PDA

View Full Version : Light Smacking - Yeah Right



Twelvevolts
24-08-2009, 10:19 PM
Now that we've squandered nine million it appears that the issue is being reframed as a parents right to do light smacking. My question is what the hell would the use of light smacking be? Surely a light smack makes no difference to a child, so let's face it, those campaigning for this are hardly likely to restrict themselves to a light smack.

This really has turned into a complete joke, at least if you want to do this admit that you're doing more than a light smack, hell I've seen people doing more than that in public so god knows what they realy do when they get the kid home. I've heard some people admit they use belts and wooden spoons etc, so I doubt they believe in the light smacking stuff but at least they're honest about what they are doing.

Personally when I was at school, I never saw the frequent caning of students ever make any difference to the ones that were being caned. Scared the hell out of the other 90% of the kids, but the ones that misbehaved never really changed and in fact seemed to see it as a competition to get the most strokes. So might give the adult an outlet for their anger, but has stuff all effect on bad kids.

SolMiester
24-08-2009, 10:31 PM
Oh, but you said it yourself 12v, scared the **** out of 90%...duh, can you say d e t e r r e n t .....comes with such words you may not of heard before....punishment.

We have a whole upcoming generation that doesn't understand that....and a current one that just wants to keep shrugging off societies barriers...

I cant say I'm happy with the law of S59, that wont resolve the purpose for which it was intended, instead it will waste police resourcing spend chasing 1 person opinion, when it could be spent ...... you guess it, policing and protecting the abused children.

Poor old Sue must have had a hard time in her childhood, my wife had a terrible one, wasn't about smacking though, but Bradford is confused with smacking\abuse, did you miss that she didn't say smack, but assault or hit!....in the news commentary tonight!

Cicero
24-08-2009, 10:32 PM
Now that we've squandered nine million it appears that the issue is being reframed as a parents right to do light smacking. My question is what the hell would the use of light smacking be? Surely a light smack makes no difference to a child, so let's face it, those campaigning for this are hardly likely to restrict themselves to a light smack.

This really has turned into a complete joke, at least if you want to do this admit that you're doing more than a light smack, hell I've seen people doing more than that in public so god knows what they realy do when they get the kid home. I've heard some people admit they use belts and wooden spoons etc, so I doubt they believe in the light smacking stuff but at least they're honest about what they are doing.

Personally when I was at school, I never saw the frequent caning of students ever make any difference to the ones that were being caned. Scared the hell out of the other 90% of the kids, but the ones that misbehaved never really changed and in fact seemed to see it as a competition to get the most strokes. So might give the adult an outlet for their anger, but has stuff all effect on bad kids.

Nothing can be done about masochists,that is those that like a bit of pain,the fact is some pain helps with discipline.

The reason we all don't rob a bank is due to fear of the consquence.

R2x1
24-08-2009, 10:40 PM
Actually, these days it's all about the banks robbing us.

Twelvevolts
24-08-2009, 10:42 PM
Nothing can be done about masochists,that is those that like a bit of pain,the fact is some pain helps with discipline.

The reason we all don't rob a bank is due to fear of the consquence.

That may be true for you, but I don't rob a bank because I think it is wrong.

Found someones credit card the other day, handed it into the bank. Found some cash in a money machine, handed it into the bank. Most IT people with a clue could scam people easily, but we don't because most of us think it is wrong.

prefect
24-08-2009, 10:48 PM
Well after the referendum the government would be pretty dumb not to change the law back to how it was.
If they dont change the law they have showed what value the government puts on citizen initiated referendum.
I they dont change the law back they will get their asses whipped in the next election.

Cicero
24-08-2009, 10:49 PM
That may be true for you, but I don't rob a bank because I think it is wrong.

Found someones credit card the other day, handed it into the bank. Found some cash in a money machine, handed it into the bank. Most IT people with a clue could scam people easily, but we don't because most of us think it is wrong.

You are talking about honesty and I am talking about fear.
Fear stops us from doing certain things,we behave because we fear a smack,for example.

Twelvevolts
24-08-2009, 10:52 PM
Well after the referendum the government would be pretty dumb not to change the law back to how it was.
If they dont change the law they have showed what value the government puts on citizen initiated referendum.
I they dont change the law back they will get their asses whipped in the next election.

Who will get arses whipped? Labour brought in the law remember. No one cares enough about this to vote them back in.

johcar
24-08-2009, 11:08 PM
Who will get arses whipped? Labour brought in the law remember. No one cares enough about this to vote them back in.

No one cares enough about Labour to vote them back in....

R2x1
24-08-2009, 11:12 PM
If people cared, explain Rodney Hide's presence to me? Oh Yeah - - -

hueybot3000
24-08-2009, 11:14 PM
I do! having only been old enough to vote once I havent had the chance to vote for labour, its on my things to do before I die list, right down the bottom with mate with a seagul

prefect
25-08-2009, 08:27 AM
labor brought the law in and lost election big time. National may lose next election if they dont change the law back.
People do care being told by the state how to bring up their offspring.
I would vote labor if someone gave me a 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000 dollars.

kenj
25-08-2009, 10:16 AM
They can get you quite cheaply!!! I would want much more than that.

Ken :D:D

Cicero
25-08-2009, 10:23 AM
I find it unbelievable that they spend 9 mil of our tax money,get an answer,then say,very nice now bugger off.

You have to feel sorry for these hard working genius's.

rob_on_guitar
25-08-2009, 11:38 AM
I find it unbelievable it was done in the first place.

Winston001
25-08-2009, 11:51 AM
.....but Bradford is confused with smacking\abuse, did you miss that she didn't say smack, but assault or hit!....in the news commentary tonight!

No Sol, she isn't confused. The word "smack" does not appear anywhere in the law. It is a form of assault and assault is unlawful.

Section 59 provides an exception, a defence for parents permiting mild assaults on their children as part of parenting.

NZ is a first world country yet we have alarming rates of child abuse. Anything which sends the message that hitting kids is wrong can only be a good thing.

Poppa John
25-08-2009, 11:52 AM
So will we be back to square one no I wonder. PJ

rodb
25-08-2009, 12:08 PM
1. It is not known how many voting papers were stolen from letter boxes by the pro-smacking brigade and used to boost their vote, so considerable doubt must be cast on the referendum result. The religious nutters have had their day and should be ignored until they obey the law.
2. Many of the people in the pro-smacking group are not good parents if they are prepared to assault their children (if you hit an adult you will be prosecuted).
3. Perhaps some reputable scientists can come up with tests to determine who is suitable to have children, and only those that pass the tests would be permitted to produce a family. One sees so many examples of neglect and violence among parents (mainly in certain ethnic groups) and this becomes an ongoing problem through the generations.
4. The use of violence against children may, in some cases, not produce physical injury but certainly affects their outlook on life and their future behaviour. Just because an adult is a sadist does not mean they should produce sadistic young people.

johcar
25-08-2009, 12:23 PM
1. It is not known how many voting papers were stolen from letter boxes by the pro-smacking brigade and used to boost their vote, so considerable doubt must be cast on the referendum result. The religious nutters have had their day and should be ignored until they obey the law.
2. Many of the people in the pro-smacking group are not good parents if they are prepared to assault their children (if you hit an adult you will be prosecuted).
3. Perhaps some reputable scientists can come up with tests to determine who is suitable to have children, and only those that pass the tests would be permitted to produce a family. One sees so many examples of neglect and violence among parents (mainly in certain ethnic groups) and this becomes an ongoing problem through the generations.
4. The use of violence against children may, in some cases, not produce physical injury but certainly affects their outlook on life and their future behaviour. Just because an adult is a sadist does not mean they should produce sadistic young people.

1. Evidence please (even a link to a news report about this). Sounds like bullshit to me.
2. There is a very large difference between a smack to correct a wayward child and an assault. The difficulty lies in interpreting the law. From a legal standpoint a smack is an assault, but 88% of New Zealanders (if we dismiss your unproven and unsupported allegation in point 1), believe there is a difference between what constitutes an assault and what constitutes correcting the behaviour of a child who won't listen.
3. More social engineering won't help the situation. It will just alienate large sectors of society who don't like (rightly, IMHO) being told what to do by a faceless, 'we-know-what's-best-for-you' organisation. That's why Helen's lot got kicked out last time.
4. More bullshit and jellybeans. I was smacked as a child (even got the dreaded slipper and occasionally the wooden spoon, when circumstances necessitated it) and I am a normal, well-adjusted functioning member of society with no violence issues (or court convictions of any kind). My outlook on life is also normal and not affected in any way by the corporal punishment meted out to me when I was a naughty boy all those years ago.

Cicero
25-08-2009, 12:31 PM
So will we be back to square one no I wonder. PJ

Indeed minus $9000000.

With a lot of happy do gooders.

gary67
25-08-2009, 12:38 PM
1. I was smacked as a child (even got the dreaded slipper and occasionally the wooden spoon, when circumstances necessitated it) and I am a normal, well-adjusted functioning member of society with no violence issues (or court convictions of any kind). My outlook on life is also normal and not affected in any way by the corporal punishment meted out to me when I was a naughty boy all those years ago.

Same goes for most of our generation. If corporal punishment doesn't work why do the young now have no respect for

Police
The law
Teachers
Adults in general

I don't advocate smacking but can see in some circumstances that it has it's place. I voted yes not to support smacking but to get the law clarified since it is as ambiguous as the referendum question was

Cicero
25-08-2009, 12:53 PM
Same goes for most of our generation. If corporal punishment doesn't work why do the young now have no respect for

Police
The law
Teachers
Adults in general

I don't advocate smacking but can see in some circumstances that it has it's place. I voted yes not to support smacking but to get the law clarified since it is as ambiguous as the referendum question was

Pain and discipline are synonomous,but the youth of today must never feel pain.
Not good for them.

Winston001
25-08-2009, 02:08 PM
Same goes for most of our generation. If corporal punishment doesn't work why do the young now have no respect for

Police
The law
Teachers
Adults in general

I don't advocate smacking but can see in some circumstances that it has it's place. I voted yes not to support smacking but to get the law clarified since it is as ambiguous as the referendum question was

Loss of respect can be laid at the feet of parents. Children imitate what they see. The babyboomers rejected authority and now wonder why their children reject their authority???

Winston001
25-08-2009, 02:11 PM
3. More social engineering won't help the situation. It will just alienate large sectors of society who don't like (rightly, IMHO) being told what to do by a faceless, 'we-know-what's-best-for-you' organisation. That's why Helen's lot got kicked out last time....


Actually social engineering by law does work. Abolition of slavery. Labour laws protecting workers. Abolition of the crime of homosexuality. Abolition of the right to strike your wife. The list goes on.

SolMiester
25-08-2009, 02:17 PM
No Sol, she isn't confused. The word "smack" does not appear anywhere in the law. It is a form of assault and assault is unlawful.

Section 59 provides an exception, a defence for parents permiting mild assaults on their children as part of parenting.


What?!....are you trying to say a smack is assault? NZ is becoming a country of liberal idiots!

Winston001
25-08-2009, 02:29 PM
What?!....are you trying to say a smack is assault? NZ is becoming a country of liberal idiots!

Any unwanted or uninvited application of force to the body of another person is assault. Pushing your way through a crowd consists of multiple assaults - but no court would ever be interested. Inconsequential. Just as no court would be interested in a light smack. And Families First could not come up with one case.

Just for the record, there are exceptions to the law of assault - police, customs, medical, prison officers etc.

Terry Porritt
25-08-2009, 02:39 PM
........................

Just for the record, there are exceptions to the law of assault - police, customs, medical, prison officers etc.

......................and in song..... :)

Herman Hupfeld who wrote 'As Time Goes By', also wrote 'Let's Put out The Lights' containing...........

"No more money in the bank,
No cute baby we can spank,
So, what's to do about it?
Let's put out the lights and go to bed."

Sue Bradford would have kittens if she listened to this tune, and no doubt would try to get it banned :banana

http://www.getalyric.com/listen/FONwVvceyAI/_let_s_put_out_the_lights_rudy_vallee_1932_

Cicero
25-08-2009, 02:51 PM
Actually social engineering by law does work. Abolition of slavery. Labour laws protecting workers. Abolition of the crime of homosexuality. Abolition of the right to strike your wife. The list goes on.

Good to see homosexuality was acknowledged as a crime.

B.M.
25-08-2009, 03:46 PM
Now letís think about this.

Now that Mr Key has a law that criminalises any parent that smacks a child, but only if the policeman thinks he/she might be a bad parent or a dislikeable person, maybe we can extend this thinking.

Let's have a law that criminalises anybody for inhaling oxygen, but only if the policeman thinks they may be a bad or dislikeable person.

All of a sudden all boy racers, drunk & disorderly revellers, or really anyone that gets up Mr. Policeman's nose can be arrested, charged, found guilty & got rid of.

Perfect - even Hitler would have loved it.

Thank you for taking us to Stage 1 of this marvellous scheme Mr. Key.

You have really excelled! :groan:

KiwiTek
25-08-2009, 03:58 PM
All this is just a diversion aimed at taking our focus off the real issue of how many of our kids are being violently killed. This anti-smacking law is a stupid waste of time, it's not protecting the kids that are being beaten to death, it's just wasting innocent peoples (and the polices) time.

There's quite a good spiel here (http://talkbacknz.com/index.php/topic,30.msg54.html#msg54) about it.

R2x1
25-08-2009, 08:29 PM
What?!....are you trying to say a smack is assault? NZ is becoming a country of liberal idiots!
"becoming" ? ?

prefect
25-08-2009, 08:42 PM
Now letís think about this.

Now that Mr Key has a law that criminalises any parent that smacks a child, but only if the policeman thinks he/she might be a bad parent or a dislikeable person, maybe we can extend this thinking.

Let's have a law that criminalises anybody for inhaling oxygen, but only if the policeman thinks they may be a bad or dislikeable person.

All of a sudden all boy racers, drunk & disorderly revellers, or really anyone that gets up Mr. Policeman's nose can be arrested, charged, found guilty & got rid of.

Perfect - even Hitler would have loved it.

Thank you for taking us to Stage 1 of this marvellous scheme Mr. Key.

You have really excelled! :groan:

Amazing as a moderator said before its not long before the nazis are always dragged into the argument.

R2x1
25-08-2009, 08:55 PM
There's no argument here; I have agreed with myself 100% of the time this thread has been running and I have no intention of changing my mind.
Everybody else has done the same, so obviously we are unanimous.

Twelvevolts
25-08-2009, 11:41 PM
Interesting people think "liberal" kids are somehow bad. My kids went to a school with no uniform, no smacking, pretty much as liberal as they come, and they don't appear to be these major issues that should have happened if the spare the rod crowd are right.

Now back when I worked for Justice, most of the offenders had been hit by their parents for good correction, some with a belt or worse. So seems to me the hitting kids prevents problems lobby have it the wrong way around, kids that are beaten are more likely to get into trouble. Of course, it could be argued they were beaten because they were the ones more likely to get in trouble, just doesn't tally with my experience.

The "society has gone wrong" and remember the good old days people seem to have hazy memories of recent human history. My kids are safer and likely to live longer than any time in human history. That's the trouble with these smacking solves everything type people, the truth just never seems to match up with the theory.

Cicero
26-08-2009, 09:24 AM
Amazing as a moderator said before its not long before the Nazis are always dragged into the argument.

I am glad we have clairvoyant mods.

SolMiester
26-08-2009, 10:43 AM
The "society has gone wrong" and remember the good old days people seem to have hazy memories of recent human history. My kids are safer and likely to live longer than any time in human history. That's the trouble with these smacking solves everything type people, the truth just never seems to match up with the theory.


You know try as I may, I just cant accept this statement, the crux of the matter isnt about smacking, that is just the result, its about the removal of barrier to guide children, and IMHO only very very good parents with better than most communication skills can carry off an up-bring without enforcement of barriers.
I guess every generation must say it, however I find kids today very rude, arrogant & disrespectful, I have a teenager at home! They are full of their rights etc, and appear to struggle talking to authority.

We have murders just about everyday, the worst drug problems ever, and solo parents almost as prevalent as the traditional family unit. Do we have problems?, you bet!

prefect
26-08-2009, 08:39 PM
Look at all the problems liberals have caused in New Zealand.
Liberalism looks like its a failed experiment.
Sickly white Anglo Saxons were the instigators, now you cant smack your kid when they deserve it. They have totally train wrecked NZ society.
We now have a generation of kids who are ill disciplined and not scared of authority.
Why has common courtesy a hall mark of a civilized English society like ours gone down the gurgler.

Twelvevolts
26-08-2009, 11:13 PM
You know try as I may, I just cant accept this statement, the crux of the matter isnt about smacking, that is just the result, its about the removal of barrier to guide children, and IMHO only very very good parents with better than most communication skills can carry off an up-bring without enforcement of barriers.
I guess every generation must say it, however I find kids today very rude, arrogant & disrespectful, I have a teenager at home! They are full of their rights etc, and appear to struggle talking to authority.

We have murders just about everyday, the worst drug problems ever, and solo parents almost as prevalent as the traditional family unit. Do we have problems?, you bet!

You paint a rosy picture of the past and a grim picture of the present. Statements like worst drug problems ever don't stack up when you read about the 20's for example, the world had many more murders in the 1940's, millions and millions of them. The 50's that the Sensible Sentencing Trust are fond of harping on about, were after the worst decade for murders in living history, not many were left to get into trouble and people were busy rebuilding the world.

When I was a teenager I listened to Led Zeppelin, had long hair and drove a Zephyr and broke a few rules. See myself today and I'd think I was a hoon, that's just getting old and less tolerant.

Never been sure what the smacking lobby thinks it achieves - I presume the threat of hurting your kids is meant to contain them, but we all know from the cane at school it just doesn't work, naughty kids won't stop because you beat them. I bet everyone who smacks has to keep doing it, the kids don't actually stop doing things the parents think need punishment.

R2x1
26-08-2009, 11:29 PM
If the cane doesn't work, should we try hanging?

Then again, the guillotine might be worth a trial?

Stoning for the other religions I suppose.

Twelvevolts
26-08-2009, 11:33 PM
If the cane doesn't work, should we try hanging?

Then again, the guillotine might be worth a trial?

Stoning for the other religions I suppose.

Hanging kids won't go down well in all quarters - but we could have a referendum to see how popular it would be.

R2x1
26-08-2009, 11:43 PM
Hanging kids won't go down well in all quarters - but we could have a referendum to see how popular it would be.
Hanging should be enough, but if it doesn't work we could try your suggestion and quarter the ringleaders I suppose. If there are still problems we would have to have a draw or two.

prefect
27-08-2009, 11:55 AM
Draw with horses or up tech with D8 bulldozers?

Agent_24
27-08-2009, 01:14 PM
No Sol, she isn't confused. The word "smack" does not appear anywhere in the law. It is a form of assault and assault is unlawful.

Section 59 provides an exception, a defence for parents permiting mild assaults on their children as part of parenting.

NZ is a first world country yet we have alarming rates of child abuse. Anything which sends the message that hitting kids is wrong can only be a good thing.

Finally, someone on this forum who actually knows what they're talking about

Cicero
27-08-2009, 01:21 PM
Finally, someone on this forum who actually knows what they're talking about

Can we assume that once we stop smacking,we will see less deaths of infants?,I think not.

Deaths are a result of an unpleasant culture of violence and has no relation to slapping.

prefect
27-08-2009, 01:26 PM
No smacking, slapping is is like on the Airplane movie where the air hostess brings hysterical passenger under control.

Twelvevolts
30-08-2009, 05:09 PM
Can we assume that once we stop smacking,we will see less deaths of infants?,I think not.

Deaths are a result of an unpleasant culture of violence and has no relation to slapping.

All beatings should continue until the violence stops . . .

Winston001
30-08-2009, 07:11 PM
Can we assume that once we stop smacking,we will see less deaths of infants?

Murder, fraud, and assault are all unlawful but still occur. Pointless laws, lets repeal them.

Twelvevolts
30-08-2009, 07:14 PM
Murder, fraud, and assault are all unlawful but still occur. Pointless laws, lets repeal them.

Let's run a pilot in Southland first.

Sweep
30-08-2009, 07:50 PM
Murder, fraud, and assault are all unlawful but still occur. Pointless laws, lets repeal them.

The law is full of exceptions. For instance every person must wear a seatbelt except for those that do not, for one reason or another.

The fact that Section 59 provided an exception ( or a defence ) is no reason in itself to repeal such law.

The law simply does not work because there are always going to be those that do not care about others and will break, bend or twist laws without regard to the consequences if indeed there be any at all.

Cicero
31-08-2009, 09:47 AM
Seems to be another case of never the twain shall meet.

Or put another way,we that are right and the rest.

Those that are unable to see the difference between a beating and a smack are doomed to remain in ignorance.Simply no escape.

prefect
31-08-2009, 11:14 AM
Seems to be another case of never the twain shall meet.

Or put another way,we that are right and the rest.

Those that are unable to see the difference between a beating and a smack are doomed to remain in ignorance.Simply no escape.

Dead bloody right there squire. These liberals keep referring to a smack as some form of assault.

Cicero
31-08-2009, 12:24 PM
Dead bloody right there squire. .

I must admit old boy,I have no recollection of being otherwise,but dead bloody right.:thumbs: