pqr Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Just who is justifying hitting a baby???? It certainly appears that people in this thread are doing just that. Who?? Quote please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hornblower Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 I think you're disagreeing now about what constitutes a baby. Some people view 2 year olds as babies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovedtodeath Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 I have not read all of the post, but posts 93 and 94 have quotes and it appears that there is blame on the parent and the child, above that being placed on the lady who was charged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovedtodeath Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 I think you're disagreeing now about what constitutes a baby. Some people view 2 year olds as babies. Well, my 2 year old wears diapers, doesn't know not to play in the toilet, gets a great deal of his nutrition from milk, only speaks when he is repeating something, and still needs supervision while in the bath or in the yard, or I would be charged with neglect. So, yeah, I consider a two year old a baby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatCyndiGirl Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 And, please can we just dispense with all the assualt euphemisms and call it what it is? Whether you say "spank" "swat" "slap" "hit" or "assault" it is all the same thing. If it is wrong to hit ME when you and I argue, then why is it not assault to hit a child? Why does an adult get more respect and legal protection than a child? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cathmom Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 If this happened to me, I would grab my child back and dial 911 on my cell phone ASAP. But I can't imagine committing the same crime I've just accused someone else of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 I have not read all of the post, but posts 93 and 94 have quotes and it appears that there is blame on the parent and the child, above that being placed on the lady who was charged. I read those posts and see nothing about HITTING a baby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovedtodeath Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 It is only assault if it causes injury. That is where the argument against assault charges lies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovedtodeath Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 I read those posts and see nothing about HITTING a baby. Blaming the parent and child (victims) rather than the assaillant is justifying the action. What if the child was raped and someone came on blaming the actions of the parent and child rather than the rapist? Would it be so hard to understand how wrong that line of reasoning is then? I am sorry. I normally agree with both Dirtroad and yourself on a great many things, but blaming the victims is not appropriate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravelingChris Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 I think these people who are hitting stranger children all have mental health issues. (I am including alcoholism in that category). This particular woman has a history of the kind of crimes that mentally ill are often charged with- disorderly conduct, petty theft, fighting, etc. One pervasive health problem in our country is that they closed the asylems but pout nothing into place to deal with chronically mentally ill who cannot live peaceably in our communities. Many of the mentally ill refuse medication and there are also those for whom medication and treatments are currently not possible. In my opinion, having humane and pleasant long term facilities for such people is a much better option than having them run around, grabbing and hitting our kids, us, and others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 I read those posts and see nothing about HITTING a baby. Hit: To come in contact with forcefully; strike.. (American Heritage Dictionary) Spanking is a subset of hitting. Laura Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Blaming the parent and child (victims) rather than the assaillant is justifying the action. What if the child was raped and someone came on blaming the actions of the parent and child rather than the rapist? Would it be so hard to understand how wrong that line of reasoning is then? I am sorry. I normally agree with both Dirtroad and yourself on a great many things, but blaming the victims is not appropriate. No one is blaming the child in THIS case. What has been said is merely that many children could probably do with a spanking. On an earlier post I stated "I will restate, the fact that the kid may or may not have needed a spanking (given the age the kid almost certainly did NOT) does not justify another woman administering said punishment." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 It is only assault if it causes injury. That is where the argument against assault charges lies. Carmen, I'm no lawyer but I believe this understanding of what constitutes "assault" is quite incorrect. While definitions vary by statute from state to state, "assault" traditionally didn't require that physical contact even take place, rather what is in issue is that one person tried to physically strike another, or one created a reasonable fear in another that they were in imminent danger of being struck. Traditionally, being struck was called "Battery". "Assault and Battery" are sometime co-joined in state laws, but I'm unaware that there is a standard of "injury" for "assault" other than "aggravated assault" (which is treated as a more serious crime). Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lionfamily1999 Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Blaming the parent and child (victims) rather than the assaillant is justifying the action. What if the child was raped and someone came on blaming the actions of the parent and child rather than the rapist? Would it be so hard to understand how wrong that line of reasoning is then? I am sorry. I normally agree with both Dirtroad and yourself on a great many things, but blaming the victims is not appropriate. It doesn't even need to get that far (rape). An adult striking another person's child is wrong. Period. When was there EVER a grey area where this was concerned. Even the cops are not allowed to strike a child, they can restrain them, assuming the child is attempting to either escape or attack, but strike???? Uh, never. Wow, I read the first post to this thread and thought... there's no way this can go anywhere, I mean, who could disagree with the idea that an adult is getting punished for striking someone else's child? I am surprised to see I was wrong. And I agree with Carmen, blaming the parent or the child (the child, blaming the child, really???) is pointless. I don't care if my kids are screaming like lunatics fresh out of the bin, you (general you) do not lay hands on them. One more thing. For those of us who are 'anti-social' or 'introverts' or whatever, we stay home (for the most part). We don't go out and demand the world bend around us. When you go out there are people, those people either were or are children. If you don't want to hear them, then stay home. We don't observe moments of silence in honor of every passer by. This whole thing is just rediculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amsunshine Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 It is only assault if it causes injury. That is where the argument against assault charges lies. Actually, I'm not sure what the law on assault is specifically in Ohio (where this happened), but the common law version of assault does not require either a touching or injury. You can have enhancements to the charge that allege injury, but assault just requires the manifestation of a specific intent to touch another person wrongfully. Battery is a wrongful touching, which is a general intent crime, and also does not require proof of injury. Again, I'm not sure what the specific assault law in Ohio is, though. Generally, however, injury is not required to prove either assault or battery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovedtodeath Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Carmen, I'm no lawyer but I believe this understanding of what constitutes "assault" is quite incorrect. While definitions vary by statute from state to state, "assault" traditionally didn't require that physical contact even take place, rather what is in issue is that one person tried to physically strike another, or one created a reasonable fear in another that they were in imminent danger of being struck. Traditionally, being struck was called "Battery". "Assault and Battery" are sometime co-joined in state laws, but I'm unaware that there is a standard of "injury" for "assault" other than "aggravated assault" (which is treated as a more serious crime). Bill Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaik76 Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 If anybody hit my child I would call the police and press charges. I believe physical violence is wrong no matter the size or age of the victim. Poor baby!Absolutely. Assault? In my state that means significant injury - requiring a doctors visit - bruising, cuts, bleeding. Assault? Wonder if she showed her gang colors or her brass knuckles first? PLEASE! Long ago, even when I was in school, a MOM would have appreciated the support of the community & the back up of a grandmother or parent. A swat on the bottom... it wasn't uncommon. Today, we are so wrapped up in self esteem & not ruining little Johnny's desire to express himself... yadda yadda. The values in our community are so diluted... you don't know who your are dealing wtih, shopping next to, or what they believe. Best thing to do is in many cases... nothing. No matter how bad the kid is acting or how miserable everyone is (including kid & his Mom). Stay out of it. My grandmother could smack a little bottom b/c all the Moms were of similar value system & rearing children in similar manners. They supported each other & understood each other. Not today. Keep your distance.... for your own safety and because you do not know the family & their issues. The Moms of these kids are worthless. On a minor issue at a BKing.... I watch a kid cruelly treat a toddler & literally run him over - tot crying, etc. We helped the baby... his Dad had lost him from her sight as he turned corner. The big kid shouldn't have been on the playground anyway... to old & too big. We found the big boys mom & told her. She defended the punk (this is what is wrong today)... and looked at me like the most evil person on the planet. It was intentional, I watched. She could have cared less. He has "issues"... yeah, he needs discipline in some form & you are his issue (in my head I was screaming this at her). He may have issues, but if they endanger a kid... keep him off the playground or watch him better. With society today, this lady shouldn't have touched the child. Let him tear the store down, drop a fancy bowl, fall out the window... don't touch him. Just complain to management (talking to mom woudl have been worthless)... they are the ones who will get sued by the doting mother if kid gets hurt & have the most liability. I can understand the authorities finding a CHARGE for the elder lady in todays society... but not assault. Good heavens. Perhaps the mother neglecting her child in public would make a good charge also. It is about time parents are held to account for their children's behavior. Yeah, I know... to harsh. But Moms & Dads need to be doing their job. You know, I just can't believe this post. The funny thing to me is that when I was growing up it was a common thing to be spanked by someone other than your parent. I remember mouthing off to one of my neighbors when I was a kid and they spanked me and then marched me back to my house and knocked on the door and told my mother what I said. My mom asked her if she spanked me and the lady said yes. My mom said good and spanked me again. I wonder if that lady Ballard grew up in a neighborhood like that, but still spanking a total stranger's child isn't the same thing as a neighbor. I wouldn't want anyone laying a hand on my child other than me, but times were different just a few decades ago and I'm not even as old as that lady Ballard. Still she was way out of line. I don't know if she's mentally ill or not, but certainly has some boundary issues. :eek: I was never spanked by someone outside my family, and would certainly not tolerate it. My grandmother was never spanked by someone outside family. My family. My rules. Keep out unless you know them and I've given permission. You either live in a city of angels or you have a far higher tolerance than some of the rest of us. Children who are rude, use foul language, hit others, scream/shout in stores etc could all use a swat or spanking (the difference based on their age and the level of their behavior). There is no need to use the charged and less precise term "hit" as it prejudices the debate and brings to mind a images that are NOT what are being discussed here. I too find things mind-boggling. How adults pardon the poor behavior of children, how parents make excuses for CONSTANT misbehavior and how a tried and tested method of disciplining children now brings cries of disdain. I don't make excuses for my kids misbehavior. But they do misbehave. Whether I choose to spank or not, that's my own decision. But no one else will ever spank my children...not even grandparents. I read those posts and see nothing about HITTING a baby.Spanking is a sub-set of hitting. And my two-year old is still a baby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaik76 Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 The woman is referred to as a grandmother in one of the articles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 It is only assault if it causes injury. That is where the argument against assault charges lies. Carmen, I'm no lawyer but I believe this understanding of what constitutes "assault" is quite incorrect. While definitions vary by statute from state to state, "assault" traditionally didn't require that physical contact even take place, rather what is in issue is that one person tried to physically strike another, or one created a reasonable fear in another that they were in imminent danger of being struck. Traditionally, being struck was called "Battery". "Assault and Battery" are sometime co-joined in state laws, but I'm unaware that there is a standard of "injury" for "assault" other than "aggravated assault" (which is treated as a more serious crime). Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovedtodeath Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Absolutely. You know, I just can't believe this post. I was never spanked by someone outside my family, and would certainly not tolerate it. My grandmother was never spanked by someone outside family. My family. My rules. Keep out unless you know them and I've given permission. I don't make excuses for my kids misbehavior. But they do misbehave. Whether I choose to spank or not, that's my own decision. But no one else will ever spank my children...not even grandparents. Spanking is a sub-set of hitting. And my two-year old is still a baby. Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Spanking is a sub-set of hitting.. ... and jaywalking is a subset of crime but that does not mean that I would refer to someone who does this repeatedly as a hardened criminal. When talking of spanking a younger child lets use the more precise term...spanking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovedtodeath Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 ... and jaywalking is a subset of crime but that does not mean that I would refer to someone who does this repeatedly as a hardened criminal. When talking of spanking a younger child lets use the more precise term...spanking. Wow! I am so glad that the majority of society treats someone spanking my baby as a criminal. BTW, There have been several definitions of spanking cited that include the term striking and hitting in the definition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Wow! I am so glad that the majority of society treats someone spanking my baby as a criminal. I am too as it is criminal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nova147 Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 If this woman had smacked the mother, would anyone think she wasn't guilty of a crime? You can't hurt people in our culture. It's not ok. And beyond that, it's illegal. And children are people. When I first saw this thread title, I figured it a was parent being charged for spanking his/her own child. I suppose my next guess would have been a caregiver. I would have never guess it was a complete stranger. I can't find any justification for this behavior. If the woman is mentally ill or disabled in some way, I suppose that is mitigation, but even so, adults who do not understand that YOU CANNOT HURT PEOPLE belong in jail or under constant supervision (like children who have not yet grasped this crucial point). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovedtodeath Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 I am too as it is criminal.I misread your intent. Thank you for further clarifying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greta Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 How about compassion from the Mom for all those poor people having to deal with her child. Those poor people can either make the choice to tolerate behavior of which they might not approve, with the maturity and wisdom that comes with the realization that none of us has the luxury of controlling everything and everyone in our environment, or they can chose to get offended, irritated, and angry about a situation which really when you stop to think about it has very little impact on their lives. Being the adults in the situation, they are the ones with the ability and responsibility to practice a little bit of patience and discernment. A temper tantrum from a 2 year old is very annoying, I agree. But from an adult it's just plain inexcusable. And I'm not just preaching about it, but honestly endeavoring to practice what I preach. I often have to remind myself not to sweat the small stuff, and to offer people more grace and kindness that I am sometimes inclined to. I am, unfortunately, a somewhat irritable person. Just ask my poor dd. I have to consciously remind myself that my irritation is my responsibility, my choice, and I am the only one who can change it. It isn't up to other people to modify their behavior to suit my wishes. It's up to me to modify my reactions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommyrooch Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Those poor people can either make the choice to tolerate behavior of which they might not approve, with the maturity and wisdom that comes with the realization that none of us has the luxury of controlling everything and everyone in our environment, or they can chose to get offended, irritated, and angry about a situation which really when you stop to think about it has very little impact on their lives. Being the adults in the situation, they are the ones with the ability and responsibility to practice a little bit of patience and discernment. A temper tantrum from a 2 year old is very annoying, I agree. But from an adult it's just plain inexcusable. And I'm not just preaching about it, but honestly endeavoring to practice what I preach. I often have to remind myself not to sweat the small stuff, and to offer people more grace and kindness that I am sometimes inclined to. I am, unfortunately, a somewhat irritable person. Just ask my poor dd. I have to consciously remind myself that my irritation is my responsibility, my choice, and I am the only one who can change it. It isn't up to other people to modify their behavior to suit my wishes. It's up to me to modify my reactions. Great post! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teeleigh2000 Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 If this woman had smacked the mother, would anyone think she wasn't guilty of a crime? :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Well, my 2 year old wears diapers, doesn't know not to play in the toilet, gets a great deal of his nutrition from milk, only speaks when he is repeating something, and still needs supervision while in the bath or in the yard, or I would be charged with neglect. So, yeah, I consider a two year old a baby. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangerine Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Do I even DARE? http://www.theautismnews.com/tag/frank-teverbaugh/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nova147 Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Do I even DARE? http://www.theautismnews.com/tag/frank-teverbaugh/ Another mess. But at least this guy admits that hitting the kid was wrong. Not that that relieves him of responsibility, but . . . well at least he knows it's wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mytwomonkeys Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 this thread is from 2009!:confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 this thread is from 2009!:confused: Justice delayed is justice denied :D Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marylou Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Justice delayed is justice denied :D Bill :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaceyinLA Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 That is "aggravated assault." That is what I would be committing should someone assault my child. :lol: I thought "aggravated assault," was assault with a weapon. Oh crud, I was reading through the posts, responded, and just saw that this thread is from 2009. Sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momof3littles Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Deleted. Just realized this is an old thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.