Don’t worry I’m 23 and don’t have any parenting experience .

Luke: Exactly. The Kahui twins (I’m assuming you’re a New Zealander, sorry if you’re not, type them into Google!) are a prime example. Obviously somebody was responsible for their deaths, but there’s not enough evidence to convict anyone! It’s also true that the vast majority of child abuse victims aren’t abused in public; for the simple reason that the abuser/s know what they’re doing is wrong, and often to go to great lengths to conceal the abuse.

I also see what you mean about what the parents meant by the children be “theirs”, that also makes sense, and yes, the parents SHOULD be responsible for raising their children.

As for my DUI comparison, I know reasonable force is not involved there, all I was doing was using it as another example to demonstrate that just because something is illegal (and stupid) doesn’t mean people will stop doing it.

I think the main thing that annoys me about parents who use smacking as (their main form of) punishment is that I suspect many of them do it because “It was done to me, and I turned out all right.” as opposed to have actually sat down with their partner, thought about how they’re going to raise their child, and then tried different discipline methods to find the most effective, rather than just going down the “You disobey. You get a smack” road by default, because it’s what they know.

Yes, some kids might respond well to this, but they might also respond equally well, or better, to something else.

Admittedly I’m only 20 and I’m not a parent, so my opinion doesn’t come from personal experience.

Actually. No. Scratch that. It kind of does. I work in a primary school (and, beginning very shortly, a drama school) with kids from 5 to 12 years old, some of whom have quite challenging behaviour issues. Obviously we’re not allowed to hit the children in our care, so we’re forced to think of other ways of managing their behaviour, and we keep trying stuff until we find something that works.

There is also no reasonable force involved with DUI but that is another angle to the point made by Holly .

: Grabs helmet and bunkers down :

Myself I couldn’t care less about the bible . While there choice of wording leaves some what to be desired I think those who state that its “their ” children are getting is the fact that they and not the government are responsible for raising there kids . Mind you I prefer internet forums to talk back radio . Of course the government is happy to tell people how to do there jobs while leaving others with all the responsibility.

If your logic concerning reasonable force was applied elsewhere no one would be able to defend themselves in the event they were attacked . Of course reasonable force is subjective but its an imperfect world and will remain so . I disagree with your last sentence I tend to lean more towards the idea that people should be able to use violence to defend there property’s .

Governments never get rid of pointless laws they only ever create more of them . In this case outlawing smacking has failed to address what I regard the fundamental issue to be which is that some people shouldn’t have kids in the first place . IMO to many people have kids because society expects them to do so rather then out of some genuine desire .

I think it’s also important to realise that banning smacking is not the same as banning discipline. If a parent only EVER smacks their children to discipline them I think there’s something rather wrong within their relationship, and that parent ought to reconsider their approach before their child grows up into a teenager, who is an adult in the eyes of the law, and before smacking is viewed as assault!

Brooke: I didn’t hear about that woman! That’s insane! I guess a potential loophole with this law is the fact that individual police officers are allowed to use their discretion to decide whether a case warrants an investigation or not. Surely different officers would have a different definition over what constitutes “reasonable”, especially if they, for whatever reason, supported smacking as a form of discipline themselves. :/

As for the “my child belongs to me” argument; that’s ridiculous on so many levels. Even if your child DID belong to you, that still doesn’t give you the right to do whatever you like with/to it! You’re not allowed to hit animals to “discipline” them (and I think it’s fair enough to say that a pet DOES belong to its owner, moreso than a child belongs to its parent) and you’re not allowed to use your car (or tractor or bicycle or whatever) to do whatever you like either! Bottom line, even if something is a possession, there are still rules for acceptable use and treatment of them!

It also strikes me that “smacking” is a euphemism. If people were forced to use the word “hitting” every time they referred to this act, I wonder whether those in favour of it would feel more guilt and hesitance about what they were doing. The same goes for “spanking”, although admittedly not so much here in NZ, since that tends to be viewed as a sexual act and something totally different.

Right. Closing this widow now. Before I get started on those drunk people we saw signing that petition at Sparks! o.O

Luke: Ok, now I have to ask, lol, do you support the outlawing of smacking, or oppose it?