|
|
Teenager Whoopin for Acting Hard On Facebook (Vid)
 Bahamut.Jetackuu
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2011-01-07 12:10:59
Sylph.Oddin said: Spanking Laws
May seem a bit biased but the link clearly defines the individual state laws for discipline. Clearly the child wasn't injured so there was no abuse. As for which state the man was in, I'm unsure but I'd say he was well within his legal rights to discipline the child.
If you're against spanking as a form of discipline, that's fine. Raise your kids as you see fit however don't blow things out of proportion when someone does spank their kid. No one told you how to raise your kids and you shouldn't push your ways on others so long as they're within their legal rights.
again I don't care what people do, but when they're abusing children everyone should take a stand. Spanking is child abuse not discipline.
[+]
サーバ: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2595
By Bismarck.Elanabelle 2011-01-07 12:11:24
Sylph.Oddin said:
According to which law(s)? Seriously, point out where disciplining your child falls under any law set forth by any state or government.
Are you really this naive?
You need someone to spoon feed you the law?
See, that scares me. People who are quick to "applaud" someone's behavior, because they "like it", without even having the capacity or knowledge to know that they're applauding criminal acts.
One is guilty of assault and battery when one physically makes contact with another person with intent to do harm to that person, either physically, mentally, or emotionally.
One is exempt from prosecution if s/he is defending him/herself from an imminent physical threat, defending one's property, or preventing someone from committing an actual crime in progress. Many states allow some "wiggle room" for parents/guardians/teachers, to prevent simple casual contact, playful wrestling, or non-aggressive open-hand spankings from being misconstrued as crime.
However, the uncle in this video does not meet any of the exemption criteria. If he had given the teen one lashing on the *** without all the angry screaming, he *might* have been able hide behind the parental exemption, especially if there was no video evidence.
But this jackass went postal with over a dozen lashings, while yelling and carrying on, and had the audacity (or more likely the lack of brain cells) to post the video on the net.
Like I said before, this would be a slam dunk for the state prosecutor in a criminal trial. This ***would never even see a courtroom or a jury, because the evidence is so obvious and damning, the uncle's lawyer would be committing malpractice if s/he advised the uncle to do anything but plead "no contest" and settle the case pre-trial, with jail time.
[+]
Bahamut.Jetackuu
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2011-01-07 12:11:37
and again, just because there are no marks doesn't mean it's not abuse
Bahamut.Jetackuu
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2011-01-07 12:13:15
Bismarck.Elanabelle said: Sylph.Oddin said:
According to which law(s)? Seriously, point out where disciplining your child falls under any law set forth by any state or government.
Are you really this naive?
You need someone to spoon feed you the law?
See, that scares me. People who are quick to "applaud" someone's behavior, because they "like it", without even having the capacity or knowledge to know that they're applauding criminal acts.
One is guilty of assault and battery when one physically makes contact with another person with intent to do harm to that person, either physically, mentally, or emotionally.
One is exempt from prosecution if s/he is defending him/herself from an imminent physical threat, defending one's property, or preventing someone from committing an actual crime in progress. Many states allow some "wiggle room" for parents/guardians/teachers, to prevent simple casual contact, playful wrestling, or non-aggressive open-hand spankings from being misconstrued as crime.
However, the uncle in this video does not meet any of the exemption criteria. If he had given the teen one lashing on the *** without all the angry screaming, he *might* have been able hide behind the parental exemption, especially if there was no video evidence.
But this jackass went postal with over a dozen lashings, while yelling and carrying on, and had the audacity (or more likely the lack of brain cells) to post the video on the net.
Like I said before, this would be a slam dunk for the state prosecutor in a criminal trial. This ***would never even see a courtroom or a jury, because the evidence is so obvious and damning, the uncle's lawyer would be committing malpractice if s/he advised the uncle to do anything but plead "no contest" and settle the case pre-trial, with jail time.
oh yeah, I forgot about the pre-trial, durderpder, you're right it wouldn't make it to trial. Easy Prey.
[+]
Bismarck.Angeleus
サーバ: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2614
By Bismarck.Angeleus 2011-01-07 12:13:19
Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: then again... if 12 of us (XIAHers) were locked in a room together there would probably be some new violent crimes being committed :) 
 Leviathan.Chaosx
サーバ: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2011-01-07 12:13:35
The Minnesota Supreme court has ruled that spanking is NOT child abuse.
Quote: The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled Friday that a father who spanked his 12-year-old son 36 times with a maple paddle did not commit physical abuse.
The unanimous ruling finalized the reversal of a lower court's decision, which did deem the punishment administered by Shawn Fraser of Bloomington, Minn., abusive.
The case passed through 3 courts – county, district and state Supreme – while lawyers and judges argued whether there was any evidence of physical or mental harm from the spankings.
The guardian ad litem, an attorney appointed to represent the children's interests, argued that while there was no evidence of injury, inflicting pain should be grounds enough for establishing abuse.
The Supreme Court disagreed.
"We are unwilling to establish a bright-line rule that the infliction of any pain constitutes either physical injury or physical abuse, because to do so would effectively prohibit all corporal punishment of children by their parents," Justice Alan Page wrote for the court.
The law allows "reasonable discipline," the ruling said, and "it is clear to us that the Legislature did not intend to ban corporal punishment."
サーバ: Titan
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1026
By Titan.Darkwizardzin 2011-01-07 12:14:35
I should have guessed that this is debate is what this forum would have turned into.
[+]
Gilgamesh.Tweeek
サーバ: Gilgamesh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2169
By Gilgamesh.Tweeek 2011-01-07 12:15:39
Bismarck.Elanabelle said: Sylph.Oddin said:
According to which law(s)? Seriously, point out where disciplining your child falls under any law set forth by any state or government.
Are you really this naive?
You need someone to spoon feed you the law?
See, that scares me. People who are quick to "applaud" someone's behavior, because they "like it", without even having the capacity or knowledge to know that they're applauding criminal acts.
One is guilty of assault and battery when one physically makes contact with another person with intent to do harm to that person, either physically, mentally, or emotionally.
One is exempt from prosecution if s/he is defending him/herself from an imminent physical threat, defending one's property, or preventing someone from committing an actual crime in progress. Many states allow some "wiggle room" for parents/guardians/teachers, to prevent simple casual contact, playful wrestling, or non-aggressive open-hand spankings from being misconstrued as crime.
However, the uncle in this video does not meet any of the exemption criteria. If he had given the teen one lashing on the *** without all the angry screaming, he *might* have been able hide behind the parental exemption, especially if there was no video evidence.
But this jackass went postal with over a dozen lashings, while yelling and carrying on, and had the audacity (or more likely the lack of brain cells) to post the video on the net.
Like I said before, this would be a slam dunk for the state prosecutor in a criminal trial. This ***would never even see a courtroom or a jury, because the evidence is so obvious and damning, the uncle's lawyer would be committing malpractice if s/he advised the uncle to do anything but plead "no contest" and settle the case pre-trial, with jail time.
If you are so certain please track the progress of what's going to happen to this man and let us know what his sentence ends up being. Let us know once he has been convicted with a source and there will be nothing left to debate other than the fact that many people would feel he was wrongly prosecuted.
Bahamut.Jetackuu
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2011-01-07 12:16:23
Leviathan.Chaosx said: The Minnesota Supreme court has ruled that spanking is NOT child abuse.
Quote: The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled Friday that a father who spanked his 12-year-old son 36 times with a maple paddle did not commit physical abuse.
The unanimous ruling finalized the reversal of a lower court's decision, which did deem the punishment administered by Shawn Fraser of Bloomington, Minn., abusive.
The case passed through 3 courts – county, district and state Supreme – while lawyers and judges argued whether there was any evidence of physical or mental harm from the spankings.
The guardian ad litem, an attorney appointed to represent the children's interests, argued that while there was no evidence of injury, inflicting pain should be grounds enough for establishing abuse.
The Supreme Court disagreed.
"We are unwilling to establish a bright-line rule that the infliction of any pain constitutes either physical injury or physical abuse, because to do so would effectively prohibit all corporal punishment of children by their parents," Justice Alan Page wrote for the court.
The law allows "reasonable discipline," the ruling said, and "it is clear to us that the Legislature did not intend to ban corporal punishment."
yeah, I see it going to the supreme court, want to take bets?
Bahamut.Jetackuu
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2011-01-07 12:17:21
Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bismarck.Elanabelle said: Sylph.Oddin said:
According to which law(s)? Seriously, point out where disciplining your child falls under any law set forth by any state or government.
Are you really this naive?
You need someone to spoon feed you the law?
See, that scares me. People who are quick to "applaud" someone's behavior, because they "like it", without even having the capacity or knowledge to know that they're applauding criminal acts.
One is guilty of assault and battery when one physically makes contact with another person with intent to do harm to that person, either physically, mentally, or emotionally.
One is exempt from prosecution if s/he is defending him/herself from an imminent physical threat, defending one's property, or preventing someone from committing an actual crime in progress. Many states allow some "wiggle room" for parents/guardians/teachers, to prevent simple casual contact, playful wrestling, or non-aggressive open-hand spankings from being misconstrued as crime.
However, the uncle in this video does not meet any of the exemption criteria. If he had given the teen one lashing on the *** without all the angry screaming, he *might* have been able hide behind the parental exemption, especially if there was no video evidence.
But this jackass went postal with over a dozen lashings, while yelling and carrying on, and had the audacity (or more likely the lack of brain cells) to post the video on the net.
Like I said before, this would be a slam dunk for the state prosecutor in a criminal trial. This ***would never even see a courtroom or a jury, because the evidence is so obvious and damning, the uncle's lawyer would be committing malpractice if s/he advised the uncle to do anything but plead "no contest" and settle the case pre-trial, with jail time.
If you are so certain please track the progress of what's going to happen to this man and let us know what his sentence ends up being. Let us know once he has been convicted with a source and there will be nothing left to debate other than the fact that many people would feel he was wrongly prosecuted.
well 23 countries would disagree with you, and more in the future (I'm sure)
[+]
サーバ: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 23653
By Shiva.Flionheart 2011-01-07 12:17:21
And then Jetackuu ruined another thread.
Leviathan.Chaosx
サーバ: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2011-01-07 12:17:53
Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Leviathan.Chaosx said: The Minnesota Supreme court has ruled that spanking is NOT child abuse.
Quote: The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled Friday that a father who spanked his 12-year-old son 36 times with a maple paddle did not commit physical abuse.
The unanimous ruling finalized the reversal of a lower court's decision, which did deem the punishment administered by Shawn Fraser of Bloomington, Minn., abusive.
The case passed through 3 courts – county, district and state Supreme – while lawyers and judges argued whether there was any evidence of physical or mental harm from the spankings.
The guardian ad litem, an attorney appointed to represent the children's interests, argued that while there was no evidence of injury, inflicting pain should be grounds enough for establishing abuse.
The Supreme Court disagreed.
"We are unwilling to establish a bright-line rule that the infliction of any pain constitutes either physical injury or physical abuse, because to do so would effectively prohibit all corporal punishment of children by their parents," Justice Alan Page wrote for the court.
The law allows "reasonable discipline," the ruling said, and "it is clear to us that the Legislature did not intend to ban corporal punishment."
yeah, I see it going to the supreme court, want to take bets? Citing legal precedent, they will rule in the same manor, not abuse.
[+]
サーバ: Ifrit
Game: FFXI
Posts: 24692
By Ifrit.Kungfuhustle 2011-01-07 12:18:20
Jeta reminds me of that one ginger kid everyone knows who ruins everything when he comes by.
[+]
Sylph.Oddin
サーバ: Sylph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1756
By Sylph.Oddin 2011-01-07 12:18:35
It won't even make it to court.
Ninja edit: Someone find out what state the kid lives in.
[+]
Gilgamesh.Tweeek
サーバ: Gilgamesh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2169
By Gilgamesh.Tweeek 2011-01-07 12:18:41
Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Bismarck.Elanabelle said: Sylph.Oddin said:
According to which law(s)? Seriously, point out where disciplining your child falls under any law set forth by any state or government.
Are you really this naive?
You need someone to spoon feed you the law?
See, that scares me. People who are quick to "applaud" someone's behavior, because they "like it", without even having the capacity or knowledge to know that they're applauding criminal acts.
One is guilty of assault and battery when one physically makes contact with another person with intent to do harm to that person, either physically, mentally, or emotionally.
One is exempt from prosecution if s/he is defending him/herself from an imminent physical threat, defending one's property, or preventing someone from committing an actual crime in progress. Many states allow some "wiggle room" for parents/guardians/teachers, to prevent simple casual contact, playful wrestling, or non-aggressive open-hand spankings from being misconstrued as crime.
However, the uncle in this video does not meet any of the exemption criteria. If he had given the teen one lashing on the *** without all the angry screaming, he *might* have been able hide behind the parental exemption, especially if there was no video evidence.
But this jackass went postal with over a dozen lashings, while yelling and carrying on, and had the audacity (or more likely the lack of brain cells) to post the video on the net.
Like I said before, this would be a slam dunk for the state prosecutor in a criminal trial. This ***would never even see a courtroom or a jury, because the evidence is so obvious and damning, the uncle's lawyer would be committing malpractice if s/he advised the uncle to do anything but plead "no contest" and settle the case pre-trial, with jail time. oh yeah, I forgot about the pre-trial, durderpder, you're right it wouldn't make it to trial. Easy Prey.
That's only under the assumption that the man would plea guilty or no contest. lol you guys are arguing about a case and we don't even know if charges have been made.. think about it.
Gilgamesh.Tweeek
サーバ: Gilgamesh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2169
By Gilgamesh.Tweeek 2011-01-07 12:20:25
Bahamut.Jetackuu said:
well 23 countries would disagree with you, and more in the future (I'm sure)
23/195 i like the odds.
 Leviathan.Anbu
サーバ: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
Posts: 229
By Leviathan.Anbu 2011-01-07 12:21:28
Fyi no one prosecuting this man...why because no one cares...just like if that kid would of kept fronting like he was and a gang member and got killed the next day...no one would give two shits...why...because it would just been another black kid shot dead in the street over some gang related bull ***...and all you forum *** attorneys screaming child abuse would go back to playing FF11 like nothing happened...just sayin'.
Bahamut.Jetackuu
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2011-01-07 12:21:47
Leviathan.Chaosx said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Leviathan.Chaosx said: The Minnesota Supreme court has ruled that spanking is NOT child abuse.
Quote: The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled Friday that a father who spanked his 12-year-old son 36 times with a maple paddle did not commit physical abuse.
The unanimous ruling finalized the reversal of a lower court's decision, which did deem the punishment administered by Shawn Fraser of Bloomington, Minn., abusive.
The case passed through 3 courts – county, district and state Supreme – while lawyers and judges argued whether there was any evidence of physical or mental harm from the spankings.
The guardian ad litem, an attorney appointed to represent the children's interests, argued that while there was no evidence of injury, inflicting pain should be grounds enough for establishing abuse.
The Supreme Court disagreed.
"We are unwilling to establish a bright-line rule that the infliction of any pain constitutes either physical injury or physical abuse, because to do so would effectively prohibit all corporal punishment of children by their parents," Justice Alan Page wrote for the court.
The law allows "reasonable discipline," the ruling said, and "it is clear to us that the Legislature did not intend to ban corporal punishment."
yeah, I see it going to the supreme court, want to take bets? Citing legal precedent, they will rule in the same manor, not abuse. no, no they won't
[+]
サーバ: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 23653
By Shiva.Flionheart 2011-01-07 12:22:18
Leviathan.Anbu said: Fyi no one prosecuting this man...why because no one cares...just like if that kid would of kept fronting like he was and a gang member and got killed the next day...no one would give to shits...why...because it would just been another black kid shot dead in the street over some gang related bull ***...and all you forum *** attorneys screaming child abuse would go back to playing FF11 like nothing happened...just sayin'.
Go back to Final Fantasy 4.0.
[+]
サーバ: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 23653
By Shiva.Flionheart 2011-01-07 12:22:34
Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Leviathan.Chaosx said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Leviathan.Chaosx said: The Minnesota Supreme court has ruled that spanking is NOT child abuse.
Quote: The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled Friday that a father who spanked his 12-year-old son 36 times with a maple paddle did not commit physical abuse.
The unanimous ruling finalized the reversal of a lower court's decision, which did deem the punishment administered by Shawn Fraser of Bloomington, Minn., abusive.
The case passed through 3 courts – county, district and state Supreme – while lawyers and judges argued whether there was any evidence of physical or mental harm from the spankings.
The guardian ad litem, an attorney appointed to represent the children's interests, argued that while there was no evidence of injury, inflicting pain should be grounds enough for establishing abuse.
The Supreme Court disagreed.
"We are unwilling to establish a bright-line rule that the infliction of any pain constitutes either physical injury or physical abuse, because to do so would effectively prohibit all corporal punishment of children by their parents," Justice Alan Page wrote for the court.
The law allows "reasonable discipline," the ruling said, and "it is clear to us that the Legislature did not intend to ban corporal punishment."
yeah, I see it going to the supreme court, want to take bets? Citing legal precedent, they will rule in the same manor, not abuse. no, no they won't
Prove it.
Bahamut.Jetackuu
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2011-01-07 12:22:41
Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said:
well 23 countries would disagree with you, and more in the future (I'm sure)
23/195 i like the odds.
this country is on it's way too, don't feel bad, and when the rest leave the stone ages hopefully they will join civilization too.
Bismarck.Antonious
サーバ: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 329
By Bismarck.Antonious 2011-01-07 12:22:58
Leviathan.Anbu said: Fyi no one prosecuting this man...why because no one cares...just like if that kid would of kept fronting like he was and a gang member and got killed the next day...no one would give two shits...why...because it would just been another black kid shot dead in the street over some gang related bull ***...and all you forum *** attorneys screaming child abuse would go back to playing FF11 like nothing happened...just sayin'.
My man has the Boyz in the Hood ***going on...."Either they don't know, or they don't care"
By Artemicion 2011-01-07 12:24:46
Gilgamesh.Tweeek
サーバ: Gilgamesh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2169
By Gilgamesh.Tweeek 2011-01-07 12:25:31
Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said:
well 23 countries would disagree with you, and more in the future (I'm sure)
23/195 i like the odds.
this country is on it's way too, don't feel bad, and when the rest leave the stone ages hopefully they will join civilization too.
Jet you said so yourself that you don't even know what 23 Countries those are.
Bahamut.Jetackuu
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2011-01-07 12:27:58
Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said:
well 23 countries would disagree with you, and more in the future (I'm sure)
23/195 i like the odds.
this country is on it's way too, don't feel bad, and when the rest leave the stone ages hopefully they will join civilization too.
Jet you said so yourself that you don't even know what 23 Countries those are. the source I cited stated that the US is not one of them
Gilgamesh.Tweeek
サーバ: Gilgamesh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2169
By Gilgamesh.Tweeek 2011-01-07 12:33:25
Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said:
well 23 countries would disagree with you, and more in the future (I'm sure)
23/195 i like the odds.
this country is on it's way too, don't feel bad, and when the rest leave the stone ages hopefully they will join civilization too.
Jet you said so yourself that you don't even know what 23 Countries those are. the source I cited stated that the US is not one of them
My point is you don't know if the list consists of ground breaking future trending Countries "ahead of our time" or if it is a bunch of worthless Countries that most people couldn't even locate on a map. I'm not saying it's one or the other, I'm just saying you/we don't know what they are and it's a bit odd the source didn't mention it sounds like typical media twisting to convey a message at it's best.
Bahamut.Jetackuu
サーバ: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9001
By Bahamut.Jetackuu 2011-01-07 12:35:01
Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said:
well 23 countries would disagree with you, and more in the future (I'm sure)
23/195 i like the odds.
this country is on it's way too, don't feel bad, and when the rest leave the stone ages hopefully they will join civilization too.
Jet you said so yourself that you don't even know what 23 Countries those are. the source I cited stated that the US is not one of them
My point is you don't know if the list consists of ground breaking future trending Countries "ahead of our time" or if it is a bunch of worthless Countries that most people couldn't even locate on a map. I'm not saying it's one or the other, I'm just saying you/we don't know what they are and it's a bit odd the source didn't mention it sounds like typical media twisting to convey a message at it's best.
you're right I don't know, and it does bother me. I have my guesses as to who's probably on the list and some probably would surprise me. I'll look into it later but for now I have to get ready to go, why the hell did I get up so early today /grumble
サーバ: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 23653
By Shiva.Flionheart 2011-01-07 12:37:10
Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Gilgamesh.Tweeek said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said:
well 23 countries would disagree with you, and more in the future (I'm sure)
23/195 i like the odds.
this country is on it's way too, don't feel bad, and when the rest leave the stone ages hopefully they will join civilization too.
Jet you said so yourself that you don't even know what 23 Countries those are. the source I cited stated that the US is not one of them
My point is you don't know if the list consists of ground breaking future trending Countries "ahead of our time" or if it is a bunch of worthless Countries that most people couldn't even locate on a map. I'm not saying it's one or the other, I'm just saying you/we don't know what they are and it's a bit odd the source didn't mention it sounds like typical media twisting to convey a message at it's best.
Calling other countries worthless, sport?
サーバ: Ifrit
Game: FFXI
Posts: 24692
By Ifrit.Kungfuhustle 2011-01-07 12:38:05
Leviathan.Chaosx
サーバ: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2011-01-07 12:39:35
Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Leviathan.Chaosx said: Bahamut.Jetackuu said: Leviathan.Chaosx said: The Minnesota Supreme court has ruled that spanking is NOT child abuse.
Quote: The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled Friday that a father who spanked his 12-year-old son 36 times with a maple paddle did not commit physical abuse.
The unanimous ruling finalized the reversal of a lower court's decision, which did deem the punishment administered by Shawn Fraser of Bloomington, Minn., abusive.
The case passed through 3 courts – county, district and state Supreme – while lawyers and judges argued whether there was any evidence of physical or mental harm from the spankings.
The guardian ad litem, an attorney appointed to represent the children's interests, argued that while there was no evidence of injury, inflicting pain should be grounds enough for establishing abuse.
The Supreme Court disagreed.
"We are unwilling to establish a bright-line rule that the infliction of any pain constitutes either physical injury or physical abuse, because to do so would effectively prohibit all corporal punishment of children by their parents," Justice Alan Page wrote for the court.
The law allows "reasonable discipline," the ruling said, and "it is clear to us that the Legislature did not intend to ban corporal punishment."
yeah, I see it going to the supreme court, want to take bets? Citing legal precedent, they will rule in the same manor, not abuse. no, no they won't Precedent: In common law legal systems, a precedent or authority is a legal case establishing a principle or rule that a court or other judicial body may utilize when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts.
So in the way our court systems work, yes they would.
I highly doubt this would even go to court, or even be reported as abuse by anyone in the family. Sure there could be some nut case who saw the video and tries to report it, but corporal punishment at home is legal in the U.S.
Source
|
|
