On September 15, 1997, Nick Kypreos suffered fatal injuries after his opponent, Ryan VandenBussche, hit him in the face during a fight midway through a hockey game. Not only did Kypreos suffer from post-concussion syndrome for years, but his career was effectively cut short due to his injuries. If this had occurred off the ice it would have been considered an assault. Yet despite the severity of his actions, VandenBussche continued to play hockey and led a full and prosperous career. This situation exemplifies the degree of misguided violence that has become increasingly prevalent in professional sports. This level of violent conduct far exceeds the necessary level intrinsically associated with contact sports. Violence in sport has become a social problem and must be more strictly regulated with laws that adequately impose sanctions for violent acts. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Problems with prosecuting violence committed during sports have existed for a long time. The main problem is to distinguish between "legal" and "illegal" behavior. Currently, most accidents that occur in a sports arena are considered legal and, therefore, not criminal. In 1980, the Sports Violence Act was introduced as a proposed federal regulation against violence in sports. This bill was not passed due to its ambiguity in the definition of what constitutes excessive force. Specifically, the bill failed to clearly outline what level of violence would be acceptable without compromising the competitive objectives of the sport. While this bill was unsuccessful, it was not the only attempt to regulate violence in sports through legislation. In 1983, another bill called The Sports Violence Arbitration Act was created which proposed the implementation of an arbitration panel to address violent conduct. This bill was also unsuccessful because it required self-regulation of conduct between players and sports leagues. Considering the failed attempts to regulate violence through federal legislation, very few athletes have been prosecuted for their violent actions during competition, and the current disciplinary guidelines followed by major sports leagues are not stringent enough to significantly curb violence. Understanding the role of the various professions involved when dealing with the prosecution of violence in sport is crucial to understanding where the discrepancies in the control of violence lie. Michael D. Bayles discusses the concept of essence and pretension. In this regard, each profession considers itself to be the competent body to establish the rules governing matters that arise within the respective profession. In this case, professional sports leagues, such as the NHL, have established a set of internal rules that dictate disciplinary procedures against their athletes. These rules, however, have not proven adequate in controlling violence among players due to the inherent fact that sports leagues encourage violence among their players. It could be argued that no sports league should be the sole disciplinary body for controlling violence. If an athlete is reprimanded by their respective sports league, this should not preclude them from receiving further criminal sanctions. An author, Daniel R. Karon, delves into the issues surrounding violence in sports and states that the current level of violence is shamefulit is intolerable. According to Karon, violence in sport is no longer confined to the arena and has effects that prove harmful to society. The author argues that a workable federal standard is needed to eliminate the ubiquitous violence in sports. The proposed solution is a federal statute that would implement criminal sanctions for athletes involved in such brutality, at both the professional and amateur levels. The proposed statute defines the key terms to remedy the ambiguity that caused the failure of the previous Acts. The regulations would break the intent requirement into two components. The first intent requirement would distinguish between intentional and unintentional contact. In this proposal, any incidental contact would be defined as “contact that results from a player's inability to stop his momentum and forces him to collide with the contacted player.” Violent actions that meet the definition of the first intention requirement will not result in criminal liability. The second intent requirement would include only contact where there was a clear intent to cause physical harm or injury. This excludes contact which is within the rules of the game. According to the author, a criminal sanction is needed for athletes who commit a violent act under the second intent requirement to ensure that a change towards less violence in sport occurs. The author believes that the proposed action would preserve the integrity of the game across sports while eliminating unnecessary violence. I strongly support the solution proposed by the author as a means to eradicate the type of violence that has become so destructive to our society. Sports competitions are watched all over the world and, as a result, the events that occur during them should be recognized as influential for spectators and society as a whole. Considering their platform and importance in society, professional athletes often serve as role models for children who in turn seek to emulate their favorite players. If professional athletes encourage and participate in violent acts, it is undeniable that young athletes will commit violence on a non-professional level. Furthermore, the level of violence currently tolerated during competitions leads to significant physical harm to athletes. This damage can cause debilitating injuries, such as brain damage, and can consequently lead to a shortened lifespan. This level of harm far exceeds the danger intrinsically associated with the sport. Excessive violence in sports not only causes physical harm but can also contribute to psychological harm towards athletes. Their career shows that violence is acceptable and there have been several instances where this violent attitude has manifested itself outside the arena. Implementing criminal sanctions for acts of excessive and unnecessary violence would send the message to athletes and society that this type of behavior is unacceptable. Considering the importance of sport in society, it could be argued that eliminating violence would have a negative impact on fan participation and viewership. It is not uncommon to see fans encouraging fights during matches and demonstrating aggressive behavior towards each other in support of such behavior. Congruent with this view, the NHL has stated that it fears that taking action against violence could cause fans to be less likely to attend competitions. Furthermore, it could be argued that controlling violence would be exceptionally difficult since violence has long been an integral aspect of sports games. Furthermore, criminal law is intended to protect the public and one could argue.