Politics, Media and Colin Craig

[mrsaneperson]

Keys - So true. Bring back lynchings eh? Ah, the good old days...

Mrsaneperson - So we're probably about the same age. And yet, strangely, the cane did not create a generation of law-abiding citizens. Society's much more complicated than a lack of violent punishment in childhood. In fact, I'd suggest that you'll find that most people who commit violent crime come from a background of family violence. So it's pretty clear that being hit (no matter how hard) has nothing at all to do with "effective parenting". Only a fool would think that smacking is the only effective way to discipline kids. If you agree with that, then you'd also have to agree that hurting kids to get them to do what you want isn't the best of the available options. Is it? If there is actually something else that is also effective, why would you choose to smack? The answer is, because it's easier and faster when you're pissed off.

You can smack your kids but you can't smack your wife or bad drivers... What a mixed up world.

This is where you get caught out being disingenuous drelly. You see your'e disconnected from using accurate words to describe things by equating an oblique word like "hit" instead of the more precise word "smack' .Thats because you like to turn debate into an emotive one rather than a rational one. Then you quote "most people who commit violent crime come from a background of family violence"- well since the majority of people connect smacking as physical discipline & not violence again you show a lack of "common sense" & inability to caution yourself away from an extremist view.

As you've mentioned several times in this forum you're an Atheist ,yet it seems you have an almost religiously dogmatic inability to recognise your own extremist viewpoint for what it is.
You do exactly the same with the gay-marriage debate .I'm sure thats how other minority vocalists like yourself have won over the spineless politicians by emotive disconnect.

[Davo36]

Drelly these bits worry me too:

(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.
(3) Subsection (2) prevails over subsection (1).

[Davo36]

Extended interview with Colin Craig here. He comes across very well to me.

[drelly]

This is where you get caught out being disingenuous drelly. You see your'e disconnected from using accurate words to describe things by equating an oblique word like "hit" instead of the more precise word "smack' .Thats because you like to turn debate into an emotive one rather than a rational one. Then you quote "most people who commit violent crime come from a background of family violence"- well since the majority of people connect smacking as physical discipline & not violence again you show a lack of "common sense" & inability to caution yourself away from an extremist view.

I used that example on purpose to demonstrate the ridiculousness of the "smacking is good" side. Surely, even you can see that it isn't the "smack" that creates a "good person"... otherwise, a beating would obviously be more effective, right? Much more persuasive! And as usual, you didn't answer any of my questions, waffled and go off on an irrelevant tangent. By the way... if talking about protecting children isn't emotive, then you've really missed the point.

Drelly these bits worry me too:

I agree that if the spirit of the law is to protect children from abuse, then the wording could be better. However, I suspect that in practice, the law needs to be strongly worded to allow conviction. There will always be a defence lawyer trying to get someone off that should be convicted. Just a guess though... ask a cop

[speights boy]

Don't laugh. I remember when homosexuality was unlawful. Now, marriage between same gender couples is allowed.

People certainly aren't laughing when displays of hateful bigotry such as this continue in our society.

Manager of gay bar attacked

A Wellington bar manager was left with head injuries after being attacked by a group of drinkers who appeared shocked at realising they were in a gay bar.

The group, who were in Ivy Bar and Cabaret in Cuba St about 10pm last Friday, "freaked out" after noticing the club was full of gay customers, manager Steven Mawhinney said yesterday.

[speights boy]

Colin Craig is deluded and dangerous — Jamie Whyte

John, the kids are fighting again.

[mrsaneperson]

I used that example on purpose to demonstrate the ridiculousness of the "smacking is good" side. Surely, even you can see that it isn't the "smack" that creates a "good person"... otherwise, a beating would obviously be more effective, right? Much more persuasive! And as usual, you didn't answer any of my questions, waffled and go off on an irrelevant tangent. By the way... if talking about protecting children isn't emotive, then you've really missed the point.

I agree that if the spirit of the law is to protect children from abuse, then the wording could be better. However, I suspect that in practice, the law needs to be strongly worded to allow conviction. There will always be a defence lawyer trying to get someone off that should be convicted. Just a guess though... ask a cop

The problem drelly is your argument is flawed from the outset ..Whenever people feel the need to twist the meanings of words it is because their argument is weak. So by replacing the word smack with the outrageous overly emotive word hit as you did shows you are willing to distort in order to try & win an argument. It seems this is a massive point you cant recognise.

Like any form of punishment there are always counter arguments against them ,but to focus on smacking purely because it involves some kind of short-lived physical pain is myopically concerning yourself that somehow physical punishment of any kind is taboo. Section 59 prior to the antismacking law allowed the use of reasonable force for the purpose of correction, if the police wanted to enter a prosecution it was then brought before a judge & jury to decide .Sue Bradford & others were bitterly opposed to this as they were upset on how judges & jurys had ruled on some court cases. So there undemocratic opinion was then foistered onto everyone by way of the much hated anti-smacking law , yet 2/3rds of parents in a recent survey continue to ignore the law.Sue Bradford herself smacked her own kids. The law as it stands is a bad one & child abuse rates have soared since then .No point in having a law if the majority of parents ignore it. Now we have police up & down the country investigating ,time-wasting & criminalising good parents.

I have never said smacking will create a good person ,like all other forms of punishment it could work well & on other times there maybe better alternative measures. Unfortunately there was never a one-stop solution. Like many things life is not black & white.

[speights boy]

My, what a surprise ......not.
Good decision to back down.

Colin Craig drops defamation case

[drelly]

The problem drelly is your argument is flawed from the outset ..Whenever people feel the need to twist the meanings of words it is because their argument is weak. So by replacing the word smack with the outrageous overly emotive word hit as you did shows you are willing to distort in order to try & win an argument. It seems this is a massive point you cant recognise.

Like any form of punishment there are always counter arguments against them ,but to focus on smacking purely because it involves some kind of short-lived physical pain is myopically concerning yourself that somehow physical punishment of any kind is taboo. Section 59 prior to the antismacking law allowed the use of reasonable force for the purpose of correction, if the police wanted to enter a prosecution it was then brought before a judge & jury to decide .Sue Bradford & others were bitterly opposed to this as they were upset on how judges & jurys had ruled on some court cases. So there undemocratic opinion was then foistered onto everyone by way of the much hated anti-smacking law , yet 2/3rds of parents in a recent survey continue to ignore the law.Sue Bradford herself smacked her own kids. The law as it stands is a bad one & child abuse rates have soared since then .No point in having a law if the majority of parents ignore it. Now we have police up & down the country investigating ,time-wasting & criminalising good parents.

I have never said smacking will create a good person ,like all other forms of punishment it could work well & on other times there maybe better alternative measures. Unfortunately there was never a one-stop solution. Like many things life is not black & white.

Somehow I missed this. I don't think I've ever said my objection was just about the physical pain? Although a smack to a child is obviously coercion via physical pain - something that is illegal when directed at another adult. If you believe in leading by example, then it does teach them to get what you want by physical domination.

Where is your evidence about Police time being wasted? I don't hear the Police complaining about it.

[mrsaneperson]

That is a fatuous statement.Children are not the same as adults, they do not have the same rights in law just as they do not bear the same responsibilities. . The term "rights" is an obvious attempt to place "absolute rights" over everything else.There are no absolutes where so many variables exist.
Another "twisting" of words by misusage & wrong context.Put this back in your jar & re-label it "propaganda".I suggest though its a bitter spread not fit for consumption
Plenty of evidence & examples of wasted police time. Police generally are not allowed to complain about insane laws,they are there to uphold the laws so you won't find them risking their career on a comment.. Google should bring up plenty of results of familys that have been victimised & castigated by the anti-smacking law..
I would also point you in the direction of the Family First website but no doubt the examples presented there you will veto because of your inherent prejudice against any religious group no matter how good their overiding intention is or how truthful the accounts are.
Colin Craig also has some good examples on the wasted police time given to this law but as you wrongly think he's some kind of religious zealot agian i cant forcefeed you the info.
Here's an overview from a website showing many actual examples of wrongful prosecutions & wasted CYF's & Police investigation time :

http://www.voteno.org.nz/real-life.htm

[drelly]

That is a fatuous statement.Children are not the same as adults, they do not have the same rights in law just as they do not bear the same responsibilities. . The term "rights" is an obvious attempt to place "absolute rights" over everything else.There are no absolutes where so many variables exist.

That's true. They are different. They feel greater pain than an adult and are emotionally more sensitive. The rights we have are those that we grant ourselves.

Plenty of evidence & examples of wasted police time. Police generally are not allowed to complain about insane laws,they are there to uphold the laws so you won't find them risking their career on a comment.. Google should bring up plenty of results of familys that have been victimised & castigated by the anti-smacking law..
I would also point you in the direction of the Family First website but no doubt the examples presented there you will veto because of your inherent prejudice against any religious group no matter how good their overiding intention is or how truthful the accounts are.

Colin Craig also has some good examples on the wasted police time given to this law but as you wrongly think he's some kind of religious zealot agian i cant forcefeed you the info.
Here's an overview from a website showing many actual examples of wrongful prosecutions & wasted CYF's & Police investigation time :
http://www.voteno.org.nz/real-life.htm

I've always checked your evidence and often found it wanting or biased. The cases you linked to... not one of them had an example where any charges were laid. The wasted time is the responsibility of the people reporting the incident, not the law. Those scare-mongering case studies had all the literary prowess one of those Jehovas Witness Watchtower magazines... all fire and brimstone.

[Wayne]

The law as it stands is a bad one & child abuse rates have soared since then .No point in having a law if the majority of parents ignore it. Now we have police up & down the country investigating ,time-wasting & criminalising good parents.

Have they soared? Do you have some figures that show a step increase?

What annoyed me the most about the campaign for the bill was using examples of gross abuse (liks in the dryer and hanging on the clothesline) and implying (maybe even saying) that the new law would stop that.
It was never going to be able to because anyone who would do those things to a child was beyond reason and wouldn't be thinking of the consequences (to them or the child).
The same as murder is illegal but still happens.
The existing laws were able to deal with the extreme abuse cases and didn't need changing.

[mrsaneperson]

Yes the new law hasn't stopped those horrendous actions because those people couldnt give a jot about any law or anything. Child abuse figures have soared Wayne. NZ has the highest rate of child abuse in the western world. The anti-smacking law hasn't worked. ADHD & ADD figures are also worse.

Drelly doesn't realise that the folks that are complaining to the police, needlessly wasting police time are simply obeying the law as it stands.Its quite possible he is one of the perpetrators that are wasting police time..lol

drelly loses pespectives on the whole "pain thing" by insinuating that a physical discipline action on a child is akin the same force as adults fighting.
Thats bollix & a lack of understanding in simple everyday physics.
No matter how many examples are placed before him & there are hundreds in the link; his own bias against religion means that he gives none of it credit despite the fact they are all mostly Herald reports.


Many of us onboard here at PT grew up in an era of corporal punishment and are better law abiding citizens because of it.

[Wayne]

Yes the new law hasn't stopped those horrendous actions because those people couldnt give a jot about any law or anything. Child abuse figures have soared Wayne. NZ has the highest rate of child abuse in the western world. The anti-smacking law hasn't worked. ADHD & ADD figures are also worse.

You are correct - the law hasn't stopped the abuse and that is the silly thing about it!
As for child abuse figures soaring - since when?
I would have said that they continue to grow - certainly they haven't soared because of the law!
The anti-smaking law hasn't worked (and I for one couldn't see how it would as I outlined earlier) but what ADHD and ADD have to do with it I don't know?

ADHD and ADD diagnosis are a whole new subject.

[mrsaneperson]

You are right its not soaring ,child abuse is rising:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/9314332/Child-abuse-is-rising-in-NZ

ADHD & ADD. Are some cases of children diagnosed with these conditions simply a case of bad parenting ? If not why were such terms unknown in the pre90s ?

We make up labels for everything these days.In the process of diagnosis for ADHD , drugs like Ritalin are prescribed bringing in unwanted & often worse side-effects than the original condition diagnosed.