Bradford Bitch gets her first conviction.

[Pussy]

I heard that Bradford was raped by her father. If this is true, it might explain her hatred of men but come on, go see a shrink bitch. Don't take it out on us.

This is what happens when you vote for Labour and MMP.

Her father would need to have been pissed and she would have needed a paper bag on her head. He probably only tupped her because he was too lazy to wank

[ynot slow]

For f.cks sake I don't need a law to tell me the differance between,a smack which leaves a red mark for 10 mins or so and bash which leaves a break or bruise.

Can't recall getting thrashed as a kid,maybe the odd smack,never had a strap or wooden spoon,just hand.Got worse from some of the ornery old nuns,i.e triangle scale ruler on knuckles,strap.

Don't think as kids my brother and I were rebels but we also understood when the folks said do it or stop it we did,usually just before we were about to jump out of a window,off the roof or similar stupid things that parents know will end in tears,and they were mostly correct.

[Hitcher]

1. Nobody knows any more about this case than has been published in the media to date, coverage which is Court censored and selective. It is therefore pointless trying to form a reasoned view until the facts are known.

2. The poll is too binary. There are more options for disciplining children than doing nothing or bashing them. "Have you stopping whacking your kids yet? Yes or No?" would have been just as meaningful.

[candor]

I am totally for the right of sane people to smack, but like alcohol there are some people who should steer well clear of it. Aggro types. They should walk away or delegate the smacking duties to calmer adults.

My little ears pricked up listening to the news and 2 things I heard about this case were of interest
1. this dad had been in strife over his "style" before.... hmmmm.
2. He smacked in anger, and can anyone tell me how a smack on the rear results in heavy enough shoulder bruising to come up on a photo? Huh, huh?

Worst kid I know was raised by an antismacker. Justine bit everyone (I hated visiting as I feared her teeth up till her teens) and turned out like Paris Hilton. I think they based Paris on Justine actually. Like most of us I come from a thousand year lineage of smacking forebears. To my knowledge I never experienced or saw it done in anger or unwisely in 4 generations of my extended family.

Against the smacking ban 100% but am prolly for this conviction... because he smacked in ANGER - which means there is a good chance the nature of the act was not corrective and nurturing like a mother wolf nipping her cub. But that the nature of the act was instead retributive and ego driven.

The nature of the act (and kids sense this) makes all the difference to the outcome. Loving correction including non angry smacking will produce a responsible self controlled adult with boundaries.

Hateful correction by an angry ego monster will simply produce a similar ego driven psychopathic bully, who likes to transfer its negative feeling onto someone elses shoulders to bare, as an adult.

This law is treating the general population like we are all in the 4% of adults with serious narcissistic traits, ie potential Kahuis. Who aren't law abiders anyway.... so what a waste of Parliamentary effort. I saw it all as a terribly sad and unjustifiable diversion from addressing the root causes of the problem at hand. Like the idea unfit parents have a right to retain custody - like letting drug f***ed parents just go for it etc etc. This was all a "feel good" diversion from the too hard basket if you ask me.

[tuhoerider]

I assume you'll be happy to find me a photo of that bruise and then let me bruise you to that extent?

Goodness knows you'd be able to handle it better than an 8 year old.

I'm sure you wouldn't dream of charging me with assault if I did it.

Oh, you would?

But if you were my son, someone I had a responsibility to protect, and also someone with no hope of defending themselves against me, it'd be OK? Not assault in that case?

Gotcha.

Assualt is illegal anyway whats the point of banning smacking a kid? Think the stink eye will work on a 3 yr old?

[mstriumph]

............. The children are powerless.

................

as WE, the people, are powerless against undisciplined children - unfortunately...

i was walking along a local street at lunchtime and watched, thunderstruck, as i was overtaken by a small boy of about 7 or 8, who proceded to DELIBERATELY kick over rubbish bins and street noticeboards along the pavement before ramming an abandoned shopping trolley into a parked car ...

when i recovered enough to shout "Hey you - stop that" the little arsehole picked up a stone and threw it at me

i took a few steps towards him [in a threatening manner] before i realised this is the age of political correctness and stopped - by which time he had correctly interpreted the message inherant in my actions and raced off ....

but i tell you, he has done NO GOOD WHATSOEVER to the wellbeing of anglo-immigrant/native-aborigine relations.... if the bastards want reconciliation they'll have to stop their trashy kids pinching my purse and chucking rocks at taxpayers

*mutter mutter mutter*

[Balding Eagle]

While I agree with Hitcher's position "That the media don't tell you all the facts so really you can't judge", my original opinion on the legislation is unchanged. If the kid was hurt really badly then the father could and should be charged with assault. If he was simply being disciplined with a smack by his father, then the government should f... off out of his life. The legislation was unnecessary and a waste of government's time.

As for the principle of corporal punishment, I am in favour. I don't recall being smacked by my parents but I was caned three times at college for misdemeanours that I deserved to be punished for. Sure as hell made me think and straightened me out and made me into the fine upstanding citizen I am today!! By the same token, I have heard about teachers who really abused the use of the cane and should have been strung up. Used right, the cane was a great tool that should be used on some of the little ar..holes who inhabit the classrooms of today. I have heard about all sorts of abuse of teachers which makes my hair curl (if I had any). If they had the cane today to use on the miscreants there would be fewer in the jails tomorrow.

[Manxman]

Being on his shoulder, I guess he had to restrain the child to apply the smacking? This, and if that is the case, may have been because the kid was either a little prick, or simply sick of getting his beats. The bullshit no depth article doesn't give any indication. It's not an article written to inform, it's an article written by some retarded loser who merely wants to inflame and sell. Yes, I think the 'reporter' (and I use that term lightly) is a cock.

.

Here, here. A lot of people have made very astute points on this thread. This is one of them...

[Usarka]

Mrs T aint no fool. She aint no jibba jabberin about them little punks. T wants to put some hurt on them fools. But it's the law thats the fool, fool.

[tri boy]

1. Nobody knows any more about this case than has been published in the media to date, coverage which is Court censored and selective. It is therefore pointless trying to form a reasoned view until the facts are known.

2. The poll is too binary. There are more options for disciplining children than doing nothing or bashing them. "Have you stopping whacking your kids yet? Yes or No?" would have been just as meaningful.

For f**k sake Hitcher.Nobody is suggesting thatBASHING kids is the thing to do. Sheesh, I'd expect more from you.

Re the poll. I'm a dumb prick obviously. Add what needs to be added.

[carver]

whose is the child?
the parents or the state's?

thats the way i see things

[candor]

Does this poll mean that 44 people need to be turned in to the authorities, ooh I hope Sue has no spies aboard the ship.

I'll confess first. Beulah got a smack, his only one in about 8 mths last week because he jumped on the bench after he had just been fed (dogs and horses eat before yourself)to steal food he had been forewarned not to touch - he ate my dinner, taking sly advantage of my temporary absence. It was not a lack of reaaon or knowledge it was wrong - oh the guilty face! Had he not been smacked swiftly his personality would have resulted in a repeat stunt every night ever after - an inch to a mile with this spunky boy. Bad as it felt to smack the rear, then ignore awhile to reinforce his fall from grace, I know he felt secure by the fact he was corrected. A line to toe was clarified = don't worry he sets them too.

[candor]

The child is neithers property Carver. Who owns you at the end of the day? And allegiance is to?

[carver]

The child is neithers property Carver. Who owns you at the end of the day? And allegiance is to?

i would like to believe once a child reaches adulthood he/she becomes independent. it is the parents responsibility to raise the child.
using force to discipline a child is just one of many ways of guiding it in the right direction.
actions have consequences, that is part of what discipline teaches

[Toaster]

Unfortunately the case still hasn't been heard. H pleaded guilty, so no test of the law was carried out.



No evidence was presented that the bruising was as a result of the discipline. For that reason he was only charged with the smacking, not the bruising.

Jantar it was apparently presented in the summary of facts that the child was bruised as a result of him being held down. He was charged with and pled guilty to assault which related to both the act of smacking and the act of holding him down - which allegedly caused an injury. Remember the "smacking bill" is a media term, not a term relating to the actual Act itself - which relates to acts of assault. Smacking is merely one form of assault. Under law, a kiss, a grab, touch, hold or a push are all technical assaults just as much as a slap, punch, tackle or other more violent action.

On the first matter, the judge commented that the defendant's actions were no longer allowable under the law. The facts as presented to the Court and the summary from the Judge indicated he would most have been found guilty under jury trial or certainly under a Judges hearing.

From experience I would estimate that his defence lawyer would have likely advised his client to plead guilty because he would have faced a more severe punishment if he plead not guilty and dragged it out to trial or defended hearing.