By: Journalist Andrea Gooden (ORU)
A bold new legislative proposal, “The Fair Play Act of 2024,” seeks to legalize mutual combat between consenting adults under the supervision of law enforcement.
The act permits individuals over 18, deemed of sound mind and body, to engage in mutual combat, supervised by a law enforcement officer. Notably, this act grants legal immunity to the victor, provided both parties adhere to agreed-upon rules — even if the outcome includes injury or death.
However, violators of these “rules of engagement” would face standard assault or murder charges. Although senators expressed differing opinions during caucus discussions, the overall reception to this bill was largely positive across the chamber.
Senate Bill No. OU-002, presented by Senator Coats (OU), initially included two proposed amendments: one to establish a “rules of engagement” section defining boundaries and regulations, and another to limit the number of participants to no more than 16. Both amendments were approved, and the bill proceeded to a 9-9 tie vote, with two abstentions. The chair cast a tiebreaker in the affirmative, passing the bill by a 10-9 margin.
Following the bill’s passage, Sen. Humphrey motioned for reconsideration. During questioning, senators took a lighter approach, probing the author’s intent and even asking about their favorite color — though the bill’s controversial elements remained a point of debate.
Later, a motion was made to strike Amendment 2, which was followed by the introduction of Amendment 3 to clarify language, specifically avoiding any dilatory terms in Amendment 2 that might hinder the bill’s objectives. Amendment 3 was adopted, and the final bill passed with Amendments 1 and 3 intact.
The Senate faced challenges navigating parliamentary procedures and managing amendments, leading to a drawn-out process for the bill’s approval. In an interview following the initial passage, Sen. Coats offered further insight into the bill’s intent and cited similar laws in states like Alaska and Texas as successful examples. Additional details on this interview and the senator’s references to Alaska’s and Texas’s self-defense and mutual combat laws will be covered in an upcoming article.
In the end, despite procedural hurdles, the Senate accomplished the passage of this unique and controversial legislation. Moving forward, further research into the bill’s implications and its comparisons to similar legislation in other states could shed light on the broader impact of the “Fair Play Act.”