THIS HOUSE WOULD BAN

BOXING.
PRO
1) Boxing is a barbaric sport, and it should not be a part of any 21st
century society.
Unlike in any other sport, boxers intend to physically injure their opponents by
knockout. Allowing people to intentionally inflict injuries upon others for public
entertainment and private profit is barbaric. Children especially are trained in
these ways. When boxers turn professional, they have often already fought in at
least 50 fights in their youth, which does not include the countless rounds of
sparring during training sessions. Boxers are essentially being trained in violent
ways, often at a young age. The Australian Medical Association actively opposes
boxing for this reason, calling it, a public demonstration of interpersonal
violence which is unique among sporting activities.[1] While there are other
rough sports, boxing is different because itsintent is harmful. The World Medical
Association, which also opposes the sport, justifies this position by noting, its
basic intent is to produce bodily harm in the opponent.[2] Boxing is a violent
sport, in which youth are taught to try to hurt their peers. It has no place in
modern society
2) The celebrity status that societies award to boxers glamorizes
and legitimizes violence in society.
Boxers are presented as beacons of success for young people, but they are
not good role models. Children should not idolize people who make a living by
injuring other people. In addition to 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. Mike Tyson is a
particularly harmful example. Tyson was one of the most popular and successful
boxers in history, when he faced Evander Holyfield in the most hyped fight of the
year. Tyson cruelly bit off a portion of Holyfields ear in the fight, on live
television.[1] These are not role models of which we should be proud.
3) All professional boxing should be banned, not amateur boxing.
When most people think of boxingthe sport that they see on TVthey are
thinking particularly of professional boxing, which is much worse. The main
difference is that in amateur boxing the round lengths are often shorter as are
the number of rounds and more protective equipment is worn. Therefore the
level of exposure is minimised. As a result, 76 participants out of every million
die, in professional boxing, but only six per million die in amateur boxing. That
makes professional boxing more than 12 times more dangerous than amateur

boxing.[1] The fact remains, however, that professional boxing is violent,

barbaric, and dangerous, so it should be banned.

4) Boxing causes many deaths, and medical officials have continually

called for it to be banned.
The British Medical Association has repeatedly called for a ban on boxing or a
removal of the head from the permitted target areas. The body of medical
evidence is growing that suggests even if a boxer survives individual bouts
relatively unmarked, the cumulative effect of a career in boxing can lead to a
greater susceptibility to chronic neurological injury. A doctor who has studied the
effect of boxing on Parkinsons specifically says that boxing causes unnecessary
harm. He writes, Unlike most degenerative neurologic diseases, this disorder
can be prevented.[1] 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. That risk is so great that boxing should be banned. A ban, quite simply,
would mean fewer people dead, injured or permanently brain damaged.

CONTRA
1) Boxing is a beloved culture and one that inspires youth and work
around the world.
The simple reason why boxing should not be banned is because it brings joy
and entertainment to so many people, without providing harm. The government
has no right to stop this practice from continuing. French sociologist Loc
Wacquant argues that the boxers themselves are the best evidence in support of
the sport. When people talk about banning boxing, he writes, one voice is
invariably drowned out and lost: that of the fighters themselves.[1] So many
children dedicate themselves so that one day they might become successful
boxers. We cannot take away this dream.
2) Boxing is dominated by the working classes and a ban would rob
many people of opportunity to participate in a sport that requires
discipline and commitment.
A ban on boxing would be classist, because it would disproportionately hurt
the working class. Most people who want to ban boxing are more well-off people
who are turned off by its gritty nature. This is an aesthetic complaint that is most
often based on an ethical or moral judgement against the sport, when the fact of
the matter is that boxing is not especially violent for members of the working
class and it provides great opportunity for those who are skilled at the sport. The
risk of death to professional boxers is lower than the risk for most manual
laborers. U.S. construction workers, for example, are more than three times more
likely to die on the job than professional boxers are to die from the sport. U.S.

farm workers are more than five times more likely.[1] Boxing is a great
opportunity for members of the working class, and banning it would hurt them
especially.
3) Boxing rules and regulations should be strengthened, not banned.
Boxing should not be banned; whatever problems there are with the sport can
be fixed with reforms. The World Health Organization has called for tighter
regulation, including Simple rules, such as requiring medical clearance, national
passports to prevent boxers from fighting under more than one name, restricting
fights for fixed periods after knockouts, requiring that ringside physicians be paid
by the state and not the promoter, and making sure that the boxers are aware of
the potential long-term consequence of boxing may help protect boxers to some
degree.[1] The Australian Medical Association additionally recommends that
media coverage of boxing should be subject to control codes similar to those
which apply to television screening of violence.[2] Finally, the World Medical
Association suggests that all matches should have a ring physician authorized to
stop the fight at any time.[3]
It has been reported that no safety regulations would be effective if head blows
remain20 - however such authors incorrectly apportion blame on boxing for a
group of diseases known as Parkinsons Syndrome. Boxing can result in chronic
traumatic neurological conditions if fighters are not well matched, and fight
without regulations in regard to their exposure. Boxing cannot cause Parkinsons
Disease or other conditions such as Alzheimers Disease as those are genetic
conditions - so to include them together as one set of conditions is incorrect and
misleading.
About 80% of deaths are caused by head, brain, and neck injuries,[4] so the
removal of the head as a scoring region may make a huge difference to the
injury outcomes for this sport. However it would also change the very nature of
the sport; and may mean people wont participate in it. Ultimately, governments
should do what they can to make boxing as safe as possible, without losing the
essence of the sport or banning it entirely.
4) A ban would not remove boxing from society; it would only drive it
underground, creating a much more dangerous culture around the
sport.
Throughout history we have seen that placing blanket bans on things
(alcohol, cigarettes, illicit drugs, cockfighting, etc) do not work. People will still
find a way to do what they want and when you remove the ability to regulate
something by ignoring its existence, you have the potential to create more
problems. There is certainly the potential that 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.
One of the reasons for such popularity of the sport in recent years is the
increasing use of boxing training as a fitness approach in gyms and other
training venues. There is such an acknowledgement of the effectiveness of
boxing training as a training approach that banning boxing clubs will make it
difficult for people who are doing legitimate training to do so.