Nate Diaz and Conor McGregor will square off in a UFC match. Should the UFC be banned for being too violent?

  • No responses have been submitted.
  • UFC should not be banned

    The UFC should not be banned for being too violent. As a species we are only scant generations away from hunter-gatherers, furthermore professional fighters are paid for the damage they take both to their body and brain during fight camps and fights - if anything they should be paid more, though.

  • I don't feel the UFC should be banned for being too violent.

    It is an individual's choice whether or not to be a fan of or watch UFC fighting matches. I personally do not enjoy watching UFC matches and never understood why people would participate in these events. So I don't watch them. However, there are many people who enjoy UFC matches and pay to see them. That is their choice. No one is forcing me to watch the UFC so I don't feel it should be banned.

  • No, the UFC should not be banned.

    The UFC should not be banned for being too violent. Instead, parents should police the television viewing of their children. Yes, children probably should not be watching such violent fighting on television. However, this does not mean that the UFC should be banned. Parents can use common sense and decide what is not appropriate for their children to watch. That way adults can still enjoy watching the fights.

  • Banning won't help.

    I don't think the human race can escape its penchant for violent sports. Banning the UFC will just result in it being played under the radar and without any regulation or health and safety standards. I would rather have the sport being open to public scrutiny and safety standards rather than being played in a basement garage with no regulations in place.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.