there is no intent to cause harm

<:pepelaugh:544857300179877898>

Smacking as a parental technique fulfils that

violence is physical harm, I don't think violence in it's broadest sense is inherently wrong, though

there's so much wrong here

You are intending to cause harm as a deterrent to a particular action

no

yeah im going to fuck off and play some more tomb raider

this conversation is groundhogging

if you've ever smacked a child, it's not a hard action

It is still physical harm

no

you don't hit the child to cause pain

It may be more minor then the cane or beatings but it is still using pain as a deterrent

That is simply morally wrong

ok, so when i touch you, is it painful?

No

when i tap you, is that painful?

A smack isn't just a touch though

Have i got to go into official definitions here of what a smack is?

Problem is, even a tap under Scotland's new law could be a criminal act

it's not our fault your parents beat you until you bled

Just no

so you have no idea what a reasonable smack is

🤷

I wasn't beaten at all as a child

Which is why i agree with not doing it to others

problem solved

https://twitter.com/AmandeepBhogal/status/1180231010409205760

How though?

***COME***

***WHAT***

***MAY***

Somehow

I don't know how but somehow

I think Boris has a plan

I don't think he would risk everything on this deal passing

He's seeking an extension now

because even if he didnt he cant leave

some bs innit

I don't think he will