Posts by Andrew Smith
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
No, not trying to be funny...just grappling with emotions really. On the one part I would like to get the whip and do the same to her. But returning violence like that is never the answer...it's just stupid, raw emotion.
-
We need a 'Warrant if Fitness' for Parents...but who's going to be the Testers?
This 'horse-whip' lady is just a plain tragedy.
-
Yeah, I agree Colin. If it's got to that stage with a Parent/Child relationship where they are going to 'dob you in', then a smack is plain dumb.
-
Ridley said:
" Andrew S, there is rather a lot on this in these PA threads if you'd like to read through them here, and here are good places to start. But in short, the s59 bill doesn't impact on the likelihood of whether parents will be prosecuted, it just removes a particular defence for those the Police have decided to press charges against. There is as much chance of parents being charged now for the example you cite as there will be after it is passed. Suggestions to the contrary are all part of the bill's opponents' misinformation campaign.
Thanks Ridley, this seems to me the likely outcome from what I have read. Let's hope after the Bill is passed that common sense prevails for all parties. One issue though, why a new Bill when a Judge can already rule against the use of s59 as a defense if he/she considers abuse to have taken place. Still a bit fuzzy on that one!
-
Thanks, Sonic. That's helpful so far.
-
A parent and child are in Foodtown, and the parent lightly smacks his/her child for disobeying a very important instruction. On the child's part it is willful disobedience and on the parent's part it is considered and done without anger. If someone sees this happen, could they report this to the police and will the parent be prosecuted under Labour's new law? Help me with the truth here; there's been so much misinformation from all parties.
-
I often wonder why the Climate Change debate is such a 'personal' issue. I don't think it's an issue of those who disagree with the science as being 'deniers', it is just that they see other major factors in their science measurements that can cause climate change; not only (oe even) mankind. They say the reasons behind cyclical change over the centuries has not been caused by man, but the activity of say, the sun. The disputes here caused by politics or left/right wing scraps haven't helped. We keep getting good debate and facts shoved aside by people who should know better eg politicians/scientists/christians etc. The science isn't settled. We all know that.
Let's not attack Garth or Jim or Augie, but do all we can to be better responsible citizens in this planet anyway.
-
Generally I agree with Russell in that this blog site has a decent 'intellectual tone' about it. I have found views from 'opponents' thoughtful and arresting (in that they make me reconsider my original arguments sometimes!) I also have no problem with a moderator doing what he/she wills with their own site. With 'tone', it's often the age old problem of not seeing someone's tongue in their check sometimes and taking personal offense too quickly.
-
Yeah, good news that the British sailors have been released. I can see why the connection is made with the Iranian detainees that the US nabbed in Iraq. However, these Iranians are from the elite Revolutionary Guard and had no business in Iraq. I think the US should send them back pronto though, without using them for it's own propaganda.
-
Nigel, I'd be interested in a brief explanation as to why "Augie is so far off base here it is not funny".