But boxing does not usually end up killing the other person. Assault, with the intent to hurt and/or kill is a crime. Whether both people agree to it or not. Under the laws of the nation, it is irrelevant what both people agree to, it is still a crime.
Recently in Germany a man consented to being killed and eaten by another man. Cannibalism. He was killed and mostly eaten, and the man that did it arrested and (I hope) jailed for the rest of his life or killed. The fact that they both agreed to it means nothing when a life is at stake.
Now see, thats what bothers me. If two people agree to something, where does the government get the ability to come in and nullify that agreement? What lets them say, "No, this can't be allowed," and take those people off to prison for doing exactly what they both wanted?
The guy consented to being eaten? Little odd, I guess, but I don't see why the government can take away his right to do what he pleases with his body. If he wanted to be eaten, so what? Why does a life at stake mean consent has to be gained from the government instead of the person?
Now, put this in context of the Murder Park. The owner(s), by providing this arena where the acts are allowed, are encouraging the acts to occur. Hence, they could be charged under the felony murder rule.
This is outrageous. How do they charge you with murder when you haven't killed someone? Good lord, we let these people govern
us? They take whatever liberties they want!
Shouldn't no one have authority over you but yourself? If I want to kill myself and be eaten by cannibals, thats my decision. Not some fatcat in an office building.
Am I missing something here?