California lawmaker proposes no spanking law.

[reetpleat]

Lincsong,

It isn't communism per se, call it by its proper name, totalitarianism or tyranny. This sort of "society (us in power) will tell you what's best" comes equally from the right and left of the political spectrum. Calling it "communism" gives the totalitarians on the right who claim to be "conservatives" an out.

As for those who say "well, this should be legislated"; I challenge you to find one "reasonable restriction" that has not been used as justification to gradually increase state control over the individual. You won't be able to.

State control is ALWAYS evil. It ALWAYS results in increasing tyranny and lack of freedom.

There are laws against abuse. Those who abuse anything, children, animals or any personal freedom should be dealt with as individuals. Preemptive, "for your own good" legislation is the worst sort of arrogance.

Who are you people to say "Well, I'm perfect, it's those people who need to be controlled"? That is not only patently elitist, it is self-defeating. You give the government the power to interfere in what you disapprove of, history shows when "your guys" get out of power the next group will use your precedent to trample over something you view as a personal right or freedom.

The only way to be safe is to deal with people as individuals and keep the government out of our lives. Let the laws on assault and abuse do the work as needed.

Individual freedom is far more important, long term, than any supposed increase in safety.

Gee, you sound like an anarchist. No government But I will let you slide and figure you are more of a libertarian.

Your statement seems to have two weaknesses though. If you define spanking as abuse, then it would justifiably be outlawed. If you do not then it shouldn't. So you can't just say abuse should be outlawed, but x or y shouldn't. Because what if someone else defines x or y as abuse.

Secondly, this is not for your own good legislation. It is not speed limits or helmet laws. It is designed to protect children. Agree or not, you can not say it is protecting someone from thelselves.

Funny thing is, and I am sure you will agree, is that Liberals fear the government and want it out of their lives in temrs of surveylence, and other intrusions, but they wnat it to be active in other people's business, nd conservatives, on the other hand, want government to leave them alone in terms of gun control, business restrictions, interference ewht the free market etc. but do want the government to intrude in other peoples lives in terms of government surveylence of radicals, abortion restrictions, exportation of democracy, etc.

Everyone wants the government to leave them alone and tell everyone they don't agree with what to do and not do. That seems to be human nature.

I guess libertarians don't, which is why they kind of fit perpendicular to conservatives and liberals.

 

[Elaina]

You can really take either side over the other.

I spanked my son once because he was playing and hid on me in a store when he was 3, when I was going to be progressive and let him be a little gentleman and not get into the cat (which he didn't want to do). After 10 terrifying minutes of seeking for him, and not finding him, I did and spanked him. It wasn't that I wasn't watching him, I got an ironing board, had both hands full, he pulled my purse out of the cart, stopped to gather that up and he was gone. Live where several abductions happen and see if talking to the child enters your head, or if you spank them and say "Never, ever DO that again!"

I took a parenting class becase I didn't want to be my mother. Not that I needed to learn how not to hit my son, but I didn't want to scream and give him all the problems I have. In my humble opinion, we've been raised not to take responsibility for our actions or selves and childrearing is taking a hit. So the government is taking over where we aren't. I'm not debating on if it's good or bad, just what I think it is.

As to hitting: my husband was abused, and still thinks he deserved every broken nose, rib and bruise he got. I know I didn't deserve most of the punishments I recieved. That distinction right there is reason enough we both decided that he is never, ever to administer any form of corporal punishment to a child. But one thing that's amazed me so far is the fact that emotional abuse is so much harder to over come, and does so much more damage that if the government wants to regulate spanking, they need to regulate what harms a person the most.

 

[carebear]

Gee, you sound like an anarchist. No government But I will let you slide and figure you are more of a libertarian.

Your statement seems to have two weaknesses though. If you define spanking as abuse, then it would justifiably be outlawed. If you do not then it shouldn't. So you can't just say abuse should be outlawed, but x or y shouldn't. Because what if someone else defines x or y as abuse.

Secondly, this is not for your own good legislation. It is not speed limits or helmet laws. It is designed to protect children. Agree or not, you can not say it is protecting someone from thelselves.

Funny thing is, and I am sure you will agree, is that Liberals fear the government and want it out of their lives in temrs of surveylence, and other intrusions, but they wnat it to be active in other people's business, nd conservatives, on the other hand, want government to leave them alone in terms of gun control, business restrictions, interference ewht the free market etc. but do want the government to intrude in other peoples lives in terms of government surveylence of radicals, abortion restrictions, exportation of democracy, etc.

Everyone wants the government to leave them alone and tell everyone they don't agree with what to do and not do. That seems to be human nature.

I guess libertarians don't, which is why they kind of fit perpendicular to conservatives and liberals.

Yep, that's libertarians, small or big "L". Perpendicular.

Sorry for the vehemence.

At worst we'd leave it up to the several states. So, to be honest, if the people of Cali are dumb enough to continue down this path, in contravention to the letter and principle of the US (and probably Cali) Constitution more power to 'em. Just don't try to export it into the free states.

Abuse can be determined the same as assault currently is, in fact, that's how it is determined right now. There's no "black letter law" definition, it is determined on a case-by-case basis by a jury. Why do we need a blanket prohibition on spanking if almost no one says all spanking is abuse? That is a law over-reaching necessity. Kids who are abused are being taken care of by the system, all this law would do is interfere with the parents who aren't abusing.

And yes, "for the children" still does not justify interference by government in parental actions that are not criminal, and abuse is already criminal.

If the government can say you can't spank your children they can, in fact, say you can't feed them fluffernutters or let them stay up late or read the "wrong" sort of books. Or take them to the church of your choice, or teach them at home. All it takes with these precedents we're setting is for enough people to decide that's just kosher. Sure, it seems like it couldn't happen but unfortunately we're already halfway down the slope.

 

[Lincsong]

The parents who drug up their kids on Ritalin are usually not those who might "beat the fear of God into their kids". Most of the people I personally know who drug their kids up like zombies on Ritalin are the ones who refuse to spank their kids, tell them no or in anyway try to discipline the kids. Should the State take kids away from their parents? It should be done on a case by case basis. For instance, if a woman throws her kids into the bay to drown them, the state shouldn't let the kids go back with her. If a man is smoking crack and lives in a rat infested room, the state shouldn't let any kids stay with him. If a parent has broken a child's limb and there are welts on the child's back, that's already covered under current law and the child should be taken away from the parent. A blanket law like the one proposed is designed for one thing; accuse all parents of being a threat to children.

Kids are kids and they need; direction, guidance, structure and authority. They certainly aren't getting it with the teachers in public schools. I know boys who take the hamburger out of the bun and eat it separately. Big DEAL! some would say that is ADD and want to drug the kids up. Hell, I pick the onions out of my food! and I never had Ritalin. Back in the early '70s when Ritalin and these other drugs were coming onto the market the Principal of the neighborhood public school told my parents that my brother needed to be on Ritalin. My Dad basically told the teacher to kiss his pale white ------and that was the last time that Principal ever called my Father into the office. Our family Doctor, who the family had gone to for 25 years at the time, said Ritalin was unnecessary and all my brother had was an overactive thyroid gland. Just another example of know-nothing government bureaucrats thinking their opinions were sent down Mt. Sinai on tablets.lol All this little Assemblywoman wants is to take more and more responsiblity away from parents and give it to the state.

 

[K.D. Lightner]

I cannot imagine that it would come to parents having their kids taken away for smacking them on the kazoo. First of all, there would be no place to put all those children -- there are not enough foster parents and retention centers now for children, they are filled to overflowing.

More than likely, the state would have to free up some monies up to create some sort of educational classes, I would imagine, to teach parents how to discipline their kids.

I cannot imagine the legislation would pass, it would create a bureaucratic nightmare, or I should say another bureaucratic nightmare. California has plenty of them.

karol

 

[carebear]

I cannot imagine that it would come to parents having their kids taken away for smacking them on the kazoo. First of all, there would be no place to put all those children -- there are not enough foster parents and retention centers now for children, they are filled to overflowing.

More than likely, the state would have to free up some monies up to create some sort of educational classes, I would imagine, to teach parents how to discipline their kids.

I cannot imagine the legislation would pass, it would create a bureaucratic nightmare, or I should say another bureaucratic nightmare. California has plenty of them.

karol

You are assuming that the legislators have thought this legislation through to its logical conclusion AND that they care.

Remember, many elected officials do this kind of thing for the attention for themselves or their cause of the day. When that "look at me" legislation actually passes because everyone gets on the "we love 'the children' too" bandwagon then it is up to the state agencies and courts to make it work at a waste of your tax dollars or clean it up by overturning it.

The underlying mentality is that "the state needs to do something" even if it doesn't, and that even though other laws cover the situations, one more law will somehow do even more good. Which it usually won't.

When public concern arises out of ignorance of existing law and how the system works in relation to the Constitution (state and Federal), elected officials have a duty, based on the oaths they swear to support and defend those documents, to educate their constituents on what is legal and proper, not be willing to sacrifice those things to curry favor with the mob.

Everyone has horror stories of particular incidents that seem to show a failure of the system, that is the nature of things, there will always be exceptions. What mass media has given us is an often overstated (deliberately for ratings more often than not) sense that isolated incidents, statistically rare, are actually common.

 

[scotrace]

There are probably "spanking offenses," though I haven't (knock wood) found myself in that situation. A child who is repeatedly doing something unsafe - running into the street or playing with matches - I think might require sudden physical correction, depending on the child and his or her specific behavioral issues. But in 99% of cases, when you've reached the point where you feel obliged to hit, you've lost the game.

My mother had a mean right hook. And I always thoroughly deserved to be cracked upside the head.

 

[J. M. Stovall]

I have never spanked my daughter, not that I never felt like I wanted to. I just don't think it's at all necessary. All it does is show your child you are out of control, not in control.

 

[K.D. Lightner]

Actually, I am not sure that many legislators think through things logically. They are, after all, politicians.

Another problem we have now is that legislators just learn about what real people need and they hit term limits and have to move on, their spot taken by another greenhorn. No one gets to build up the savy and expertise necessary to enact good legislation that makes sense.

However, keeping people in office too long can cause corruption, cronyism and all the things people voted against when they voted for term limits.

A two-edged sword, it seems.

karol

 

[GOK]

There are probably "spanking offenses," though I haven't (knock wood) found myself in that situation. A child who is repeatedly doing something unsafe - running into the street or playing with matches - I think might require sudden physical correction, depending on the child and his or her specific behavioral issues. But in 99% of cases, when you've reached the point where you feel obliged to hit, you've lost the game.

My mother had a mean right hook. And I always thoroughly deserved to be cracked upside the head.

I have never spanked my daughter, not that I never felt like I wanted to. I just don't think it's at all necessary. All it does is show your child you are out of control, not in control.

:eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap

I smacked my youngest once - he was 14 and he'd pushed and pushed and pushed. It wasn't a hard smack and frankly, at 6'1", he hardly felt it. But it was sufficient for me to be utterly horrified at what I had done and I fled to my room and cried.

I will never ever forget that feeling - it was horrible. Not just because I'd lost control of the situation, nor because I'd smacked my child but because using violence against someone goes against everything I am and believe.

 

[carebear]

I have never spanked my daughter, not that I never felt like I wanted to. I just don't think it's at all necessary. All it does is show your child you are out of control, not in control.

"All people who spank are out of control"?

Why not just say "I don't feel it necessary to spank my children" and leave off your perceptions of others mentalities? Or project how you felt at the time onto how others must have (or should have) felt.

Perceptions which, in this case, are in fact incorrect, since I was spanked and my parents were, in fact, in control. It was used effectively, minimally and caused no emotional or permanant physical harm to me. Thus my personal example decisively invalidates your contention.

Furthermore, this is the kind of assuming that leads to these kind of nonsense laws. One person or a group of people decide "they know better" than everyone else and choose to try and enforce their belief on others. In this example, there is no objective, academic, peer-reviewed study that says conclusively that spanking is harmful. There are in fact millions of parents and children (grown and not) that will state that in their, equally valid as yours, experience spanking was a positive part of their upbring.

Beyond that, even if there were such a study, we'd still have to look at what kind of legislation, if any, to deal with the problem would be both effective and Constitutional. I doubt a blanket spanking ban would end up the most effective response, it'd probably best be dealt with, like most behavioral issues, with non-coercive education and conscientious enforcement of existing laws.

Don't get me wrong, Having an opinion is fine, whether it's absolutely supportable or not, it's when those opinions are forced on others by well-meaning do-gooders that I have a problem.

You weren't talking about forcing yours, I was just using it as an example.

 

[J. M. Stovall]

The child perceives it as a loss of control, how another adult feels is not my concern.

 

[carebear]

The child perceives it as a loss of control, how another adult feels is not my concern.

So now you know how all children who have ever been spanked perceived their spankings?

Don't suppose you can apply that ESP to who's gonna win the Superbowl?

And again, with my own personal experience, your perception is proven incorrect.

The few times I was spanked I had known I had done wrong, that I had in fact been warned many times before and punished with the denial of privileges and the like, and yet, because, for one example, running into the parking lot was fun, I did it anyway.

After running away from my mom to get to the car first one time too many, the dangers of such were explained again in detail that evening by my dad, and this time the lesson was punctuated by several sharp swats. After those were given, I was again forbidden some time with my friends and access to toys, I again had to sit in the chair in the living room and not allowed to read.

The seriousness of the situation was emphasized by the spanking, I doubt it even left a red mark, yet I stopped running into traffic where previous punishments hadn't worked on my willful self.

I was probably 4 or 5 but I distinctly recall that time with my Dad. I had no doubt my dad was in control, he wasn't flailing angrily, it was almost formal, and that I had, by my repeated defiance, brought things to that point. In fact, he made me feel bad for scaring my mom so much, because men were supposed to protect women, not scare them. That stuck too.

 

[J. M. Stovall]

Your recall of events when you where 4 years old is amazing! What did have for dinner that day?

 

[carebear]

Your recall of events when you where 4 years old is amazing! What did have for dinner that day?

I dunno, dinner wasn't punctuated by a spanking. That kind of focused the mind.

I can tell you the song my mom was singing the first time I woke up after being knocked unconscious (for the first time) when I was six (Itsy Bitsy Spider). Or how nice it was that my dad came and woke me up one night when I was five so I could watch "the tank parts" with him when Patton was on TV. Or when I was "helping" him build the deck one Saturday at five or six years old and he called a break so we could watch King Kong vs. Godzilla.

I only was spanked a few times. They reserved it for dangerous situations where I was tending to repeatedly act willfully. Me being fairly assertive and argumentative even at a young age and all. They never did it out of anger, it was used to give a physical component to a lesson, to increase the chance of me remembering the lesson when faced with the situation again and, yes, to provide deterrance. As non-punishing as the spankings were, I knew they weren't going to be softer if I broke the rules a second time.

I'll let your snide, implicit accusation of me of being a liar slide.

 

[J. M. Stovall]

You crack me uplol

 

[scotrace]

Spank kids? Maybe.

Spank quibbling members? Well...


Let's keep things civil, gentlemen.

 

[carebear]

J.M.,

I'll take that as a recognition of my sterling wit.

This is definitely an "agree to disagree" topic (unless of course legislation is actively on the line ).

I have a horrible problem with absolutes, even when folks don't mean them that way. Heck, I got more "hot buttons" than the elevators in "The Towering Inferno". lol

I appreciate the conversation. At least we aren't giving each other one word answers or talking about the tabloids.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

CareBear
You certainly have some good points. Strange..but I can remember events from when I was 1 1/2 yrs old!
What I immediately got from my very few spankings as a youngster..was that I had just let my parents down to the point where they had "had enough"! That abrupt realisation affected me much more than any physical pain or humiliation. I wasn't scarred for life. It didn't show me a "loss of control"..but rather reminded me "who" was in control. I was an only child. Often the center of attention...but only to a point. No continual screaming or coaxing and pleading for little HD to "please behave". 3 or maybe only just 2 1/2 times and you're out. Along with this came alot of attention and easy love and affection. Perhaps that's the key! Have the courage to not falter with either responsibility.
What's next?..."Let Junior do want he wants...or they'll drag you out in handcuffs for possible Emotional Abuse!". Pass the Ritalin!!
HD

 

[Lincsong]

The author of proposed legislation has no kids and considers herself a protector of pets.

Since some are going down memory lane in terms of spanking, I've been spanked several dozen times, not just a few. It was because I was mouthing off or did something bad. (I know, an angel like myself it's hard to believelol ) Well, anyway back when I was around 3 or 4 years old I wanted to ride underneath the shopping cart in the grocery store. These cars had a big space under the cage and the cage was positioned high. (oh lord, now Lieber will want to ban children in shopping carts ) Well, my mother had just had an operation and told me to wait in the car with my Dad, but I insisted on going into the store. So I was horsing around in the cart and whamm! I got spanked, marched out to the station wagon and had to wait there with Dad. I wasn't emotionally scarred. But I sure never horsed around with the carts. Oh, wait, a couple years later I knocked over a stack of wine bottles at another grocery store.lol Another time, we were in Montgomery Wards and I pulled the handle on a fire extinquiser and got some lady all wet with water. Whamm again! But it wasn't like a beating just to beat. And that's what most people spank for; as disciplinary action, there is not a rampage of spankings going on.

Then there was the Jr. High School Days when the teachers used to bring the paddle out. bahahahahhahahahhaa That's another topic.fftopic: