Posts by Chuck Bird

Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First

  • Hard News: Not so much ironic as outrageous,

    Speaking of dishonesty, all the lefties claiming that section 59 has not been repealed are being deliberately misleading. Section 59 for all practical purposes has been repealed. Adding some clause that the police may use discretion when deciding whether to lay charges was a nonsense. That would have applied in any case.

    Chester Borrows proposed amendment would have amended the legislation so that anyone who smacked a child with anything more than the lightest tap could have been convicted of assault. Nonetheless it would have been an amendment. To claim the present legislation is an amendment is totally dishonest and just an exercise in semantics.

    Since Apr 2007 • 55 posts Report

  • Hard News: A depressing day in court,

    sorry chuck, but that is simply absurd

    Chi, I am sure you mean in your humble opinion that my view and that of 80% of the public is absurd. I am not talking about the right to hogtie or use a riding crop on anyone.

    In your view what is a right? Is it what you decree or is something that is determined democratically?

    Does a 39 week fetus have a right to life or is it up to the mother to decide whether she wants the baby born alive or would rather have a late term abortion?

    Since Apr 2007 • 55 posts Report

  • Hard News: A depressing day in court,

    Should that be, Children should not have the same rights as the family pet.

    Please explain. Are you trying to say it is a criminal offense to smack a disobedient dog. If so, quote the act.

    Since Apr 2007 • 55 posts Report

  • Hard News: A depressing day in court,

    Nobody Important, so I assume you would consider Sue Bradford was always blameless like the Timaru Lady? Would you consider spitting in a police officer's face self defense?

    The main issue should be should good parents be penalized by the actions of a handful?. I am talking single digits who have successfully used section 59 to avoid conviction.

    The proposed legislation has nothing to do with the welfare of children. It is ideologically driven. The same people who are driving this think it is okay for a 14 year old girl to get a abortion without a parent's knowledge. They are also the same lot who wanted to lower the age of consent to 12.

    Children should not have the same rights as adults any more than they should have the same responsibilities.

    Since Apr 2007 • 55 posts Report

  • Hard News: A depressing day in court,

    Russell, this lady at the very least is very selective in the way she tells her story. I doubt if she is telling the whole truth. She was certainly not very bright in regard the timing for the release of her video. The video was convincing. I have reassessed my view of her after the latest allegation. However, none of this presents a logical argument in favour of Bradford’s bill. Is Bradford as violent a person as she is because she received the odd smack as a child or would she be worse if she never received a smack as all?

    Since Apr 2007 • 55 posts Report

Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Older→ First