I don't agree with spanking. Sugar coat it all you want, it's still hitting a child with the intent of using both pain and the fear of pain as a means of punishment. Spanking is one of the few parenting choices that I'll pass judgment on. It's pretty simple - you hit a kid, that makes you the worst kind of coward.

So you'd think I'd be happy over a recent bit of news, that California Assemblywoman Sally Lieber is planning on introducing a bill that would make it a crime for parents to spank their child, provided the child is 3 or younger. Those caught in the act would face up to a year in jail, along with fines. The bill would extend the state's corporal punishment laws, which make it illegal for anyone but parents to spank a child - wow, are there still schools that allow "swats"? I got paddled by the principal when I was in the fourth grade, and it truly sucked; hurt like a bitch and very humiliating. Ah well, the principal was about 60 then, so there's a good chance that these days, she's enjoying her retirement...in the fires of Hell.

Back to the proposed law. No, I don't like spanking. But to pass a law against it solves nothing. How would it be enforced? (Yeah, I know, the Bush administration has already placed wiretaps and hidden cameras in most of our houses anyway, so it just becomes a matter of who to send the tapes to.) How much of a burden would this place on an already overtaxed court and prison system? Even though I think people who hit their kids are pussies (and, in the case of the folks who run this particular website, delusional psychotics), I don't think throwing them in jail for a year is the answer. Perhaps our tax dollars and resources should be used to help parents who are looking for ways to discipline their kids that don't involve violence; I'd rather see my state do more to help educate parents on alternative means of correcting their kids' behavior.