|
|
| | |
| |
 |
| Summary: Should boxing be banned? |
|
|
| |
Author:Peter English ( Bouvet Island )
Peter is applying to teacher training college in Glasgow. His interests and hobbies include long distance running, wildlife photography, alt. country music and food.
Created: Wednesday, November 13, 2002
Last Modified: Monday, January 16, 2006
|
| |
In the twentieth century 1000 boxers died in the ring, or shortly afterwards - the youngest recorded victim was just 12 years old. And in the first five years of the 21st century another 43 victims have been recorded worldwide - mostly professional boxers but including up to ten amateurs. Thousands more have suffered permanent disfigurement, detached retinas in their eyes, and a whole host of other neurological complaints. The shuffling and mumbling figure of Mohammed Ali, once a supremely coordinated and quick-witted athlete, is familiar to millions of people worldwide.
Despite a tightening of safety regulations, these injuries have continued. Most medical associations have policies against boxing, including the World Medical Association and the national bodies of the USA, Britain and Australia. Although the tightness of regulations upon boxing varies from country to country, and in the USA from state to state, only a handful of countries have some kind of ban in place. For example, Sweden bans professional boxing. Amateur boxing remains an Olympic sport, although controversy exists over the way in which it is scored.
As safety fears about boxing have grown, it has stopped being offered as a high school sport in most western countries. Yet overall enthusiasm for boxing is at an all time high; television audiences are up and record numbers of youngsters across the world are joining boxing clubs. In Britain the young Olympic silver medallist Amir Khan, who turned professional in 2005, is a popular hero and role model. In a number of western countries where amateur boxing was losing popularity, especially the USA, interest has been renewed in the past ten years by the rise of women’s boxing and by white-collar boxing for office workers in their lunch-breaks. Both British and American television have run boxing-themed reality television shows. On the other hand, the large number of organisations claiming to be World bodies for boxing (e.g. WBA, WBO, IBF, etc), each with their own world champions, has damaged the credibility of the sport. Many people have also disliked the sight of aging former-champions coming out of retirement in their forties or later, tempted by one last big purse.
The arguments below ask if boxing should be banned. Most apply to both the professional and amateur sports, but the last points deal particularly with banning the professional game while leaving amateur boxing legal. The arguments would also apply to most other forms of combat sport, for example cage-fighting. |
 |
|
|
| The British Medical Association has repeatedly called for a ban on boxing or a removal of the head from the permitted target areas. A body of medical evidence is building up to suggest that even if a boxer survives individual bouts relatively unmarked, the cumulative effect of a career in boxing can lead to a greater susceptibility to diseases such as Parkinson’s. Although the incidence of injury is much higher in sports such as basketball, rugby or riding, the risk of serious injury in boxing is far greater. In fact, that risk is so great that boxing should be banned. A ban, quite simply, would mean fewer people dead, injured or permanently brain damaged. |
|
Though the risks of injury in boxing are significant, boxers are aware of the realities of their sport and are more than adequately compensated for these by the big purses at stake in fights. We allow individuals to take risks in all walks of life - in business, smoking, gambling and hang-gliding. Every attempt is made to ensure that the risk of injury to boxers is minimised: thorough medical checks are undertaken; doctors and anaesthetic equipment have to be present at ringside; referees intervene to stop fights and gloves have been made heavier to slow hand speeds. The best thing that government can do is to minimise the risks of injury to boxers. |
 |
|
|
| Unlike any other sport, it is the intention of boxers to physically injure their opponents by knockout or by exploiting cuts around the eyes. It is barbaric that in the modern age we allow people to intentionally inflict injuries upon others for the sake of public entertainment and private profit. At the very least professional boxers should be forced to wear head guards, rounds should be shortened and maybe the head (as the major source of injury) should be taken out of the target area. People under 16 should also be banned from fighting in amateur fights. Currently children as young as 11 can be found sparring in boxing clubs (the UK’s Naseem Hamed started boxing at the age of 7). It seems curious that in many countries you can start boxing before you are legally deemed mature enough to have sex. It is common that on turning professional most boxers will have at least 50 amateur fights to their name - this does not include the countless rounds of sparring in the build up to each fight. |
|
Labelling boxing ‘barbaric’ merely expresses one’s disapproval of it rather than suggesting reasons why it should be banned. Most people who call for a ban on boxing have no understanding of the ‘fight game’ beyond a gut disapproval of it. The appeal of boxing lies in its simplicity, the distillation of the sporting contest to its most basic format- a physical battle between two egos. To say that boxing is the only sport where the intention is to injure ones opponent is merely a semantic point and anyone who has experienced the LA Raiders offensive line might well dispute this anyway! The suggestion that the head should be taken out of the target area is equivalent to suggesting that football should be played without goals. There is no evidence that head-guards prevent anything but cuts and they can even exacerbate certain injuries. Paradoxically shortening rounds may lead to greater incidence of injuries as instead of out-pointing an opponent over 12 rounds, boxers would have a greater incentive to go for knockout punches. While it may well be sensible that an age or fight limit be introduced, this does not amount to a compelling argument to support a ban. |
|
|
|
| Boxing is exploitative. To be successful boxers have to train for 8 hours a day 6 days a week, spending the best years of their lives in the gym. Because most boxers lack a formal education and spend all their time in the gym they employ managers to handle their business affairs; very often the boxer’s entourage control the fighter’s destiny. This relationship can be exploitative given the inequality of bargaining power and the fact that most boxers need to make as much money as they can before they are worn out. An average boxer will have about 30-40 top-level professional bouts in them before their health and skills will dramatically deteriorate. Whilst it may well be in the fighters’ interest to hang-up his gloves, those around him have a financial incentive to push fighters into more and more title defences or comebacks. The way in which Mike Tyson lost his many millions of dollars distressed many, who also disliked the way poverty has forced him to make increasingly desperate appearances in order to pay off his debts. |
|
Boxing is still a sport dominated by the working classes and a ban would rob many people with the potential to become rich and successful boxers of that opportunity. Cassius Clay was a garbage-man and instead became a global legend. When asked in a recent interview, if he would do anything differently or if he had any regrets he answer was a resolute ‘No’. Many fighters accept their injuries as just the flip side of the coin of success. Although 95% of boxers will not even penetrate public consciousness, unless the opportunity is there we have no way of finding who this top 5% of champions will be. Most boxing clubs do excellent work in their communities, instilling discipline and respect in the young men and women who train in them.
Former world champion Barry McGuigan set up the British Boxers’ Association (BBA) in 2002. Backed by the muscle of one of Britain’s biggest trade unions, it aims to tackle problems that union members face in their boxing careers. Such initiatives will protect fighters from exploitation while allowing them to pursue their athletic ambitions. |
|
|
|
| The celebrity that is awarded to boxers glamorises and legitimises violence in society. Alongside the violence in the ring brawls often break out at press conferences and even inside boxing venues. The marketing of boxing exalts this mindless violence and those who perpetrate it, these are not role-models of which we should be proud. |
|
Boxing is one of the least bad culprits when it comes to promoting negative stereotypes to society. Far more dangerous is the 'sport' of wrestling where the violence is not part of a contest but a macho soap opera. Participants are routinely 'hit' over the head with metal objects to apparently no consequence, which sends out dangerous signals to the youngsters who form the majority of the audience. Most boxing is on late in the evening anyway and its impact on youngsters is therefore less damaging than that of other sports. |
|
|
|
| It is not a valid argument to claim that boxing would just 'go underground'. Dog fighting and cockfighting were banned to protect the welfare of the (admittedly non-consenting) combatants. Consent, however, is not the important issue - welfare is. When cockfights come to the attention of the police the perpetrators receive hefty penalties. These penalties are an effective deterrent to these 'sports' and they are now all but extinct in most countries. A ban would also deprive these sports of television exposure, and therefore the huge amounts of money this brings into the sport, as well as shutting down boxing clubs, all of which would prevent boxing from thriving underground. |
|
Such is the popularity of and desire to see boxing that a ban would just drive it underground, where fights would be unregulated and unsupervised by qualified medics. Crowd trouble can also be a problem at boxing venues and unless the proper security arrangements are made, many people could be hurt. The safety of boxers and fans should be paramount and therefore to minimise the risk of injuries to all it should remain legal but regulated. |
|
|
|
| As a first step, professional boxing at least should be banned, as it is already in countries like Sweden, Cuba and North Korea. Even if adults wish to fight each other for sport, violence should not be encouraged by financial reward. The amateur sport is at least much better regulated, with credible governing bodies and tough rules on wearing helmets, the length of fights, the role of the referee, etc. Knock-outs are very rare and serious injuries much less common than in the professional game (although there are still deaths each year in amateur boxing). |
|
It would be very unfair to ban professional boxing in particular. Top amateur boxers will wish to train full-time, which can only be done by turning professional. They may be forced to go to other countries without a ban, or to appear in illegal, unregulated contests on an “underground” circuit. In any case, the lighter divisions of professional boxing are similar to the amateur sport in the rarity of knock-outs and the role of scoring in deciding fights - why should they be banned? Finally, amateur boxing is not without its critics - even at the Olympics there have been many scandals over biased scoring and the way the game is regulated. |
|
|
|
| | This House would ban boxing
This House would ban contact sports
This House would end the fight game
This House believes violence is unacceptable
|
| View the full discussion |
Author |
Post |
Smersh
Member
|
Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 02:20 pm
|
|
It's here, It's now, their choice, not yours. If you have a problem. Go play soccer |
Debatabase
Member
|
Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2006 12:08 pm
|
|
Author: Peter English
Peter is applying to teacher training college in Glasgow. His interests and hobbies include long distance running, wildlife photography, alt. country music and food.
Created: Wednesday, November 13, 2002
View Topic
In the twentieth century 1000 boxers died in the ring, or shortly afterwards - the youngest recorded victim was just 12 years old. And in the first five years of the 21st century another 43 victims have been recorded worldwide - mostly professional boxers but including up to ten amateurs. Thousands more have suffered permanent disfigurement, detached retinas in their eyes, and a whole host of other neurological complaints. The shuffling and mumbling figure of Mohammed Ali, once a supremely coordinated and quick-witted athlete, is familiar to millions of people worldwide.
Despite a tightening of safety regulations, these injuries have continued. Most medical associations have policies against boxing, including the World Medical Association and the national bodies of the USA, Britain and Australia. Although the tightness of regulations upon boxing varies from country to country, and in the USA from state to state, only a handful of countries have some kind of ban in place. For example, Sweden bans professional boxing. Amateur boxing remains an Olympic sport, although controversy exists over the way in which it is scored.
As safety fears about boxing have grown, it has stopped being offered as a high school sport in most western countries. Yet overall enthusiasm for boxing is at an all time high; television audiences are up and record numbers of youngsters across the world are joining boxing clubs. In Britain the young Olympic silver medallist Amir Khan, who turned professional in 2005, is a popular hero and role model. In a number of western countries where amateur boxing was losing popularity, especially the USA, interest has been renewed in the past ten years by the rise of women’s boxing and by white-collar boxing for office workers in their lunch-breaks. Both British and American television have run boxing-themed reality television shows. On the other hand, the large number of organisations claiming to be World bodies for boxing (e.g. WBA, WBO, IBF, etc), each with their own world champions, has damaged the credibility of the sport. Many people have also disliked the sight of aging former-champions coming out of retirement in their forties or later, tempted by one last big purse.
The arguments below ask if boxing should be banned. Most apply to both the professional and amateur sports, but the last points deal particularly with banning the professional game while leaving amateur boxing legal. The arguments would also apply to most other forms of combat sport, for example cage-fighting. |
|
|
Login
to leave a quick reply or
View the full discussion
|
|
|
|
