What would you have done?

[LV XD9]

I won't draw a line.

Of course not.

But there is clearly a difference between slapping an ass and punching a face.

Both inflict pain on a person too small and weak to defend themselves. Both are physically striking someone resulting in the victim feeling pain.

A child is dependent on a parent for everything, JUST LIKE YOU SAID, and that includes discipline. {Quote edited to replace irrelevant part (in bold) that was previously snipped for brevity} Physical discipline is not appropriate for every reminder, but it is not inappropriate at times.

Discipline does not have to mean physically striking a child - there are other ways. A parent has the responsibility of feeding, clothing, and sheltering their children, but that does not give said parent the right to punish them by committing assault whenever the child does something they don't like.

Think about disparity of force for a second. I've seen it brought up many times on this site when discussing a woman being attacked by a man and using disparity of force as a justification for using lethal force to stop the threat. Now think about the difference in size and strength between a small child and a grown adult.

You are responsible for your child; it is not a free adult that has privacy or freedom from non-assault touching from you.

Upon first glance at the NRS, it does not appear that what you described above (slapping an ass of a child) would constitute "non-assault touching," but I could be mistaken. It sure seems like it would be assault and battery, especially if you replace the child in the example with some random stranger. If it's assault and battery with a stranger, it makes sense that it would be considered at least as bad when the victim is a small child.


***Post edited (at request of MAC702) to replace full quote that was previously snipped for brevity.

 

[MAC702]

Of course not.

Both inflict pain on a person too small and weak to defend themselves. Both are physically striking someone resulting in the victim feeling pain.

Discipline does not have to mean physically striking a child - there are other ways. A parent has the responsibility of feeding, clothing, and sheltering their children, but that does not give said parent the right to punish them by committing assault whenever the child does something they don't like.

Think about disparity of force for a second. I've seen it brought up many times on this site when discussing a woman being attacked by a man and using disparity of force as a justification for using lethal force to stop the threat. Now think about the difference in size and strength between a small child and a grown adult.


Upon first glance at the NRS, it does not appear that what you described above (slapping an ass of a child) would constitute "non-assault touching," but I could be mistaken. It sure seems like it would be assault and battery, especially if you replace the child in the example with some random stranger. If it's assault and battery with a stranger, it makes sense that it would be considered at least as bad when the victim is a small child.

You are making the same argument, and ignoring everything I said about it the first time you made it. You even deliberately snipped my statement about physical discipline not always being the appropriate discipline because it works better for your strawman. You did not use ellipses or any other indication that you took me out of context either. That is a rule violation for a reason.

How can you possible replace YOUR CHILD with a random stranger and make any kind of sense? Would you wipe clean the genitals of the man in the stall next to you if you think he didn't do a good enough job? Would you insist if he resisted?

EDIT: So now it was an "irrelevent" part that was "snipped for brevity?" Seriously? Yet in your reply to it, you use the same idea as the part you snipped in an attempt to correct the part you didn't snip.

 

[MAC702]

I won't draw a line...

Of course not....

Explain, please. What are you insinuating?

Actually, let's make YOU draw a line on something. When EXACTLY is the time in their life that you can use nothing but your words to stop a child from doing something bad?

 

[LV XD9]

You are making the same argument, and ignoring everything I said about it the first time you made it. You even deliberately snipped my statement about physical discipline not always being the appropriate discipline because it works better for your strawman. You did not use ellipses or any other indication that you took me out of context either. That is a rule violation for a reason.

I snipped it for brevity's sake, but have replaced the irrelevant part where you attempted to justify hitting children on their butt under certain circumstances. That in no way changes anything that was posted in response. There was no strawman, despite your claims to the contrary.

But really, the part you're complaining about me snipping was addressing something no one has claimed. No one here said that anyone believed that physical discipline is always appropriate, so your argument was really the strawman, if you stop and think about it.

How can you possible replace YOUR CHILD with a random stranger and make any kind of sense?

Simple. You hit a stranger for doing something you don't like, you're charged with assault and battery. If you hit your child for doing something you don't like, why should that not result in the same consequences? Shouldn't it be worse, since in the second example the victim is much smaller and weaker and incapable of defending themselves in any way?

Would you wipe clean the genitals of the man in the stall next to you if you think he didn't do a good enough job? Would you insist if he resisted?

Caring for your child does not give you permission to hurt them when they do something you don't like. You don't get to brag about things like wiping your kid's butt, because you're supposed to do that. You're expected to feed and clothe them. Doing as expected doesn't give you carte blanche to discipline your child in any way you see fit. Likewise, being responsible, to a certain point, for the actions of your child is also not justification for using whatever sort of physical discipline you see fit. These are some of the consequences to having children.

 

[MAC702]

...Caring for your child does not give you permission to hurt them when they do something you don't like...

Ah, the rub, finally.

Define "hurt."

 

[MAC702]

...No one here said that anyone believed that physical discipline is always appropriate, so your argument was really the strawman, if you stop and think about it...

No, a strawman is built, falsely attributed, and then attacked.

Simply adding information is not a strawman. I did not attribute the information to anyone, nor attack them for having [not] said it.

 

[LV XD9]

Explain, please. What are you insinuating?

Actually, let's make YOU draw a line on something. When EXACTLY is the time in their life that you can use nothing but your words to stop a child from doing something bad?

You didn't quote the whole exchange.

Hitting and spanking are two very different things and to treat them the same is as criminal as hitting, in my opinion.

How do you differentiate between hitting and spanking? Where, in your mind, does spanking cease to be spanking and begin to be hitting?

I won't draw a line. {Snip, as to not offend, even though the link to the full quote, as always, is included with the quote}

Of course not.

You made a claim, but couldn't actually back it up with anything substantive. Couldn't even come up with one flimsy excuse.

Of course, it could be because, on some level, even you understand that the difference between hitting and spanking is semantics at best. After all, spanking is just another way of saying "hitting on the butt with a hand or physical object."

And no, you don't get to refuse to back up what you say and then turn it around on me. You made the claim that hitting and spanking are "two very different things," so the onus is on you. Nice try, though.

 

[LV XD9]

Ah, the rub, finally.

Define "hurt."

To cause pain. And yes, hitting a child (even on their butt) causes them pain.

And that's just the physical part....

 

[MAC702]

...that does not give said parent the right to punish them by committing assault whenever the child does something they don't like. ...

Is it your intention to imply that those who advocate the legitimacy of physical discipline are this way? I think this is likely repulsive to all parents.

 

[MAC702]

To cause pain. And yes, hitting a child (even on their butt) causes them pain.

And that's just the physical part....

Under what time period should we constrain ourselves when determining when the "pain" is to be avoided?

 

[MAC702]

...You made the claim that hitting and spanking are "two very different things," so the onus is on you. Nice try, though.

I see what the confusion is now. Let me try this, instead. Thank you for the exchange that helped me see the confusion.

In the context I tried unsuccessfully to imply, the extremely generic term of "hitting" was more representative of punching, beating, and abusive slapping. I define spanking as a very narrow application of physical "hitting", involving slapping on the fleshy buttocks.

If someone "spanks" a child, and you accuse them of "hitting" a child, you are making an extremely unfair, and arguably (apparently) morally wrong, description.

 

[Anonymouse]

I won't draw a line. But there is clearly a difference between slapping an ass and punching a face.

A child is dependent on a parent for everything, JUST LIKE YOU SAID, and that includes discipline. Physical discipline is not appropriate for every reminder, but it is not inappropriate at times. You are responsible for your child; it is not a free adult that has privacy or freedom from non-assault touching from you.

Not necessarily...

My bio father beat me. So I remember what abuse is. Spanking and even the occasional punch is not necessarily abusive or wrong.

I was spanked a lot by my step father. Frankly I deserved it.

One time when I was 13, in public, I told my mother to shut up. My stepfather came home, punched me in the face and knocked me out. I deserved it. I'm now 35 and have never disrespected my mother since. Not once. Only time he ever hit me outside of a spanking..

Shrug. Not abuse...

Each has its place. Obviously a teenager should rarely be punched and then in the most dire if circumstances. A young child never. Spankings should occur for serious offenses. Lesser punishments should apply for lesser offenses.

The shock of the punch set me straight. I never was even spanked after that.

Any problem can be solved by the proper application of force.

Too much force though makes it lose its usefulness. Beat downs are never good. Lol...

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[LV XD9]

Not necessarily...

My bio father beat me. So I remember what abuse is. Spanking and even the occasional punch is not necessarily abusive or wrong.

I was spanked a lot by my step father. Frankly I deserved it.

One time when I was 13, in public, I told my mother to shut up. My stepfather came home, punched me in the face and knocked me out. I deserved it. I'm now 35 and have never disrespected my mother since. Not once. Only time he ever hit me outside of a spanking..

Shrug. Not abuse...

Each has its place. Obviously a teenager should rarely be punched and then in the most dire if circumstances. A young child never. Spankings should occur for serious offenses. Lesser punishments should apply for lesser offenses.

The shock of the punch set me straight. I never was even spanked after that.

Any problem can be solved by the proper application of force.

Too much force though makes it lose its usefulness. Beat downs are never good. Lol...

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

And your mother remained married to that psychopath? She didn't immediately call the cops and have him locked up?!? He could have killed you, you know.

I know you're unwilling (or unable) to admit it, but you were most definitely abused. You most certainly did not deserve to be hit in the face by that d-bag. Punching a thirteen year old kid in the face (hard enough to knock him out, no less) for telling his mother to shut up in public is the act of a sociopath.

You have both my empathy and my sympathy. I truly hope you don't perpetuate the cycle with your own children.

 

[Anonymouse]

And your mother remained married to that psychopath? She didn't immediately call the cops and have him locked up?!? He could have killed you, you know.

I know you're unwilling (or unable) to admit it, but you were most definitely abused. You most certainly did not deserve to be hit in the face by that d-bag. Punching a thirteen year old kid in the face (hard enough to knock him out, no less) for telling his mother to shut up in public is the act of a sociopath.

You have both my empathy and my sympathy. I truly hope you don't perpetuate the cycle with your own children.

Lol. My mother divorced my bio father.

My STEPfather most assuredly did not abuse me. If it wasn't for him I'd be dead or a felon. Because of him I'm a vet and now a nurse. Scratch that I was a felon. By 13 I was stealing cars, breaking into houses, using drugs and rolling with the Latin Kings. That punch saved my ****ing life.

Shrug...

The problem with the world is that the people that need their *** kicked almost never get it...

I got lucky. My stepfather did it instead of Officer Friendly or some rival banger...

You know what the life expectancy and/or outlook of a black male in a gang is???

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[LV XD9]

Lol. My mother divorced my bio father.

Yet she didn't divorce the man who punched he son in the face hard enough to knock him out?!? Whatever happened to a parent's natural drive to protect their children? Does it just disappear in some people when the kid becomes a mouthy (aka normal) teenager?

My STEPfather most assuredly did not abuse me.

Again, whether you're able to admit it or not, he most certainly did. Punching a boy in the face for telling his mother to shut up is not a rational, normal thing to do. It's what you do when you're a sociopath who has no internal governor stopping you from behaving psychotically.

Again, you have my sympathy and empathy. For your children's sake, I hope you don't perpetuate the cycle of violence.


Edited to address stuff added to quoted post:

By 13 I was stealing cars, breaking into houses, using drugs and rolling with the Latin Kings. That punch saved my ****ing life.

Right, but he didn't punch you to stop you from stealing cars, breaking into houses, using drugs and rolling with the Latin Kings, right? He punched you because you told your mother to shut up in public, right? So the outcome was incidental - he wasn't trying to stop your life of crime, he was angry that you told his wife to shut up and punished you with overwhelming force.

Sounds like you've had a rough life, with practically zero positive roll models during your youth. I'm glad you were able to overcome what sounds like a pretty terrible childhood. Thank you for sharing your story.

 

[Anonymouse]

Yet she didn't divorce the man who punched he son in the face hard enough to knock him out?!? Whatever happened to a parent's natural drive to protect their children? Does it just disappear in some people when the kid becomes a mouthy (aka normal) teenager?


Again, whether you're able to admit it or not, he most certainly did. Punching a boy in the face for telling his mother to shut up is not a rational, normal thing to do. It's what you do when you're a sociopath who has no internal governor stopping you from behaving psychotically.

Again, you have my sympathy and empathy. For your children's sake, I hope you don't perpetuate the cycle of violence.

Mouthy???

Where are you from? The suburbs??? Lol You know what 13 year olds do where I grew up???

Reread my post. Then go watch the movie Colors. (Dating myself lol) That's where I am from. No white picket fences there.

You know what I would have had to do if I wanted to go through initiation???

Forget saving my life. He probably saved your life.



Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Anonymouse]

Yet she didn't divorce the man who punched he son in the face hard enough to knock him out?!? Whatever happened to a parent's natural drive to protect their children? Does it just disappear in some people when the kid becomes a mouthy (aka normal) teenager?


Again, whether you're able to admit it or not, he most certainly did. Punching a boy in the face for telling his mother to shut up is not a rational, normal thing to do. It's what you do when you're a sociopath who has no internal governor stopping you from behaving psychotically.

Again, you have my sympathy and empathy. For your children's sake, I hope you don't perpetuate the cycle of violence.


Edited to address stuff added to quoted post:

Right, but he didn't punch you to stop you from stealing cars, breaking into houses, using drugs and rolling with the Latin Kings, right? He punched you because you told your mother to shut up in public, right? So the outcome was incidental - he wasn't trying to stop your life of crime, he was angry that you told his wife to shut up and punished you with overwhelming force.

Sounds like you've had a rough life, with practically zero positive roll models during your youth. I'm glad you were able to overcome what sounds like a pretty terrible childhood. Thank you for sharing your story.

Actually yes he did. Publicly disrespecting my mother was the end result of my downward spiral.

Post punch all of that ended.

That's not abuse. Well it wasn't before the world became PC.

It wasn't spiteful or done in some drunken rage, it was necessary and it was effective.

And I've never committed a crime or disrespected my mother since. Well I speed.

Damn good parenting I'd say.



Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[FallonJeeper]

LV XD9 I see all of the posts you've made, giving your opinion on how people should not discipline their children. Just out of curiosity, how do you discipline your children, and how effective is it?

 

[peckerwood1986]

From what I remember the law states that you can slap your child on the butt up to 3 times as long as it not in anger and it is with a open hand . That being said I have two daughters both under 10 and both are very well behaved. I get compliments about it all the time. If you do not beleave me that's fine but if you meet my kids you will understand. I see kids doing what they want and then I hear parents say kids will be kids. I do spank my kids when need be. Never out of anger and just enough to get their attention. My kids will be raised with respect and morals. I think that more people need to spank their kids not abuse but spank and discipline them. Oh yea if I ever told my mom to shut up my dad would have knocked me out even if I was 30 and I would not blame him. I would have done the same thing. That being said everyone has the right to raise their children as they see fit. I have friends who do not beleave in spanking. To be honest their kids do what they want because they know that the worst they get is yelled at.

 

[Tawnos]

LV XD9 I see all of the posts you've made, giving your opinion on how people should not discipline their children. Just out of curiosity, how do you discipline your children, and how effective is it?

I'm not LV XD9, but I have read quite a bit on studies of kids, have three much younger (14-18 years) brothers I have taken care of before, and understand both the research and how it conflicts with our "lizard brain" desire to exact physical reminders of a "shouldn't do" situation.

The short of it (and all I really have time for right now, I have to code this thing by end of week and the web crawler code is labyrinthine) is that while spanking or otherwise striking a child may not have lasting residual effects, it does not do better at curbing the desired behavior than alternative punishments, and children punished by such methods are statistically more likely to have problems as they get older. In short, it does not help, but it may hurt the kid.

And while I've tangled with people calling such research no more than "liberal bs" or something like that, the facts aren't swayed by political ideology. I'm not saying you can't spank your child. I'm saying it's ineffective, often counter-productive, and can inadvertently lead to abuse that goes beyond mere physical discipline.