Get ready to hit your kids...

[Tank]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4665501a6160.html

Opponents of the anti-smacking law change are celebrating after collecting enough signatures to force a referendum.

Kiwi Party leader and petition organiser Larry Baldock said today that the petition had been certified by the Clerk of the House as having enough valid signatures.

"This is great news and a huge victory," he said.

When the petition was originally handed to the Clerk on February 29, 285,027 valid signatures were needed. It failed because too many were ruled to be invalid.

This time, around 310,000 signatures were valid - 25,000 more than required to force a referendum.

The referendum will be on the question: "should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?"

Mr Baldock called for the refendum to be held with this year's election.

"None of the reasons being given by the Prime Minister for delaying it make any sense at all, and are simply a tactic for her to try and avoid this being an eleKiwi Party leader and petition organiser Larry Baldock said today that the petition had been certified by the Clerk of the House as having enough valid signatures.

"This is great news and a huge victory," he said.

When the petition was originally handed to the Clerk on February 29, 285,027 valid signatures were needed. It failed because too many were ruled to be invalid.

This time, around 310,000 signatures were valid - 25,000 more than required to force a referendum.

The referendum will be on the question: "should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?"

Mr Baldock called for the refendum to be held with this year's election.

"None of the reasons being given by the Prime Minister for delaying it make any sense at all, and are simply a tactic for her to try and avoid this being an election issue. She will not drown out the voice of the people and should realise there is no point further angering everyone by delaying the inevitable."

In June, Helen Clark said it was unlikely the referendum could be held with the election.

"Just in terms of sheer organisation I don't think that is possible."




Awesome - Im off home to smack the kids up a bit just to get some practice in - I dont want to be rusty when they overturn this silly legislation

[MIXONE]

Shit the dog will be happy about that.I will be able to hit the kids again rather than kick his arse.

[FJRider]

Shit the dog will be happy about that.I will be able to hit the kids again rather than kick his arse.

The outcome of the referendum does NOT guarantee ANY laws will be changed after the election. The number of signatures, compared to number of potential voters, will not guarantee their desired outcome.

[ManDownUnder]

yeah na... I wish it worked that way but the might of the UN ("THOU SHALT NOT SMACK") outweighs that of 310,000 kiwi citizens.

Govt policy to appease both opposing requirements is therefore
1) Duck dodge and avoid said topic till they leave office (however long that takes)
2) Blame the new govt for not taking action.

[ManDownUnder]

Shit the dog will be happy about that.I will be able to hit the kids again

Sue Bradford lives at your place???

[MIXONE]

Sue Bradford lives at your place???

If she did she'd be fighting the dog for something to eat and somewhere to sleep.

[nodrog:Me]

if they change it i would like to see it be made equal for all New Zealanders. i dont have any kids, but somtimes i would like to be able to walk down the street and smack over other peoples.

[mstriumph]

love it!!
i am already drawing up a list of other people's kids to chastise ----- ohhhh the sweet anticipation

[Devil]

I'm warming up already!

[FJRider]

if they change it i would like to see it be made equal for all New Zealanders. i dont have any kids, but somtimes i would like to be able to walk down the street and smack over other peoples.

Its law you can't smack your OWN kids... self defence ???

[ManDownUnder]

love it!!
i am already drawing up a list of other people's kids to chastise ----- ohhhh the sweet anticipation

I'll be childish if you promise to put me across your knee...

[Colapop]

Oooo goody - a referendum. We've had those before, right? And they did about as much good as this one will do...

BTW - you've never been legally allowed to beat up your kids, why did we need another law to tell us that it's not ok?

[spookytooth]

i am going to have to find other ppls kids to beat on. Mine have gotten way to big now

[jrandom]

BTW - you've never been legally allowed to beat up your kids, why did we need another law to tell us that it's not ok?

It's about whether using 'reasonable force' for the purpose of correction is a defence to a charge of assault against one's kid(s).

Right now, it's not. Anything that's an assault against another adult is an assault against your own child, regardless of whether you were doing it to the kid to punish them for bad behaviour or not.

And it's a bloody hard question to answer as to whether that should or shouldn't be the case.

I was walloped a bit as a kid, as most of our generation were, and I can tell you for sure it never did me any good. Just made me loathe authority even more.

Whereas some folk swear with hand on heart that being smacked now and then did them a world of good.

I think the variable is parents, not the methods applied, to be honest. Good parents will always raise good kids, whether or not they use physical pain as a deterrent, and useless parents will always raise fuckups, whether or not they ever lay a hand on them.

Personally?

I remember how I felt being beaten as a kid, and I don't think any other child should ever have to feel that way.

So I support the law in its current form, inconvenient as it may be for well-intentioned-but-frustrated parents.

[Colapop]

The term 'reasonable force' is subjective. What is reasonable? The goalposts change according to social concience at any particular time. The punishment I was subjected to as a child is neither here nor there right now. Right now it is a determining the future