It seems to have been decided that all matters involving force were police business only, that self defense was to be sternly discouraged, and that Her Majesty's loyal subjects were no longer fit to decide such things as who to hit or how hard in a home invasion or other criminal act. It was my opinion that I'd REALLY like to know who decided that, since I didn't get asked.
Well here's a chance to know who's deciding something for you. Your betters have decided that you are not smart enough to decide about spanking your own child. Its one more step down the same path that's getting your underwear checked at the airport in case you might have a Swiss army knife stuffed up where the sun don't shine. Pay close attention to the who and where.
A medical journal's call to do away with Canada's so-called spanking law is something Manitoba daycare advocates say they've been demanding for nearly a decade.You'll find Canadian Medical Association fingerprints all over gun control legislation in Canada too.
"We, along with many other provincial and national organizations concerned with the well-being of children, have long held the belief that hitting children is not an acceptable form of guiding children's behaviour," said Pat Wege, executive director of the Manitoba Child Care Association Inc.
In 2003, the Manitoba association endorsed a cross-Canada coalition's joint statement on physical punishment of children and youth, said Wege.
Now, a strongly worded editorial in the Canadian Medical Association Journal has called for the repeal of Section 43 of the Criminal Code, which gives parents and teachers a legal defence when they physically discipline children.
"It is time for Canada to remove this anachronistic excuse for poor parenting from the statute book," editor-in-chief John Fletcher wrote in a signed editorial Tuesday.
The editorial will likely re-ignite debate on a controversial topic that has inflamed opinion for decades.
The Supreme Court of Canada upheld the Criminal Code provision by a 6-3 margin in a landmark 2004 ruling.
The high court ruled the provision doesn't infringe a child's right to security of the person under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
Let the bastards know what you think. Personally I think they should F- OFF out of my business, but that's just me.