Ok, so where does discipline end and abuse begin?

In the sense of hitting your kids. At what point does it stop being discipline?
Or as long as the kid's done wrong do they deserve any sort of punishment be that a smacked hand or total and complete kicking and hitting shizz?

I think any kind of corporal punishment is abusive.

Physical discipline ends when the parent allows his anger or frustration to take control of the situation. Then it becomes abuse, especially when it happens frequently.

However, I disagree with the idea of abolishing corporal punishment. I would tend to shy away from using it with girls, but when it comes to boys, we're pretty hard-headed and thick-skinned. It takes a lot of work to teach us some things, while other things we learn pretty easily. Our emotions are less involved in learning, while our pride and ego are usually more involved; therefore, we can take more discipline (and often need it!)

I agree with SoundsLikeMusic fully. Corpral punishment has been standerd for years. Take it away and only harm ensues. It never damaged me, in fact it did more harm than good. When a kid deserves a spakanking they need to get it. Simple.

I was never "harmed" by not being physically punished. I'm obedient to my parents now without ever having to take a physical beating as punishment, in fact without ever being punished much at all.

Punishment does not make nearly as deep nor as permanent a mark as reward does.

Punishment paints what was done as negative and is neccesary. Crime without punishment is the bane of society.

There are ways other than physical hitting to paint something as negative. Do you want children growing up to believe that the only reason a certain crime is negative is that they'll get beaten if they get caught?

And just what's wrong with taking away privilages? Works better.

I love this topic. There is no law in Virginia stating that you can not hit your kids. But people don't because they don't want to get a bad name from society. Now my mom went off on this topic a few months ago. One cop told her that you can in fact hit your kids but when it gets down to belts and leaving marks then that is taking it too far. My mom said that the government doesn't own her children and that she does. I agree one hundred percent on that.

Hitting your kids is not wrong. It's showing them who is boss. Leaving marks where it shows and you see blood then that is completely taking it too far. It should never get that far. Some insane people just hit their kids for kicks and I think they are taking the whole hitting your kids theroy to their head. Either that or their head is jammed up their ass. Some parents are afraid to hit their kids thinking their kids might run back and tell the cops. Well if my child did that then I would tell the cops if they thought they could do much better raising my kids then take them right on down the road. Parents need to buckle down on their kids. What happened to raising your kids like the old days? That needs to come back, seriously.

It is a very complicated situation when trying to disciplin children. One does not want to stifle their growth or damage them early in life, but one cannot give them free reign since they are not mature to make informed descisions. In order to avoid the problems of discipline it may be important for the parents to set a finer example for their children during the early parts of their youth. Children are, when born, completely without characteristics and behaviours. Parents play very important parts in the development of behaviours. If the parents constantly fights or yell, it is more than likely that the child will develop a similarly belligerent personality.
It is important to ensure that when the child is born it is raised in an environment that results in the creation of positive behaviours, or those that would be least likely to result in a reason for disciplining the child. As the child matures, it will be giving greater personal freedom to go along with its greater ability to process information and make informed decisions.
While in theory this process should completely remove the need for discipline, practically it should at least result in a lessened need for it. Trying to punish a child for behaviours that were instilled in it at its infancy is not an adequate solution, care must be taken to prevent such things from occurring in the first place.
That being said, if this cannot be prevented, it is important to try and instill these positive behaviours as soon as possible and in a way that is not permanently harmful to the child physically or mentally and logical reasons should always be provided to the child. Saying simply, "I am the boss," is not conducive to change.

Double standards don't work. Everyone is an individual and will learn differently. I am a hard-headed, thick-skinned female. Hitting does not fix the problem. Just like with any other living being. Smacking it may work with one, but with the other it just makes it more sneaky about how it goes about doing things. My step dad hit my one dog every time she'd pee on the floor. She learned quick not to pee on the floor. My other dog he tried smacking and it caused the dog to hide when he had to go to the bathroom therefore soiling some place where you'd have to go find where he did it.

Obviously humans and dogs are different but it goes to show you you have to take everyone as an individual. Hitting isn't the answer. Both dogs could of been taught how to go outside without any voilence. My current dogs did.

Consider this. When corpral punishment was completely legal, the crime rate in America was incredibly low. Now that we have succombed to the libral theory that all physical punishment is abuse, our crime rate has not only shot through the roof, it has in fact blown the roof itself to kingdom come.