I've taken a breath for some intra on your spective. I also recognize that we have wandered beyond sight of spanking.
However, I am enjoying this, now rare, attempt at reasoned, logical exploration in search of illusions; mine as well as yours. So, a request. If (when, more likely) we are invited to cease, may I send you a P.M. to arrange continuation?
Bobwhaler, you need to replace your idea bulb with a CFL. Government said so.
The idea of smacking a child is to inflict just enough pain that they understand that what they have done wrong to cause the smacking, is unacceptable.
The problem today is that a parent cannot even give a light tap (which is pointless anyway) to their child without the do-gooders jumping up and down screaming "child abuse."
You still have not defined spanking or smacking - smacking sounds like a slap to the face? When I was younger, I met a single father who would flick his finger at the inside of his son's wrist; it stung for a second, it got his attention, and there was no possibility of causing actual physical damage.
I do not believe in smacking anywhere around the head area. Usually it was on the backside or upper legs.
Also depended on the circumstance. For instance; if any of my children (when they were younger) bit me, then I would bite them back with enough pressure that they realised not to do it again, or it was again returned in kind.
Did it leave teeth marks? Sure it did. Did they stop biting? Sure they did.
Has there been any long term problems? None whatsoever. They use their teeth for what they were designed for :).