Maes
I like big butts!
Posts: 10192
Registered: 07-06 |
Jimi said:
I wonder how would it work if everyone was required to own at least one weapon and carry it on public places. Would it result in a massive deathmatch, or would people be able to control themselves from trying to kill everyone around them?
It kind of works like that in fringe environments -warrior societies, mafia, gangsters, mercenaries etc. but only among PEERS.
When dealing with each other in non-conflicting situations, they always assume that they are armed or that trying anything will result in immediate retaliation, and thus try acting with an informal diplomacy and abide by some mutually agreed upon unwritten rules -an outsider might call this a "code of honour" or consider it a form of "noble savage's respect".
The reality is less romantic: they simply try and keep as calm and diplomatic as possible because they know how much damage can be inflicted if shots starts flying and the police starts meddling with their affairs, which would be a lose-lose situation, so these "gentlemen" choose a more diplomatic compromise stance that won't hurt their mutual interests. So, it's purely a practical choice, but it sounds better if you call it "honour" or "respect" ;-)
Of course, even in those environments, there are "rookies", "loose cannons" and general "rule breakers" that can ruin your day, or selective application of said rules. Let alone that finding out who's a peer worthy of "respect" (and when) and who's not can be a tricky affair. Politics, gentlement, politics ;-)
|
12-15-12 00:14 
