Good posts on anti-smacking bill

Over the last few weeks there have been some good posts about the anti-smacking bill. Peter McCaffrey has a good post comparing Tariana Turia’s different attitudes towards gangs and smacking. One important thing to remember about this anti-smacking bill is that it is not going to reduce child abuse. Those who beat children, in almost all cases, are already against the law. Changing the law to ban smacking won’t stop them. As for those small number of cases involving a parent being let off under section 59, for hitting their children with things like a horse whip ( the fact the child tried to hit his father on the head with a baseball bat is often ignored by the anti-smacking lobby), the National MP Chester Borrows proposed an ammendment to the bill to prohibit the use of reasonable force as a form of discipline, except where the harm caused is transitory and trifling. In a clear sign of ideological extremism, Sue Bradford threatens to withdrw the whole bill if such an ammendment is passed. This shows clearly that her real agenda is to ban smacking-not protect children. If anyone has any more doubt that the bill is an anti-smacking bill read this. Confirming my belief the so-called “compromise” is actually a sell-out, Steven Franks has put up an excellent post showing that from a purely legal view, the compromise changes nothing. One thing that never ceases to amaze me is why politicians are so stupid enough to pass this bill into law.

Explore posts in the same categories: Anti-smacking Bill

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: