> From: raincrone@juno.com > > You've lost me, sorry. Sorry, you've lost me too. I have yet to see a post by anyone here that advocates this punishment. > to hot-sauce a small child's mouth? If you hit a 3- or 4-year- > old with a belt, would it make you any less a thug if it were one > you bought for the purpose or one you had around? Sorry, I didn't know you were so dense. The reason I wrote that paragraph was because someone made up a lot of what-if's, and chastised us because we weren't responding to these unknown what-if's. My point, and my examples were to show that the article was specific: It was Tabasco, and it was a drop on the tonuge. To jump to Dave's Insanity, and an accidental splash into the eyes, and respiratory crisis is ridiculous. Actually, I'm sure it IS a possibility, but to yell at us for it is silly. There were very few responses to begin with, and now with this crap, I bet there won't be another hot sauce post for months. Thanks a lot. > > if that's really necessary after nonphysical methods haven't worked. > But for the average kid that age, what you described is sadistic, and > calling us killjoys for pointing that out, or implying we're "jackbooted > PC police", doesn't render our point invalid. In fact, it doesn't > even address it. I didn't call someone a killjoy because they think the article is sadistic. We actually almost agree on that point. I called them a killjoy because they were unhappy with our light joking around. And personally, I found the jokes to be aimed at us, and definately not at the poor children. Dustin