and board of directors can deal with several thousand sequential death challenges. No one HAS to duel, but MEC, Inc wouldn't be doing much business after.

You truly believe that the power plant outside of town is destroying the planet through global warming? Stake your life on it: challenge the operators.

Officers Goon and Thug lied and killed Grandma in a no-knock raid? Invite them to a few dozen FAIR fights with all the clan. No body armor or sovereign immunity, ossifers.

Truly principled PETA operatives could fight affairs of honor for Tyson chickens.

Your Washington, DC Rep's lips were moving (aka- lying)? Call him out. Actually this used to be something of a tradition in some areas. That's why the politicians banned weapons in courts in New Hampshire (the legislature technically being a court here).

Depending on the circumstances of the offense, a duel needn't be to the death. First blood (and the attending pain) may be enough to get the point (a-hem) across. Or if you just want to get the company to deal honestly at the bargaining table, the first challenger in the line of hundreds could even suggest paint ball guns.

Keeping duels fair, as opposed to formalized murder, should be simple. There are plenty of examples throughout history. The challenged party having choice of weapons would tend to keep challengers honest. An impartial judge, and witnesses, would be essential. And specialized dueling halls would minimize the risk to innocent bystanders (and could be good money-makers until politicians and executives realize we're serious).

And there's no reason to restrict this to purely domestic affairs. You may recall that shortly before the U.S military invaded Iraq, the Iraqi's proposed settling the matter with a personal duel between Dubya and Saddam. I thought that was a great idea; resolve the trouble without getting anyone else killed. It spoke greatly of George W. Bush's cowardice and disregard for the lives of American military personnel that he refused.

Mr. Heinlein told us that an armed society is a polite society. Some people tend to think of that in terms of keeping muggers, rapists, and murderers under control. Formalized dueling would extend that civilizing influence to the goons who, without duels, are isolated from responsibility for their actions.