Reb Eliezer:
You wrote: “A young child crossing the road in traffic requires spanking to avoid this in the future or any other endangerment like striking a match or opening the gas.”
Apples and oranges. I have no interest in “teaching” my young child about traffic, matches, and the gas stove. My only interest is in inhibiting the dangerous behavior. That can be accomplished with various negative consequences, including the potch. I can reserve lessons about the dangers for later. In the behaviors which parents find irritating, which include chutzpah etc., the goal is to absorb the proper values in which these behaviors will not occur. The goal is to teach, not inhibit. Punishments fail to accomplish that. The comparison is irrelevant. You need a better argument to make potching something that is effective, a choice intervention, and logically appropriate.