Smacking children, should you do it.

SwingsitlikeHogan said:
yes
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

Maybe we should look to ban all contact sports as well then. Football, rugby and boxing all involve plenty of 'violence'. Lots of people on here are against violence yet they are happy when the centre half of their team 'sticks it into the opposing centre forward' Even something as genteel as cricket has a certain level of aggresive behaviour such as fast bowlers trying to land a bouncer in the batsman's ribcage.
 
drive4show said:
Fair enough.

Maybe we should look to ban all contact sports as well then. Football, rugby and boxing all involve plenty of 'violence'. Lots of people on here are against violence yet they are happy when the centre half of their team 'sticks it into the opposing centre forward' Even something as genteel as cricket has a certain level of aggresive behaviour such as fast bowlers trying to land a bouncer in the batsman's ribcage.
Click to expand...
Are you drunk Gordon?? 🤣🤣🤣🤣
 
drive4show said:
Fair enough.

Maybe we should look to ban all contact sports as well then. Football, rugby and boxing all involve plenty of 'violence'. Lots of people on here are against violence yet they are happy when the centre half of their team 'sticks it into the opposing centre forward' Even something as genteel as cricket has a certain level of aggresive behaviour such as fast bowlers trying to land a bouncer in the batsman's ribcage.
Click to expand...

You're taking the pee now aren't you?!
 
drive4show said:
Fair enough.

Maybe we should look to ban all contact sports as well then. Football, rugby and boxing all involve plenty of 'violence'. Lots of people on here are against violence yet they are happy when the centre half of their team 'sticks it into the opposing centre forward' Even something as genteel as cricket has a certain level of aggresive behaviour such as fast bowlers trying to land a bouncer in the batsman's ribcage.
Click to expand...
That’s as bad as my pet analogy ;)
 
drive4show said:
Fair enough.

Maybe we should look to ban all contact sports as well then. Football, rugby and boxing all involve plenty of 'violence'. Lots of people on here are against violence yet they are happy when the centre half of their team 'sticks it into the opposing centre forward' Even something as genteel as cricket has a certain level of aggresive behaviour such as fast bowlers trying to land a bouncer in the batsman's ribcage.
Click to expand...

Consenting adults fully aware of the risks and consequences of putting themselves in a situation..... slightly differing I reckon.
 
drive4show said:
Not really. If violence is unacceptable in the family home then why is it acceptable on the sports field?
Click to expand...

Assuming the "violence" on the sports field you refer to is competitive behaviour and is within the rules of the game that is being played.....are you honestly saying you see no difference between that and a bloke smacking his children or other family members?
 
Don Barzini said:
Assuming the "violence" on the sports field you refer to is competitive behaviour and is within the rules of the game that is being played.....are you honestly saying you see no difference between that and a bloke smacking his children or other family members?
Click to expand...
No I'm saying that I have seen things on the sports field that people consider to be part of the game but if they happened outside the pub on a Friday night it would be assault. So why is one acceptable but the other isn't?
 
drive4show said:
No I'm saying that I have seen things on the sports field that people consider to be part of the game but if they happened outside the pub on a Friday night it would be assault. So why is one acceptable but the other isn't?
Click to expand...
Who says it’s acceptable ? If something happens on a sports field that would be classed as assault then it’s not part of the sport and should be punished.

Any sort of violence is not acceptable - the sports you mention bar boxing are not violent , cricket ?!? Seriously ?

Sports have rules just like life has laws - stay within those rules and laws then there is no issue - cross them and the be punished.
 
Liverpoolphil said:
Who says it’s acceptable ? If something happens on a sports field that would be classed as assault then it’s not part of the sport and should be punished.

Any sort of violence is not acceptable - the sports you mention bar boxing are not violent , cricket ?!? Seriously ?

Sports have rules just like life has laws - stay within those rules and laws then there is no issue - cross them and the be punished.
Click to expand...
Yes cricket and I'm serious. I clearly remember an Ashes test when there was plenty of tension, Merv Hughes was warned for deliberately bowling too many bouncers at the ribs and head of a batsmen and the look on his face when he floored the guy with a ball in the ribs. It was clearly deliberate. And when a batsman goes for the big tonk into the stand and there is a silly point in front of him do you think he thinks to himself 'I better not because I might hurt this guy 6 feet in front of me' or 'It's his own fault for standing there if he gets hit'?
As for football, well that is just legalised thuggery at times but you are a keen supporter.
 
drive4show said:
Yes cricket and I'm serious. I clearly remember an Ashes test when there was plenty of tension, Merv Hughes was warned for deliberately bowling too many bouncers at the ribs and head of a batsmen and the look on his face when he floored the guy with a ball in the ribs. It was clearly deliberate. And when a batsman goes for the big tonk into the stand and there is a silly point in front of him do you think he thinks to himself 'I better not because I might hurt this guy 6 feet in front of me' or 'It's his own fault for standing there if he gets hit'?
As for football, well that is just legalised thuggery at times but you are a keen supporter.
Click to expand...
Sorry Gordon it’s getting a bit silly in fact beyond silly - how it’s got to the stage of sports from people thinking smacking a child is wrong I have no idea.

A cricketer hitting a ball isn’t violent for Christ sakes just as a bowler putting down bouncers and football ?!

If a sportsman commits a violent act on the sports field then they are punished , an adult smacking a child is imo a violent act and should be punished , just as if an adult smacked another adult it would be classed as assault

Smack a child means failing in the role of parent and protecting your own child. Who is going to protect the child from parent willing to hit them
 
Liverpoolphil said:
Who says it’s acceptable ? If something happens on a sports field that would be classed as assault then it’s not part of the sport and should be punished.

Any sort of violence is not acceptable - the sports you mention bar boxing are not violent , cricket ?!? Seriously ?

Sports have rules just like life has laws - stay within those rules and laws then there is no issue - cross them and the be punished.
Click to expand...

Phil, you always come across with this "if things are within the law".

Are all laws fair?

Have they all been agreed on by the populace?

Are they all applied fairly across race, creed, demographics and "status" of individuals?

Are all laws morally justifiable?

Have you never broken a law in your life?
 
No Phil it's not silly. This thread is about the acceptance (or not) of violent behaviour and I have given some examples of differing standards.
 
Liverbirdie said:
Phil, you always come across with this "if things are within the law".

Are all laws fair?

Have they all been agreed on by the populace?

Are they all applied fairly across race, creed, demographics and "status" of individuals?

Are all laws morally justifiable?

Have you never broken a law in your life?
Click to expand...
Yes I have broken a law and been punished for it.

As for your questions on laws being fair ? I suspect many would think they are and many would think they aren’t. I personally find no issues with them and believe I live my life within in - even if I may not agree with a rule i will respect it. That’s how I was brought up.
 
drive4show said:
No Phil it's not silly. This thread is about the acceptance (or not) of violent behaviour and I have given some examples of differing standards.
Click to expand...

It is stupid when start to bring in sport and even more so when you suggest people believe it to be acceptable

Violence -

using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

if that is used in sport ( beyond the obvious combat sports ) then it will be punishable

IF a footballer is deemed to have carried out an act of violence - punished , same in rugby , tennis , cricket or indeed any sport.

This is the football rule on violent conduct


VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.

The punishment is a red card plus suspension

I believe in cricket it’s Law 42 , in rugby Law 10 - so how can violence be deemend acceptable in sports when they have laws that oppose it ?

Unlawful acts of violence or violent behaviour are not acceptable by 99% of the respectful human race. Violence or violent behaviour is 99% the last act of a coward who has no respect.
 
Liverpoolphil said:
It is stupid when start to bring in sport and even more so when you suggest people believe it to be acceptable

Violence -

using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

if that is used in sport ( beyond the obvious combat sports ) then it will be punishable

IF a footballer is deemed to have carried out an act of violence - punished , same in rugby , tennis , cricket or indeed any sport.

This is the football rule on violent conduct


VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.

The punishment is a red card plus suspension

I believe in cricket it’s Law 42 , in rugby Law 10 - so how can violence be deemend acceptable in sports when they have laws that oppose it ?

Unlawful acts of violence or violent behaviour are not acceptable by 99% of the respectful human race. Violence or violent behaviour is 99% the last act of a coward who has no respect.
Click to expand...
Yep fair enough I agree with what you say. But those advocating smacking children on here are talking about a little tap on the back of the hand or backside which is considerably less violent than some of the actions you see in football or rugby which you consider to be part and parcel of the game. So if you can't tap a child's hand why do you think it is acceptable to shoulder barge an opponent to the ground in football which is within the rules?
 
drive4show said:
Yep fair enough I agree with what you say. But those advocating smacking children on here are talking about a little tap on the back of the hand or backside which is considerably less violent than some of the actions you see in football or rugby which you consider to be part and parcel of the game. So if you can't tap a child's hand why do you think it is acceptable to shoulder barge an opponent to the ground in football which is within the rules?
Click to expand...
You are talking about two adults playing a sport - a shoulder barge isn’t a violent act and it’s not done to hurt someone. Players tackling each other isnt a violent act - it maybe physical force but it’s not violence

Someone smacking a child is trying to shock them into not doing something- they don’t “tap” the back of the hand - it’s done with enough force to shock and the shock comes from the initial pain of the blow.

Not one of us can judge how little force can produce pain for a child - it’s someone physically stronger hitting someone with a different pain threshold

If someone imo feels they are justified in raising a hand , slipper etc to someone physically smaller than them as a punishment then imo they have failed that child
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dufferman
Do you support someone just because they're Scottish / Irish / Welsh?
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
dufferman
dufferman
Top