It may, but it certainly does not harm mine.
The unmindful, uncaring, dangerous, drinkers in society, who drove were targeted. The ones who caused damage to society. Those who had a social wine over lunch or whatever, were not considered in the same overall category. To include those responsible drinkers would be unfair.
It was about raising public consciousness and helping society. Both which are commendable. Not marginalising the responsible to drive a point about drinking in general terms. Hence the "Two and that'll do" campaign
And by not attempting to define "smacking" as opposed to "hitting" and banning both (actually, the consensus was that both were harmful to the child), the legislation did protect children. Perpetrators who would previously not be committing a crime when beating a child now were, and many no longer did.
So the next question is: even if they were wrong is saying both are harmful to the child, isn't saving a few children from an unnecessary beating (crossing the line but previously within accepted limits) worth it?
As for drinking and driving, what are the limits down under?
.08 I think.
I think this is the crux of things.
So the next question is: even if they were wrong is saying both are harmful to the child, isn't saving a few children from an unnecessary beating (crossing the line but previously within accepted limits) worth it?
Is it a reasonable question?
I think so. The answer is i do not believe in the type of mindset of "Kill them all, God will know his own". The reason for it is that the superficial answer is "Yes if it spares the kids it is great, children need protecting from beatings". I am not a heartless person so I am encourage to give this answer until i consider it on a deeper level. It protects kids, even if they do not need it, BUT it potentially punishes good and bad parents. Is that also as commendable?" My answer is, "No"
I think the military call this collateral damage.
I think it demands a case by case basis. Kind of innocence til proven guilty.
It also is likely to drive a discourse which tars one with another unfairly and I think this is not beneficial to the parents, the kids, or society. Bad parents deserve bad repercussions and good parents deserve to be praised.