What would you have done?

[Tawnos]

The funny thing with all those studies, how to etc...etc... It look good on paper, but take a good look at how the kids/teens/young adult behave (or dont) now compared to 30 years ago, or to our grand parents generation... We can clearly see what is working or what is not.

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

You're right, let's look at these numbers: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-decline-of-violence

And some humor, because it's so true: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMvMb90hem8#t=0h09s

 

[loic]

I remember when a man's word use to mean something....

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[peckerwood1986]

I remember when a man's word use to mean something....

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

Those days were the good ones. When a handshake was a contract. Or when you could trust the guy next door and people really wanted to help. Now a days you get hung out to dry when you try to do something right. I for one still beleave in respect and honor even if everyone else doesnt.

 

[MAC702]

Discipline does not mean spanking, though....

Not every time, no. I don't like it being insinuated that I think it does.

And I've got siblings and friends enough to know when it CAN be used effectively.

Proper spanking is no more physical abuse than grabbing an arm.

 

[MAC702]

... it's never more effective than alternative methods...

Any study with the word "never" is b***s***.

 

[Anonymouse]

Not every time, no. I don't like it being insinuated that I think it does.

And I've got siblings and friends enough to know when it CAN be used effectively.

Proper spanking is no more physical abuse than grabbing an arm.

Corporal punishment is so horrible its no wonder that countries that utilize corporal punishment over jail, like Singapore, have lower crime rates than countries like the US... BTW that seems to apply to many of the corporal punishment using countries.

Oh wait... my bad.

http://www.nationmaster.com/compare/Singapore/United-States/Crime

The problem with many of these studies is they address young children. Studies even show young children have higher rates of crime.

What the studies don't do is address teenagers or the fact that the older people become the more effective it is at preventing crime.

So...

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Tawnos]

I remember when a man's word use to mean something....

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

So like... 1954, when this case was decided: http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/...phy/the-bargain-relationship/lucy-v-zehmer-2/ ?

Or any of the other cases that ended up being decided because one person made a deal or a promise that they intended to renege upon?

Thinking things used to be better "back in the day" is often just rose-tinted glasses.

 

[Tawnos]

Corporal punishment is so horrible its no wonder that countries that utilize corporal punishment over jail, like Singapore, have lower crime rates than countries like the US...

Oh wait... my bad.

http://www.nationmaster.com/compare/Singapore/United-States/Crime

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Comparing two significantly different cultures to try and make such a point is the pinnacle of intellectual dishonesty. Part of the problems cited in the various research about spanking efficacy is that it's inconsistently administered. Singapore is known for its strict and consistent enforcement, as well as its tendency to punish capitally for many crimes. If you want to embrace that, fine, but I hope not to see you claiming to love the protections enshrined in our Constitution.

 

[Tawnos]

Any study with the word "never" is b***s***.

Do you have any evidence of that, or are you merely trying to protect your own cherished beliefs? The fact is, numerous studies on the efficacy of discipline methods have demonstrated no statistical correlation between corporal parental discipline and greater compliance than alternative forms of discipline can produce. In other words, it's never better than the alternative. It may be equally as effective for some people. However, it often is worse.

I'm bolding those words because I want to make it clear that I'm not saying that it's never effective. I'm saying it's not more effective than other options available to a parent.

 

[Anonymouse]

Comparing two significantly different cultures to try and make such a point is the pinnacle of intellectual dishonesty. Part of the problems cited in the various research about spanking efficacy is that it's inconsistently administered. Singapore is known for its strict and consistent enforcement, as well as its tendency to punish capitally for many crimes. If you want to embrace that, fine, but I hope not to see you claiming to love the protections enshrined in our Constitution.

Significantly different cultures. And what exactly IS this culture of America?

Strict, consistent punishment is never bad. I mean compared to the fact that you can get more time for say selling cocaine than murder. Get a life sentence for shoplifting if its a third strike but bankers walk free.

I prefer strict and consistent.

Besides, if you agree with capital punishment at all then you can't really complain at the subjective level that govt sets capital crimes at can you? If you agree the state can take your life you've agreed they can decide when to take your life.


Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[LV XD9]

And you are also supposed to discipline your children, so this argument you are making does not address the issue (a hijack, to be sure, but oh well...) of how to do so, or even what options are available.

There are plenty of options for discipline outside of physically striking the child. The information is readily available, should you be interested in learning more about the alternatives.

I'm glad someone else brought back an earlier point I tried to make that led to this quote from you.

Do you think we can "ground" our children? Or is that kidnapping and unlawful imprisonment? Can we pay them less than minimum wage for labor? These things fall under YOUR definition of "hurt" since you choose to open the door to expanding that word.

A person thinking it's better to discipline your child without striking them does not mean that person is a wackjob who's against any form of discipline. Trying to paint me as an extremist who doesn't think children should be disciplined or punished is weak sauce. Again, nice try.

As for the definition of hurt, there was no need to "expand" anything. Here are a couple of definitions from a couple of sources (emphasis mine: )

1. To cause physical damage or pain to; injure.
1 a : to inflict with physical pain
2 a : to cause emotional pain or anguish

But really, when you're arguing over the definition of the word "hurt," do you really have a leg left to stand on?

 

[FallonJeeper]

There are plenty of options for discipline outside of physically striking the child. The information is readily available, should you be interested in learning more about the alternatives.




A person thinking it's better to discipline your child without striking them does not mean that person is a wackjob who's against any form of discipline. Trying to paint me as an extremist who doesn't think children should be disciplined or punished is weak sauce. Again, nice try.

As for the definition of hurt, there was no need to "expand" anything. Here are a couple of definitions from a couple of sources (emphasis mine: )

1. To cause physical damage or pain to; injure.
1 a : to inflict with physical pain
2 a : to cause emotional pain or anguish

But really, when you're arguing over the definition of the word "hurt," do you really have a leg left to stand on?

When I take away my child's internet access for surfing inappropriate content, and he tells me that he feels emotional pain and anguish, am I hurting him?

That's a fine definition, but is it abuse? If a police man grabs the bad guy and throws them to the ground and cuffs them, it will probably inflict physical pain. Is that a crime against the bad guy? My point is, some inflicted pain is justifiable. The courts are full of people explaining what is and is not justifiable. To simply say hurting somebody is bad without any limits or guidelines is not valid.

 

[LV XD9]

When I take away my child's internet access for surfing inappropriate content, and he tells me that he feels emotional pain and anguish, am I hurting him?

Is this really all you have to contribute?

That's a fine definition, but is it abuse? If a police man grabs the bad guy and throws them to the ground and cuffs them, it will probably inflict physical pain. Is that a crime against the bad guy? My point is, some inflicted pain is justifiable. The courts are full of people explaining what is and is not justifiable. To simply say hurting somebody is bad without any limits or guidelines is not valid.

It helps if you follow the conversation.


As to the bolded part - weak strawman. No one ever said anything close to "hurting somebody is bad without any limits or guidelines," but that was a nice try.

 

[loic]

I'm sorry, but this is wrong. Tell how todays society is better? Never had so many gangs, murder, rape, drug abuse, burglary, vandalism, people been shot for a pair of shoes or a play station or what not. People been stampede at Walmart for a black Friday deal, people killing each other for a freaking tv on black friday, band of teenagers go beat up a stranger in the street as past time etc etc etc.... Again, tell me how is it working again?


Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[FallonJeeper]

Is this really all you have to contribute?


It helps if you follow the conversation.


As to the bolded part - weak strawman. No one ever said anything close to "hurting somebody is bad without any limits or guidelines," but that was a nice try.

I thought I was following the conversation pretty well. You made statements initially stating that striking a child in the name of discipline was wrong. You gave the "giants vs. children" analogy and the "Child vs. a stranger" analogy, and in a way told people on this forum that if they discipline by spanking they are abusive.

Here are some of your quotes:

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

Why is it okay to do something to a person much smaller and weaker than you (who depend on you for everything) that's not okay to do to a person equal in strength to you without facing criminal charges?”

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

’’ 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.

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

So tell me if I’m not following the conversation.

If you choose to not use physical touch to discipline your children, that is your prerogative. I will respect that. But please don't tell parents how to parent, it's not your place.

 

[LV XD9]

So tell me if I’m not following the conversation.

Pasting out of context quotes from earlier posts in the thread doesn't show that you're following the conversation. Your inane reply was enough to convince me that you're skimming at best (or you have serious issues with reading comprehension.) Either way really doesn't matter - you've demonstrated how little you have to contribute to the discussion, so I see no point in trying to hold your hand and lead you through the conversation.

But thanks for playing!

 

[FallonJeeper]

Pasting out of context quotes from earlier posts in the thread doesn't show that you're following the conversation. Your inane reply was enough to convince me that you're skimming at best (or you have serious issues with reading comprehension.) Either way really doesn't matter - you've demonstrated how little you have to contribute to the discussion, so I see no point in trying to hold your hand and lead you through the conversation.

But thanks for playing!

Didn't have time to cut and paste everything. Your problem is you can't unsay the things you said. Those quotes were not out of context. Had there been one quote, out of context, maybe, but this was a clear thought process from you. Now you want to deny you said/meant it?

Nice try, love your spin, you lose. But y'all come back and play any time. I could do this all day.

I won't be posting any more to this thread, it's been taken way off topic.

 

[vegaspassat]

Word of advice from a fellow military member.

Part of your defense plan should be not putting yourself in dumb situations. Yes I would intervene if need be, but you would never catch me at that gas station for good reasons (Yes, bad stuff happens everywhere but that area is BAD). I also agree with the whole her turning on you thing.. Happens all the time. Another thought is it might be helpful to turn on a recorder on your phone to at least get audio of the incident. Her crying, you telling him to stop hitting her etc in case things go south.

Keep good situational awareness at all times, try not to put yourself in bad situations, and always be ready to defend yourself or others even if you don't have a gun. That's my advice.

I beg to differ, at 9 in the morning there is nothing wrong with that gas station. Same thing with the down town arts district in the afternoon vs at night. even further, i used to live in the apartment complex next to the holiday inn and NEVER had a problem ONCE. As a matter of fact i wpuld argue it was the best neighborhood ive ever lived in because i knew all of my neighbors amd they knew me. We definitely had more of a community than most other "upper class" neighborhoods

 

[Tawnos]

Significantly different cultures. And what exactly IS this culture of America?

One that does not as readily tolerate the government murdering someone for ingesting an intoxicant.

Strict, consistent punishment is never bad.

Never? Punishment? I prefer discipline to punishment, and the fruits of learning and growth to the regressionary policy of continued imprisonment.

I mean compared to the fact that you can get more time for say selling cocaine than murder. Get a life sentence for shoplifting if its a third strike but bankers walk free.

Agreed, total BS.

Besides, if you agree with capital punishment at all

I don't. Used to, but there are too many problems that stem from giving government the power to execute a person.

 

[Anonymouse]

People seem to tolerate a lot here. Ask Oscar Grant or Milton Hall about that.

Our entire criminal system is based on punishment. Maybe its not right or the best method but it is...

So you go to prison for robbery and are abused, raped even possibly murdered.

Same difference...



Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2