Smacking

[Easy 10]

But extremes seem to illustrate the point quite well. You don\'t want to listen when I offer up the point that children don\'t learn from violence. Why can\'t you explain something to them?

\"Oh my child has just run into the road and almost hurt himself very seriously I know just so I make sure he never hurts himself I\'ll hurt him\".

Do you see where the flaw in that is?

This is fundamentally where we are going to disagree. You consider smacking a child as an outright act of VIOLENCE, because in adult life, if we strike out and punch another adult, that in itself is an act of violence. You will not acknowledge that there is a difference.

A parent is directly responsible for the behaviour of their child, and is responsible for teaching them right from wrong, guiding them and disciplining them as they grow into young adults. Part of that discipline, as an absolute last resort, can include a smack when that child has seriously crossed a dangerous or unacceptable line. That,a s far as I am concerned, is not violence, unless it descends into a beating.

An adult striking another adult is an ENTIRELY different matter altogether. No adult can be considered \"responsible\" for another adult. As grown ups, we are responsible for ourselves, and should have built up the experience and life skills to handle situations without hitting each other. You have no right to discipline me on anything, and I have no right to discipline you. Any attempt by either of us to do so would, inevitably, lead to VIOLENCE.

There is a fundemental difference there. But if you consider it all the same thing, we will never come close to agreeing.

 

[Nibble]

Ummm. But OK as a retaliatory tool?
political tool?
Law enforcement tool?

Couple of points there.

Firstly we are talking about children and so I think phrases like law enforcement are a bit strong.

But when used on adults Law enforcement should use force. But there is a differance between violence and force. I have arrested thousands of people in my previous career and I only ever had to use violence once. Force on may an occasion, but not violence.


As a retaliation, well if your life depends on it or it is another adult that is happy to have a fair fight I can't see why I wouldn't approve of abit of a ding dong!

 

[Rusthall Seagull]

This is fundamentally where we are going to disagree. You consider smacking a child as an outright act of VIOLENCE, because in adult life, if we strike out and punch another adult, that in itself is an act of violence. You will not acknowledge that there is a difference.

A parent is directly responsible for the behaviour of their child, and is responsible for teaching them right from wrong, guiding them and disciplining them as they grow into young adults. Part of that discipline, as an absolute last resort, can include a smack when that child has seriously crossed a dangerous or unacceptable line. That,a s far as I am concerned, is not violence, unless it descends into a beating.

An adult striking another adult is an ENTIRELY different matter altogether. No adult can be considered \"responsible\" for another adult. As grown ups, we are responsible for ourselves, and should have built up the experience and life skills to handle situations without hitting each other. You have no right to discipline me on anything, and I have no right to discipline you. Any attempt by either of us to do so would, inevitably, lead to VIOLENCE.

There is a fundemental difference there. But if you consider it all the same thing, we will never come close to agreeing.

but this is where you and I are going to disagree Easy.......you think that NUBBLE will understand a well thought out, logical, sensible post....I however.......

 

[Nibble]

This is fundamentally where we are going to disagree. You consider smacking a child as an outright act of VIOLENCE, because in adult life, if we strike out and punch another adult, that in itself is an act of violence. You will not acknowledge that there is a difference.

A parent is directly responsible for the behaviour of their child, and is responsible for teaching them right from wrong, guiding them and disciplining them as they grow into young adults. Part of that discipline, as an absolute last resort, can include a smack when that child has seriously crossed a dangerous or unacceptable line. That,a s far as I am concerned, is not violence, unless it descends into a beating.

An adult striking another adult is an ENTIRELY different matter altogether. No adult can be considered \"responsible\" for another adult. As grown ups, we are responsible for ourselves, and should have built up the experience and life skills to handle situations without hitting each other. You have no right to discipline me on anything, and I have no right to discipline you. Any attempt by either of us to do so would, inevitably, lead to VIOLENCE.

I agree on some levels but you are right, I can't acknowledge violence as a legitimate tool of punishment, discipline or education.

 

[Nibble]

but this is where you and I are going to disagree Easy.......you think that NUBBLE will understand a well thought out, logical, sensible post....I however.......

am a drunk wind up merchant.

 

[Nibble]

Nubble, that doesn't even make sense?

 

[Rusthall Seagull]

am a drunk wind up merchant.

what ?

 

[Rusthall Seagull]

Nubble, that doesn't even make sense?

http://www.virtualimage.co.uk/html/nubble_express.htm

 

[Nibble]

what ?

Exactly.

 

[nail-Z]

This is fundamentally where we are going to disagree. You consider smacking a child as an outright act of VIOLENCE, because in adult life, if we strike out and punch another adult, that in itself is an act of violence. You will not acknowledge that there is a difference.

A parent is directly responsible for the behaviour of their child, and is responsible for teaching them right from wrong, guiding them and disciplining them as they grow into young adults. Part of that discipline, as an absolute last resort, can include a smack when that child has seriously crossed a dangerous or unacceptable line. That,a s far as I am concerned, is not violence, unless it descends into a beating.

An adult striking another adult is an ENTIRELY different matter altogether. No adult can be considered \"responsible\" for another adult. As grown ups, we are responsible for ourselves, and should have built up the experience and life skills to handle situations without hitting each other. You have no right to discipline me on anything, and I have no right to discipline you. Any attempt by either of us to do so would, inevitably, lead to VIOLENCE.

There is a fundemental difference there. But if you consider it all the same thing, we will never come close to agreeing.

What about striking a cat?

:runsforcover:

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

or a retarded cat ?

 

[Easy 10]

I agree on some levels but you are right, I can\'t acknowledge violence as a legitimate tool of punishment, discipline or education.

Thats my point.
You consider disciplining a child with a smack is an act of violence against them, in the same way as if I walked up to you in the street and gave you a slap for looking at me funny.

 

[Nibble]

Ok let me use an extreme example. Say you are the carer of a mentally handicapped adult. Say they have the mind of a toddler. Say they step into the road. Thay are in your charge, they have the mind of a five year old and you are responsible for teaching them road safety. Do you think it would be acceptable to swipe that person around the bum?

 

[Easy 10]

What about striking a cat?

:runsforcover:

I;ve not seen it since. Job done.

 

[Rusthall Seagull]

Ok let me use an extreme example. Say you are the carer of a mentally handicapped adult. Say they have the mind of a toddler. Say they step into the road. Thay are in your charge, they have the mind of a five year old and you are responsible for teaching them road safety. Do you think it would be acceptable to swipe that person around the bum?

nope, that is what Tazers were invented for.......

hicuuuuuup.......

 

[Easy 10]

Ok let me use an extreme example. Say you are the carer of a mentally handicapped adult. Say they have the mind of a toddler. Say they step into the road. Thay are in your charge, they have the mind of a five year old and you are responsible for teaching them road safety. Do you think it would be acceptable to swipe that person around the bum?

These daft examples do you no favours.
The chances are, if they are permanently retarded to the age of a toddler, my guess would be that they would probably be incapable of learning anything, and wouldnt even be able to comprehend what it was they had been smacked for. Again though, I have absolutely NO expertise in disciplining the mentally handicapped, so its all a bit of an irrlevence really.

 

[Nibble]

It's nice to see that when I make a valid point it is ignored. Genius.

 

[Gritt23]

What I always find so sad about the whole "smacking" debate is that it has become an issue in a valiant attempt to stop the arse-end of society from beating their kids, but the decent people in society who would never imagine being violent towards their own children end up being made to feel guilty for disciplining their children with mild smack, while those scum-suckers in society who leave their kids black and blue, could give a flying f*** about any of this and will carry on doing as they have always done.

Before you leap all over me Nibble, I am also drawing a clear distinction between a smack and a beating. The latter is a clear act of violence, the former most certainly isn't.

 

[Rusthall Seagull]

It's nice to see that when I make a valid point it is ignored. Genius.

Now, let me see.....you make a point.....EASY responds......you are ignored ? Have I missed something in my drunken stupor?

 

[Nibble]

These daft examples do you no favours.
The chances are, if they are permanently retarded to the age of a toddler, my guess would be that they would probably be incapable of learning anything, and wouldnt even be able to comprehend what it was they had been smacked for. Again though, I have absolutely NO expertise in disciplining the mentally handicapped, so its all a bit of an irrlevence really.

They only seem daft to you because you are fixated with the priveledge of being able to smack a child. Anything that might shine a bit of light on that narrow minded method is rejected outright as daft. You just see it as your right and you can do it when you deem it necessary. When you deem it necessary to inflict pain on another person, another person who is smaller, weaker and esily confused, you do it.