Labour's smacking laws could be 'unworkable'
"Senior judges want parents who are taken to court for smacking their children to be treated leniently.
A mother or father who does not intend to hurt their child should get only light sentences, new advice for the courts is expected to say.
The recommendations could make Labour's laws on smacking effectively unworkable".
What utter bollocks!
This makes me so angry.
Violence against children is not acceptable in a so-called civilised society.
The whole purpose of hitting a child is to hurt the child, therefore the intent was to hurt the child, the necessary element which makes it a criminal offence.
Parliament removed the defence of reasonable chastisement because some parents were unable to control themselves when inflicting pain upon a child and went overboard leaving marks upon the child and then claiming it was reasonable.
It is trying to make a mockery of the law, and Lord Phillips should know better, to advise that judges ignore the will of Parliament. If Lord Philips is in favour of violence towards children, perhaps he should be removed from his post until he has been seen by a psychiatrist and it is decided that he is no longer a danger to society, particularly, to children?
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
Site Meter
Showing posts with label Labour's smacking laws could be 'unworkable'. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Labour's smacking laws could be 'unworkable'. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)