A No Spanking Ban? Then Parents Will Punch Instead

Some parents believe that their kids will grow up to be terrorists if they don't hit them on a near-daily basis. So if spanking is outlawed, the more-violent parents might resort to punching and slugging and shoving to the ground their kids. This way, if someone blows the whistle on them, they'll use the defense that they didn't even spank their child. They'll take out the whips and chains and claim that the spanking law is just for spanking, not for scourging or kicking.

What defines "spanking"? Does this mean only a palm-strike to a child's bottom? Or does it include a whacking with a ping pong paddle? What about with a tree branch or wooden spoon? What about with a rolled up magazine or newspaper? Have the lawmakers defined "spanking"? So far, they haven't; at least I haven't heard of an official definition yet.

So if spanking is banned, then parents will grab their kids at the collar and shove them to the concrete. After all, there's no proposed ban on shoving. Or, daddy might kick his boy. There's no ban on kicking, either. Or, mum might give her 4-year-old the swiftest backhand across the jaw in the West. Again, there's no proposed ban on that, either.

So if there's going to be a ban on spanking, why limit it to that? Occasional spankings have not been shown to cause emotional damage or behavioral problems in kids. For example, if you repeatedly tell your kid to stop darting ahead of you at the crowded amusement park, and each time you instruct him, your voice grows more authoritative, and you even throw in some threats that you will go home, or not buy him ice cream - he's broken away from you five times now; or, you actually tell him that if he stays at your side, you'll reward him with (name whatever reward is your child's hot button).