I mean, we have all this gang and mob violence. It's all random and full of collateral damage. Maybe a return to the formal duel with set agreed parameters and a legal outlet two agree to engage in isn't such a bad idea.
If two knuckle heads want to fight it out between each other and see who bleeds first, who cares and why? Grab the popcorn and enjoy the show.
That's just two guys punching each other. There would have to be the odd flourish, a gauntlet thrown, some archaic piffle to make the whole thing worthwhile. It demands a certain level of pomposity, no? to make it duelly?
I literally typed in most rubbish duel in recorded history and it came up numerous times. Normally I would dig a little longer but I read it was in hot air balloons and felt no extra effort was warranted.
Humphrey Howarth, MP for Evesham fought Lord Henry Barry, 8th Earl of Barrymore, so lots of nobs involved.
Actually, more nobs than anyone expected, as Howarth stripped naked before the start of the duel. While perfectly happy to kill a man, Lord Henry couldn't look at one, so both men declared honour to be satisfied and called the whole thing off. :)
Everybody wins, every body gets to go home and a little bit of knowledge (in this case the relationship between wounds, cloth and infection) gets disseminated.
No, it was as Lucia has indicated. Both men were at the races at Brighton and they were talking at The Castle Inn. Talking (no doubt helped by alcohol) turned to arguing, but exactly what it was about I can't find without doing more than a surface search.
Oh, the Earl of Barrymore? Irish. :) Not a one of the English, Welsh or Scots need any help to start an argument and never have, but it's nice that our cousins over the sea join in so enthusiastically. :) We're all just a bunch of bastardised scrappers really.