Unacceptable parenting
I wish to congratulate John Thurlow on his letter. These crims and their families need to be brought into line, even if they have lost a member of their family who stole someone's car and wrote it off.
Some may have been driving their own prized possession, but we need to look into things deeper. Why did they flee from the police in the first place? (1) disqualified driver, (2) drunk driver, (3) too many demerit points and another ticket would see them walking, (4) No WOF or vehicle already written off the road, (5) Trying to impress their mates with their lack of driving skills, (6) No driver's licence (under age). It could be a number of these offences.
The majority of these drivers are underage and should be in bed! It's strange later that their families declared their prized next of kin was a child genius or the salt of the earth who's going to work for the UN.
Recently, the mother of one of these offenders did a burnout on the road where he was killed, in memory of her son.
Great stuff, and it shows you what the police have to deal with.
A number of years ago, a local mayor made a startling statement that some parents need to get "permits to breed".
Clearly stated to start a debate of the worthiness of some parents and their lack or parenting skills. Don't blame poor potty training — parents are responsible for their kids.
Having 13-year-olds driving stolen vehicles around at 1am or 3am is unacceptable parenting, and the offenders' parents deserve to pay for any damage to vehicles or property.
I assume ACC in this PC world would now cover the cost of the offenders' funerals, even if they are committing an offence, or killing people. Old rules were that offenders committing an offence and suffered an injury or death were not entitled to a death claim (funeral etc).
BOB WALKER
St John's Hill
Colonial bloodshed
Potonga Neilson (Chronicle, February 15) may be right that there are some old kumara pits along the Taranaki coast, but that is about all he says before drifting into fantasy.
As recorded by missionary Samuel Ironside who, unlike Potonga, lived in Taranaki in the 1850s: "They have now millions of acres of land unappropriated, not one tithe of which they can ever cultivate.
"This land has been a fruitful source of quarrel, bloodshed and violence."
And violence there certainly was. Has Potonga forgotten the capture of Pukerangiora Pa, just a few years before 1840, when about 1300 defenders were killed and eaten by invaders from Waikato, an event that led to the virtual depopulation of the whole of South Taranaki.
It is that sort of behaviour which "decimated the native population of this land" (to use his terminology), not any actions of the presumed wicked white colonials.
Read John Robinson's careful demographic analysis in When Two Cultures Meet (Tross, 2012) if you doubt it, a vastly superior source of information to Potonga's wild speculation.
BRUCE MOON
Nelson
Counting new houses
Usually other readers do it, but in this instance I have to comment on my letter of February 20.
I have redone the maths, and it is obvious that if you demolish 10 houses and then build 13 you have actually only gained 3, not 13.
Likewise, if you retain and renovate the existing 10 and build 13, then you end up with 13 extra, not 23.
I guess the results depend on the sort of number-crunching you engage in. I'm pretty sure I know which one the politically motivated would prefer.
DOUG PRICE
Castlecliff
Send your letters to: The Editor, Whanganui Chronicle, 100 Guyton St, PO Box 433, Whanganui 4500; or email editor@wanganuichronicle.co.nz
