Like the 1300s? You’re talking about tort law. I think the OP was asking about the criminality of consensual fights, though the OP has been, to paraphrase my torts professor, hijacked more times than Air Havana in the 1960s.
To complicate matters, some jurisdictions that have always held mutually consensual combat to be illegal have different gradations of severity. I believe I read the other day that in New York a simple assault can be a number of things (including an “assault” in the tort sense [creating apprehension of attack] as well as an actual striking). However, the striking of a person that would normally constitute simple assault is downgraded to a lesser charge (disturbing the peace violation I believe) when it occurs in the midst of mutually consensal combat.
Yeah, I figured I was treading on dangerous grounds there, Monkeypants. Realized I was most likely confusing 2 areas, neither of which I knew much about.
Re: criminal law - what distinguishes between matters that require a complainant, and those that do not? For example, assume my town has a noise ordinance and my neighbors violate it, but the state won’t prosecute unless I swear out a complaint. But if I murder my neighbor, the state will prosecute me without a complaint.
So, in a mutually consensual fistfight, if neither party wishes to press charges, what dictates whether the state will act?
This is interesting. That explains the movie cliche where two kids or two military guys start to fight and some leader makes them take it into the ring. Now it’s legal.
So, what is the difference between a consentual fist fight in the street and a consensual sparring fight in a kung fu club?
Both are consensual.
One may say that usual fists fights are full of anger and bitterness but say two (somewhat deranged) friends decided two match their skill in a fist fight. They fight, one wins, they go out for a beer and that is that (not very different from a kungfu sparring). How would a police stop them? And for that matter what is the difference between a fightclub and a kung fu club? isn’t it pretty much the same?
And, Dinsdale , what is S&M or B&D?
I’m sure there are lots of legal differences, but on a fundamental level the main difference is intent. In sparring, the participants are trying very hard NOT to hurt one another. The only time this isn’t true is when the sparring partners are very mismatched, so the lower-level student can pretty much fight his hardest, but the more-skilled fighter still needs to be extremely careful not to injure the other in his defensive reactions. When the fighters are more evenly matched, attention to the safety of their partner is crucial, or they won’t be sparring very long.
Bare-knuckle, no-holds-barred, unrestricted sparring (the equivalent of a street fight) is extremely rare, at least in all the training I’ve experienced. This is mainly due to the fact that most martial artists don’t want to risk an injury that would restrict their training when it’s not necessary or productive. A few safety measures can make injuries much less likely and still provide fairly realistic training.
You’re talking about tort law. I think the OP was asking about the criminality of consensual fights, though the OP has been, to paraphrase my torts professor, hijacked more times than Air Havana in the 1960s.