Smacking Bill again

[mashman]

Looks like there are people that want this sorted.

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-sto...ng-law-change/

Whilst the article says that only 2 people have been prosecuted. Family First have been producing the "overviews" of the cases and in several instances, more than 2, they list PROSECUTED next to the case... Someone's telling porkies...

http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/index.cfm/Smacking_Cases

[rainman]

Why does this matter so much to some people?

And BTW, a poll by Curia (Nat's tame polling co) and some "facts" quoted by Family First are unlikely to be seen as fair and balanced, if that's what you were going for.

[bogan]

Wasnt there a referendum that was 80% in favour of overturning the law?

[mashman]

Why does this matter so much to some people?

And BTW, a poll by Curia (Nat's tame polling co) and some "facts" quoted by Family First are unlikely to be seen as fair and balanced, if that's what you were going for.

Have you seen what kids are capable of? This is kids we're talking about here... ya know, thems with know knowledge... how do you instill boundaries in a child that is adamant that they know it all becauswe they can think? Shout at them? Did you read the cases on the family first site... the comments of the kids, the rend in the family unit because punishment/discipline/whatever you call it was being administered by the one person who knows the child best... This shows how out of touch with the people these fuckers in their Beehive are... and how dare they tell me how to bring up my child when they'd struggle to even name her... let alone know what "punishment" works for her... It's a disgrace... and teachers, police, firemen, the public etc... all pay for it in one way or another....

Wasnt there a referendum that was 80% in favour of overturning the law?

Yup, but they DONT have to act on it, apparantly... it wasn't seen as a binding referendum

[SPORK]

Smacking Bill again?

I can think of a few Bills that could do with it.

[Maki]

Poor Bill.

[bogan]

Yup, but they DONT have to act on it, apparantly... it wasn't seen as a binding referendum

shows what the politicians think of public opinion though doesn't it. Simply having majority isn't enough, I gotta wonder how it can be overturned when they just ignore public opinion.

[mashman]

shows what the politicians think of public opinion though doesn't it. Simply having majority isn't enough, I gotta wonder how it can be overturned when they just ignore public opinion.

The problem is they think the law is working... at least that's what the party line is.

[Marmoot]

Whilst the article says that only 2 people have been prosecuted. Family First have been producing the "overviews" of the cases and in several instances, more than 2, they list PROSECUTED next to the case... Someone's telling porkies...

If there are only 2 people prosecuted so far:
- If the 2 are guilty, the law is not helping. The number of child abuse case in NZ is far above 2 and that law is not helping.
- If the law is not intended to help alleviate child abuse, the law is pointless, and thus is not needed.
- If the law is intended to help alleviate child abuse, clearly it is not working as intended.
- If the 2 are innocent, the law is not working as intended. No innocent citizen should be prosecuted by the proper law.

Weird....

[rainman]

Have you seen what kids are capable of? This is kids we're talking about here... ya know, thems with know knowledge... how do you instill boundaries in a child that is adamant that they know it all becauswe they can think? Shout at them? Did you read the cases on the family first site... the comments of the kids, the rend in the family unit because punishment/discipline/whatever you call it was being administered by the one person who knows the child best... This shows how out of touch with the people these fuckers in their Beehive are... and how dare they tell me how to bring up my child when they'd struggle to even name her... let alone know what "punishment" works for her... It's a disgrace... and teachers, police, firemen, the public etc... all pay for it in one way or another....

Well, in general it's a state prerogative to sanction and punish violence, so it's quite within normal practice for the state to tell you that you can't beat your kids. They tell you that you can't beat adults, don't they?

And yes, I know a fair bit about kids, and have two of my own - who are fairly well-adjusted, happy and co-operative. Yes, we occasionally have "boundary-pushing" issues (one of my kids is 11 )

These issues aren't best addressed by smacking, and usually not even by yelling (sometimes, but hey, I'm human). When I was a kid I was generally not smacked (maybe when I was very young, can't remember), and I haven't generally smacked my kids (certainly not for years and years). If you have to smack, "ur doin it rong". Kids are more likely to respect the boundaries you set when you love them, listen to them (not obey them, not hear them, but listen to them), treat them like valuable people in their own right, and respect them. Some will play up whatever you do - but smacking doesn't help here either.

Parenting's a grand game of negotiation - not forcing them to your will. And no-one said it was easy, buddy.

If there are only 2 people prosecuted so far:
- If the 2 are guilty, the law is not helping. The number of child abuse case in NZ is far above 2 and that law is not helping.
- If the law is not intended to help alleviate child abuse, the law is pointless, and thus is not needed.
- If the law is intended to help alleviate child abuse, clearly it is not working as intended.
- If the 2 are innocent, the law is not working as intended. No innocent citizen should be prosecuted by the proper law.

You missed a case:
- If 2 people are guilty and would formerly have escaped prosecution under S59, then the law is working.

S59 repeal will not eradicate child abuse in NZ. Nor will smacking, as it happens. The remedy with the best chance of success is actually greater social equality, and improved economic circumstances for the lowest socio-economic groups. Preferably through greater employment. Be nice to see some policy heading in that direction, but I'm not holding my breath.

[SPman]

FFS! What is the big deal? It's not an "anti smacking bill" - it's a bill designed to do away with the excuse of disciplining a child as an excuse for assault and thuggery on a child! All parties agreed on it and voted for it - why do some people seem so incensed about that - do they actually enjoy people beating up kids and then getting off by claiming "parental correction"! Are they so blinded by hatred they can't see the intent or are they just fucking stupid!
Sick fuckers!

[Mudfart]

its a joke. NZ where everything is so pc, its insane. except for acceptable violence. we love it.
we have one of the highest murder rates per capita in the world. and we love to make others hurt, scared, feel the pain. biatch.
oh yes in my own little existence, i can make someone who is 1/4 my weight and size fear me, yeah bring it on. I so wish that was my work collegues, who coincidentally im not allowed to sort issues out anymore with violence, but used to be!.
god save NZ......
because we have fucked it up.

[MisterD]

FFS! What is the big deal? It's not an "anti smacking bill" - it's a bill designed to do away with the excuse of disciplining a child as an excuse for assault and thuggery on a child! All parties agreed on it and voted for it - why do some people seem so incensed about that - do they actually enjoy people beating up kids and then getting off by claiming "parental correction"! Are they so blinded by hatred they can't see the intent or are they just fucking stupid!
Sick fuckers!

Do we have to go over this all again? What incenses people, is that the left-wing social-engineering types used a couple of freak jury decisions as a basis to legislate away a parent's right to discipline their children as they see fit. It was never about protecting children for Bradford, it was about increasing state control into the home.

Laws should reflect society's beliefs not be used as a blunt instrument to try to change them - a law that most people think is wrong, or will ignore, is a stupid law.

I'll repeat, kids need three things:
Love
Boundaries
Consequences for crossing those boundaries

The anti-smacking crowd should be focussing their attention on why too many children (especially those of Maori and beneficiaries) don't get item (1) and quit worrying about how some parents choose to apply item (3).

[mashman]

Children are different and as such some can be dealt with using reason, some using shouting and some using a smack... some are beaten black and blue, shoved in as drier etc... beaten with a stick and so on... I understand what the law is attempting to do... but the fact that the Police, Courts, CYF's etc... need clarification under the law as to what is deemed "reasonable" force... how can they then pursue a conviction? Make it a zero tolerance law... What's the damage to the child from not receiving a smack on the bum? in future years the child may well become uncontrolable at school? the child may repeatedly smack other kids (they don't just see this at home)? the limit is the imagination... What's the damage of investigations... check out the FAMILY FIRST SITE ABOVE...

Personally yes. I smack my children. Have I ever done it as a knee jerk reaction. Yes, once or twice and I beg for forgiveness, instantly, in exactly the same way as I would have of for "hurting" any member of my family, or society for that matter, if I was wrong... My kids are severely traumatised by my approach to parenting (sarcasm)... my 18yr old has had a terrible time with repressed memories... So bad he's gone to University, flies half way around the world to see his family and hugs me whenever we meet etc... everyone he meets loves him, he really must be insecure and worried that i'll start beating him now that he's older...

How often do I smack my children. Maybe once a week, perhaps twice. How often do I warn them before I smack them... EVERYTIME... they know what's coming, but they are testing their limits as far as I'm concerned... no more no less...

[Marmoot]

You missed a case:
- If 2 people are guilty and would formerly have escaped prosecution under S59, then the law is working.

You're missing my case. If they are, then how come there's only two while during such period so many kids were abused, despite this law being said as "functioning as intended".