ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Aviation Trivia, Jokes & Humour

Moderator: Moderators

Flying Glow Ant
Wanna Fly
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:02 am
Closest Airfield: FASH
Location: Cape Town
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Flying Glow Ant » Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:12 am

Moderators Message:
Fake Profile Closed.
Swartbok
Frequent AvComer
Posts: 755
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2014 6:15 pm
Closest Airfield: Wonderboom
Location: Gauteng
Has liked: 26 times
Been liked: 76 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Swartbok » Fri Sep 20, 2019 6:33 am

The law now says I can’t spank my kids at home.
I don’t want to break the law.

So I’ll spank them next door at the neighbors then.
Always read the fine print.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Flying is like sex. I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I could stand.
Falafel
Incipient Spin
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:47 am
Closest Airfield: FALA_LCY
Location: United Kingdom
Has liked: 40 times
Been liked: 69 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Falafel » Fri Sep 20, 2019 8:05 am

Romeo E.T. wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 12:08 am
When I was growing up, the "whip" was NOT SPARED.....on more than one occasion blood was physically drawn
My parents, especially my father ruled like a tyrant, and respect was beaten, not earned

so much so, that post matric, I broke all communications with the parents, and proudly sing the famous by "Ole Blue eyes" ..I did it my way

Well the father passed away around 5 years ago, and I hadn't seen him (them) or spoken to them (or even a christmas card) for over 25 years, and I barely had a lump in my throat when I heard of his passing.
Since then my mother, being a lonley old woman, has tried to reconcile, and make up, but there is too much traumatic childhood memories, and too much time apart, for me to see her as anything other than someone I am supposed to be acquainted to/related to.

I was engaged for 7 years to another woman, that came with instant kids (baggage), and since they were not my own, I felt no need to discipline them, but rather preferred the "transactional analysis" approach first, and if that didn't work, then the stern deep serious voice.
It worked perfectly for me (I think), and I never had the need to resort to violence, although their mother DID.

I believe a stern serious voice and action can achieve the desired level of discipline and respect, without resorting to violence and pain, to instill fear.
I classify my relationship with my parents, as one where respect and discipline where achieved thru pain and fear, which is why I never looked back when I broke ties with them.
Sad but happens more often than we realise unfortunately.
Falafel
Incipient Spin
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:47 am
Closest Airfield: FALA_LCY
Location: United Kingdom
Has liked: 40 times
Been liked: 69 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Falafel » Fri Sep 20, 2019 8:13 am

Wildcat_004 wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:43 pm
Here are a couple of guys who spanked their kids.....and suddenly Falafel is surprisingly absent. Talk about double standards...! I don’t care a hoot what your point is. Nobody will tell me what I do in my household. Fullstop. The Bible is very specific and I will use that because it’s a very straightforward instruction. And then you have the audacity to say you are right.....take a hike.
I'm still here and your post just makes me realise more and more how much a law like this is maybe a good thing... many of the other posters arguing FOR a smack on the bum on occassion raise some good points and seem rather balanced, but reference to the bible as your "law" is rather curious considering how many passages in the bible can in fact be interpreted depending on which side of the fence you sit on.

I have a Muslim friend who discusses the Koran with me on occassion. I find it incredible interesting and his interpretation of it says that his wife does not have to wear a head veil and nor does he treat her badly, in fact a very nice family in my view, and I enjoy their company allot. Maybe this is indicative of just how far apart we are on this issue and likely others.

In principle 99% of parents likely smack when appropriate but laws are generally not intended to protect those kids... and likely giving your kid a smack is not going to lead to an assault charge ever, its the one child whose parents beat them indiscriminantely using it is a "form of discipline" and hiding behind their own insecurities and inadequacies... I received 6 of the best on a few occassions and the teacher who gave them to me is in my view still one of the best around. He taught my son and while he couldnt dish out the same treatment to him (my son), if he did (and was legally allowed to), I would err on his side in terms of dishing out the appropriate punishment to him. He is a well balanced individual whom I admire and respect allot.
Kill_Switch
Straight and Level
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 3:17 pm
Closest Airfield: FAWK
Location: Centurion
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 2 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Kill_Switch » Fri Sep 20, 2019 9:34 am

Falafel wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 8:13 am
In principle 99% of parents likely smack when appropriate but laws are generally not intended to protect those kids...
This is where I will agree, the issue is today we cannot turn a blind eye to abuse.

However I do not agree with the court ruling. I as a parent never have given a hiding out of anger, in fact we have a rule in our house that if they were to be given it is after all parties have discussed the reason and implications of actions that led to the discipline.
I am pretty sure that there are far more parents that would give up their worlds for there kids, and when physical discipline is given it is not meant to harm. Yes there is the exceptions and always will be.

Thus my issue is the Law has been made based to stop abuse, but those who abuse are not going to stop because of the court ruling.
User avatar
Christo
Seven Thousand
Seven Thousand
Posts: 7944
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 11:01 am
Location: Pretoria
Has liked: 40 times
Been liked: 54 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Christo » Fri Sep 20, 2019 9:41 am

Kill_Switch wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 9:34 am
Falafel wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 8:13 am
In principle 99% of parents likely smack when appropriate but laws are generally not intended to protect those kids...
This is where I will agree, the issue is today we cannot turn a blind eye to abuse.

However I do not agree with the court ruling. I as a parent never have given a hiding out of anger, in fact we have a rule in our house that if they were to be given it is after all parties have discussed the reason and implications of actions that led to the discipline.
I am pretty sure that there are far more parents that would give up their worlds for there kids, and when physical discipline is given it is not meant to harm. Yes there is the exceptions and always will be.

Thus my issue is the Law has been made based to stop abuse, but those who abuse are not going to stop because of the court ruling.
You cannot delay punishment with small kids! Having a debate first by the time you get round to it they have no farking clue why they are punished and thus in their mind you are punishing them for no reason.
These users liked the author Christo for the post (total 2):
WhirlyTFD
Due to the price increase in ammunition, do not expect a warning shot.

Sig Sauer, kinda like Glock except for men.
Kill_Switch
Straight and Level
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 3:17 pm
Closest Airfield: FAWK
Location: Centurion
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 2 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Kill_Switch » Fri Sep 20, 2019 9:46 am

depends on kids then I assume, mine are 5/8 and works well
Falafel
Incipient Spin
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:47 am
Closest Airfield: FALA_LCY
Location: United Kingdom
Has liked: 40 times
Been liked: 69 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Falafel » Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:00 am

Kill_Switch wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 9:34 am
Falafel wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 8:13 am
In principle 99% of parents likely smack when appropriate but laws are generally not intended to protect those kids...
This is where I will agree, the issue is today we cannot turn a blind eye to abuse.

However I do not agree with the court ruling. I as a parent never have given a hiding out of anger, in fact we have a rule in our house that if they were to be given it is after all parties have discussed the reason and implications of actions that led to the discipline.
I am pretty sure that there are far more parents that would give up their worlds for there kids, and when physical discipline is given it is not meant to harm. Yes there is the exceptions and always will be.

Thus my issue is the Law has been made based to stop abuse, but those who abuse are not going to stop because of the court ruling.
The difficulty is you need the laws first and then implement later... so, most traffic cops would agree that you can in some circumstances go through a red traffic light at night in a bad area if you are cautious for your own security, but you cannot make it legal since it then becomes open to abuse, so it has to be one or the other... its not an easy situation but the law has to be there to protect first and foremost and then implemented in a manner in which it protects, which is in my view where SA falls rather short... implementation is questionable. There is clearly no easy answer to this or one where you can please everyone.
User avatar
Jack Welles
Tree Tousand
Tree Tousand
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:15 pm
Closest Airfield: FACT
Location: Muizenberg
Has liked: 23 times
Been liked: 183 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Jack Welles » Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:01 am

rare bird wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:24 pm
Eddie - you are more qualified to comment than I am -
https://www.amazon.com/Emperor-Has-No-C ... 1643731912
https://soundcloud.com/user-637572915/t ... osium-2018
Obviously there are more views on the ConCourt than just mine, but as regards Mathee please note that he is approaching the whole thing from a very hard-line religious perspective (which we're not allowed to discuss here) so suffice it to say that his main shtick is strongly anti-abortion which then colours his evaluation of a court that has ended up, effectively, in the liberal pro-choice camp.

I don't have any of those sort of affiliations so viewed from a purely legal perspective FWIW I think the ConCourt (actually the judiciary generally) has done extraordinarily well in a country where the oversight bodies have been seriously compromised through executive malfeasance.

That doesn't mean the judicial bench is perfect. I have my own reservations with regard to some judgments, but even in that regard will accept that they have, at the very least, not been arbitrary.
These users liked the author Jack Welles for the post (total 3):
Falafelrare birdrichard C
Jack Welles (thriller_author pen name)
https://www.amazon.com/Jack-Welles/e/B073VJQTTX
Eddie Haynes-Smart
Textbook - "The Lore of Negotiation"
http://www.loreofnegotiation.com
Falafel
Incipient Spin
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:47 am
Closest Airfield: FALA_LCY
Location: United Kingdom
Has liked: 40 times
Been liked: 69 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Falafel » Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:10 am

Jack Welles wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:01 am
rare bird wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:24 pm
Eddie - you are more qualified to comment than I am -
https://www.amazon.com/Emperor-Has-No-C ... 1643731912
https://soundcloud.com/user-637572915/t ... osium-2018
Obviously there are more views on the ConCourt than just mine, but as regards Mathee please note that he is approaching the whole thing from a very hard-line religious perspective (which we're not allowed to discuss here) so suffice it to say that his main shtick is strongly anti-abortion which then colours his evaluation of a court that has ended up, effectively, in the liberal pro-choice camp.

I don't have any of those sort of affiliations so viewed from a purely legal perspective FWIW I think the ConCourt (actually the judiciary generally) has done extraordinarily well in a country where the oversight bodies have been seriously compromised through executive malfeasance.

That doesn't mean the judicial bench is perfect. I have my own reservations with regard to some judgments, but even in that regard will accept that they have, at the very least, not been arbitrary.
Question: Could a child who has been spanked, with this ruling in place now, take his / her parents to court in say years to come (once they reach major status) later on in life?
User avatar
Jack Welles
Tree Tousand
Tree Tousand
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:15 pm
Closest Airfield: FACT
Location: Muizenberg
Has liked: 23 times
Been liked: 183 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Jack Welles » Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:11 am

It's interesting that no-one has addressed the actual reasons for the ConCourt's ruling that it is unconstitutional. Perhaps a quote below will explain the reasoning -
this was unconstitutional on the grounds that it violated the child’s right to equal protection of the law, dignity, freedom from all forms of violence and degradation, bodily and psychological integrity, and the child’s right not to be discriminated against based on age.
in other words no-one on this forum who objects to the ruling has set out why, in their opinion, the legal interpretation by the ConCourt of the relevant clauses of SA's Constitution is incorrect.
Jack Welles (thriller_author pen name)
https://www.amazon.com/Jack-Welles/e/B073VJQTTX
Eddie Haynes-Smart
Textbook - "The Lore of Negotiation"
http://www.loreofnegotiation.com
Falafel
Incipient Spin
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:47 am
Closest Airfield: FALA_LCY
Location: United Kingdom
Has liked: 40 times
Been liked: 69 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Falafel » Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:13 am

Jack Welles wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:11 am
It's interesting that no-one has addressed the actual reasons for the ConCourt's ruling that it is unconstitutional. Perhaps a quote below will explain the reasoning -
this was unconstitutional on the grounds that it violated the child’s right to equal protection of the law, dignity, freedom from all forms of violence and degradation, bodily and psychological integrity, and the child’s right not to be discriminated against based on age.
in other words no-one on this forum who objects to the ruling has set out why, in their opinion, the legal interpretation by the ConCourt of the relevant clauses of SA's Constitution is incorrect.
Hard to argue with that
User avatar
Jack Welles
Tree Tousand
Tree Tousand
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:15 pm
Closest Airfield: FACT
Location: Muizenberg
Has liked: 23 times
Been liked: 183 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Jack Welles » Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:23 am

Falafel wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:10 am
Question: Could a child who has been spanked, with this ruling in place now, take his / her parents to court in say years to come (once they reach major status) later on in life?
IIRC the ability to bring a prosecution for common assault (which I presume it would be) precribes after 20 years, but it can get complicated depending on the definition of the crime and whether specific prescription rules relating to the crime in question have been put in place elsewhere in legislation.
Jack Welles (thriller_author pen name)
https://www.amazon.com/Jack-Welles/e/B073VJQTTX
Eddie Haynes-Smart
Textbook - "The Lore of Negotiation"
http://www.loreofnegotiation.com
User avatar
Fransw
Fife Thousand feet
Fife Thousand feet
Posts: 5248
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 3:22 pm
Closest Airfield: Pretoria
Location: Pretoria
Has liked: 213 times
Been liked: 80 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Fransw » Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:27 am

Falafel wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:13 am
Jack Welles wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:11 am
It's interesting that no-one has addressed the actual reasons for the ConCourt's ruling that it is unconstitutional. Perhaps a quote below will explain the reasoning -
this was unconstitutional on the grounds that it violated the child’s right to equal protection of the law, dignity, freedom from all forms of violence and degradation, bodily and psychological integrity, and the child’s right not to be discriminated against based on age.
in other words no-one on this forum who objects to the ruling has set out why, in their opinion, the legal interpretation by the ConCourt of the relevant clauses of SA's Constitution is incorrect.
Hard to argue with that
Yes, its nothing but fair!
Falafel
Incipient Spin
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:47 am
Closest Airfield: FALA_LCY
Location: United Kingdom
Has liked: 40 times
Been liked: 69 times

Re: ConCourt - spanking unlawful

Unread post by Falafel » Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:42 am

Jack Welles wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:23 am
Falafel wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2019 10:10 am
Question: Could a child who has been spanked, with this ruling in place now, take his / her parents to court in say years to come (once they reach major status) later on in life?
IIRC the ability to bring a prosecution for common assault (which I presume it would be) precribes after 20 years, but it can get complicated depending on the definition of the crime and whether specific prescription rules relating to the crime in question have been put in place elsewhere in legislation.
So the parent who goes against the constitution in this instance had best keep on the right side of their children because they could conceivably take you to court in just under 20 years from now for assault... regardless of the fact that its your own home or your religion says otherwise, right :?:

Keep 'em happy people, and hope that they see their hiding in the same light as you do for a very long time :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Return to “123.45”