Maybe sterilisation isn’t such a bad idea after all

November 3rd, 2012 at 12:18 pm by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

A mother who admitted she was an alcoholic who smoked P and marijuana around her two year old son, blew cannabis smoke in his face and waited for days to take him to hospital with a broken arm, has denied any role in his death.

How can any mother do that?

She also admitted she did not take the boy to a doctor for several days after he broke his arm because she was drunk and she was scared the boy would be taken from her.

As should have happened.

Lawrence had testified that Loffley forced JJ to smoke marijuana through an asthma inhaler.

Ready, aim, fire.

However, she admitted getting ”wasted” a lot and sometimes blowing cannabis smoke in JJ’s face herself.

”I probably used to blow some in his face but he used to give him full on spots,” she said of Loffley.

I think they deserve each other. What they do not deserve is more children.

Tags:

107 Responses to “Maybe sterilisation isn’t such a bad idea after all”

  1. iMP (2,245 comments) says:

    In-topic, and speaking of sterilisation, when is a Penis Art? The Pataka Penis controversy.

    http://conzervative.wordpress.com/2012/11/03/when-is-a-penis-art/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Manolo (13,386 comments) says:

    As in the infamous words of comrade Clark: “There is no underclass in New Zealand.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Longknives (4,467 comments) says:

    Quite simply- We fucking stop paying feral scum like this to breed. This is all a product of the Welfare State….Handsomely rewarding people like Lawrence to breed is the most insane way to send this Country down the gurgler. And how many more Cannabis addled children will she likely spit out in the next few years??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Manolo (13,386 comments) says:

    She is a savage and a brute. Words fail to describe this beast.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Longknives (4,467 comments) says:

    I’d also like to hear some thoughts from the ‘Pro Cannabis’ brigade who think that their precious ‘Sacred Herb’ is the wonder drug.
    Surely If Philu was still around he would be linking us to research that show how ‘Healthy’ Cannabis is for children’s minds….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Redbaiter (7,640 comments) says:

    The end result of the socially toxic mix of welfarism and progressivism/ liberalism- a degenerate long term underclass with out any moral boundaries.

    What’s the solution??

    Only one answer really-

    MORE FUCKING GOVERNMENT..!!

    More regulation. More taxes. More social workers. More bureaucrats.

    Right liberals, lefties, progressives, compassionate ‘conservatives’ and all the rest of you fucking bleeding heart liberals..?

    What else can the answer possibly be??

    Sending this country down the tube and there ain’t nothing will deter you from your course.

    Even events like this.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. liarbors a joke (1,069 comments) says:

    ..and the list of dead beaten maori babies goes on..” wait, you cant say that..what proof have you got “..fuck off and open your eyes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Redbaiter (7,640 comments) says:

    BTW, what is this absolutely noxious talk of sterilization?

    Who is going to sterilize who??

    The overclass is going to sterilize the underclass?

    Hasn’t humankind been down that ghastly road all too often before?

    Here’s self professed liberals in the 21st century calling for the same solutions that the master class once attempted. What a sick and repulsive perversion of outcomes we have arrived at.

    Fucking unbelievable.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Ross Miller (1,664 comments) says:

    But the problem of course is that it is not her fault. We are (collectively) all to blame. We have (collectively) failed her. We should (collectively) be hanging our heads in shame …. so goes the mantra of all those who would deny that people are responsible for their own actions.

    The reality is that (collectively) we should indeed hang our heads in shame for as long as we allow this ‘it’s someone elses fault’ crap to continue.

    Bleeding hearts f**k off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. ChardonnayGuy (1,136 comments) says:

    Personally, though, one hopes she does get contraceptive counselling or tied tubes instead of deciding to parent again. What an abyssmal example of parenting this woman is. And remember, everyone, some sock con ideological purists think alkie, pothead or other such addled birth parents should be able to bring up kids rather than have government agencies intervene and hand them over to eligible lesbian or gay parents. Uh, newsflash? Yet another straight underclass ratbag batters a child to death.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Bob R (1,340 comments) says:

    Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes and President Teddy Roosevelt knew this almost 100 years ago as did many sensible lefties like feminist Margaret Sanger and John Maynard Keynes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Redbaiter (7,640 comments) says:

    That’s the trouble with you Guy, its always about your sexuality, and you always self identify with that sexuality, yet you get your panties all knotted whenever anyone else references it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. gump (1,491 comments) says:

    There’s no need to sterilise ferals like these.

    Just put them in prison. You cannot make babies in prison.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. redeye (631 comments) says:

    “I’d also like to hear some thoughts from the ‘Pro Cannabis’ brigade who think that their precious ‘Sacred Herb’ is the wonder drug.”

    She was a fucken alcoholic! Your not calling for prohibition I notice.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. wreck1080 (3,734 comments) says:

    I believe the only way to halt child abuse in this country is to remove children from abusive parents (sterilisation is better, but, no govt would have the cajones).

    But, then, the issue is what do you do with these unwanted kids? That is tricky — does anyone want one of these kids knowing the progeny?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. liarbors a joke (1,069 comments) says:

    “I probably used to blow some in his face but he used to give him full on spots,”

    “who smoked P and marijuana”

    I think the alcohol would take a back seat to the other shit she is obviously addicted to, the filthy feral poor excuse of a human.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Longknives (4,467 comments) says:

    redeye “She was a fucken alcoholic! Your not calling for prohibition I notice”

    You don’t think the fact that they were giving this kid ‘Spots’ of Cannibis is relevant Redeye?
    I guess your beloved ‘Sacred Herb’ is good for kids eh??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    I am absolutely appalled by the child harm in this country. But it is becoming an excuse to bring in vile UN sanctions to blame the populace with middle class approval, to persecute the disenfranchised.

    From day one politicians have promised they could change the nation. They lied. Now the middle class is dwindling and the ever increasing poor are being blamed for political greed and waste over the decades. Fabian Socialist lies from both sides of the house.

    Sterilisation could be a responsible life choice but should NEVER be mandated as a legalised alternative.

    UN depopulation genocide

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. redeye (631 comments) says:

    Longknives:

    So if she was force feeding the child cough mixture you’d be calling for a ban on that? What about if she was feeding him home brew? It happens.

    The parents are the problem not what they were forcing on the poor child.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    Well, at least it’s being debated..

    Gump: You can’t “put them in prison” for ever….Although having said that, if the male is convicted of murder it will be interesting to see what his sentence is…the Judge could, courtesy of amendments made to the Sentecing Act in 2010, sentence him to LWOP, which in my view would be richly deserved and might even deter some other feral vermin…

    Wreck: a good rule is never use “big words” unless you are sure of their meaning…the “progeny” ARE the children old boy…what you are trying to say is who is going to take them knowing their parentage? The answer is “lots of people”…if you are desparate enought to parent to go and get some child from a Romanian orphanage with God know’s what genetic and environmental background, people will queue up to adopt poor dead JJ’s new sibling…

    Bob R: Spot on…all the early female family planners thought this way…Funny how today’s feminists laud the suffragettes but are strangely silent about Sanger and Marie Stopes…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    US Government Legalize Sterilization for Minors Without Parental Consent

    The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have funded a program that is marketed as a sterilization effort that uses sharp blasts of ultrasound directed against a man’s scrotum to render him infertile for six months. It might accurately be called a “temporary castration” technology.

    This site also talks about circumcision which has nothing to do with sterilisation actually confusing the issue

    Read what you may into it

    http://www.secretsofthefed.com/us-government-legalize-sterilization-for-minors-without-parental-consent/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Bob R (1,340 comments) says:

    *** Bob R: Spot on…all the early female family planners thought this way…Funny how today’s feminists laud the suffragettes but are strangely silent about Sanger and Marie Stopes….***

    @ David Garrett,

    Yes, also left wingers who support Keynesian policies tend to overlook he had similar views. As did Sir William Beveridge the architect of the welfare state in England. They were realists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. tristanb (1,133 comments) says:

    So if she was force feeding the child cough mixture you’d be calling for a ban on that?

    You should not be using cough mixtures in kids under 6.

    DG:
    “You can’t “put them in prison” for ever…”

    Why not? What is wrong with that? (Forever meaning until they die, not until the universe ends.) It shouldn’t be that hard to make prison a bit less expensive for the taxpayer.

    But the costs these families create probably exceed what it costs to hold them in prison even now. Most prisoners have kids that are paid for by the taxpayer. Children are very expensive – especially children of criminals. Tons of neonatal care, free doctors visits, free childcare, free primary school, free counselling when dad comes homes and beats them and mum, free high school, the property crimes the kids will likely start doing, another teenage pregnancy, burglary and assault, another beaten child, and the cycle will continue.

    The $100,000 per year to keep dad in jail is a pittance compared to the alternative, which is perpetuating and exponentially increasing “poverty”, crime and suffering due to continued breeding and crime.

    That $100,000/yr is money well-spent to prevent >$100,000 worth of insurance, property and social costs, as well as preventing what will become further drains on the rest of us.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Kevin (1,122 comments) says:

    … ” You cannot make babies in prison.”

    Why not?

    You can smuggle semen out, run multimillion dollar drug operations, have conjugal visits, time out for family events and tangi etc, fall in love, get married, have affairs, send threatening letters,…..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    tristanb: In theory of course you are quite right…and as I say, if this mongrel gets convicted, the Judge has it in his power to give him LWOP…but he won’t…I am picking a minimum non parole of 12-14 years at most….and if his lawyer persuades the jury he didnt actually mean to kill the poor wee mite, it may well be less than that.

    Kevin: Quite correct…all of those things have happened.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    Yeah, but that’s only the Corrections Officers, the prisoners are up to much worse.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Kevin (1,122 comments) says:

    Any way isn’t she pregnant again? And if she was accused and went to prison she’d be allowed to keep her leeetle blameless baaabeeee in prison with her for two years. Oooohhh hoow sweeeet.

    A precedent of six years was recently set for a similar murder. And when the fuck will crown prosecutors wake up and appeal these pathetic sentences?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    Kevin: No-one gets six years for murder…it must have been a case where the jury was persuaded it was manslaughter…but the Judge…no, better not… Mickey the Weasel and his spies might be cruising about…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Megatron (187 comments) says:

    Well you could look at another way, at least there is going to be one less feral offspring clogging up the welfare and possible prison system in years to come.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. gump (1,491 comments) says:

    @ kevin

    You dismiss the general point because of a small number of rare exceptions?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Kevin (1,122 comments) says:

    Oh yes sorry manslaughter

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10841578

    I unreservedly withdraw the implication the he was a murderer. Helen Clark was successfully sued,when she called a killer a murderer. He got a light sentence because throwing a baby against a wall and samping on it was a one off event. And anyway this blameless babe has been forgwiven by the famiwy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Kevin (1,122 comments) says:

    No gump, but sterilisation is cheaper.

    However you do have to think that medical and psychological therapy would be even better. Most of these people are,victims of colonialism or exploitation by neoliberal capitalism. I see no reason,why some of our taxes should not go to paying for drug and alcohol addiction treatment, counselling to overcome their inferiority complexes and anger management training.

    A couple of the more useful treatments in this regard are lead therapy or high dose phenobarbital. Cost effective too.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    Is ‘lead therapy’ some kind of euphemism for a bullet in the back of the neck.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. lilman (892 comments) says:

    Am totally sick of sick slack arsed mothers and puke ridden arsehole fathers doing this to children.
    If I ever meet this bitch and her scumbag husband a well directed punch and kick to them as they did to their child wont be far away.
    Savages and deadbeats abusing kids and still we hear nothing from the people who are SUPPOSED to be our leaders.
    Why wasnt this bitch up on charges as well.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Kevin (1,122 comments) says:

    Got it mike

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    Low recidivism rate; but difficult to resurrect the innocent.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    Shit, you are sharp today Mikey…

    Megatron: I don’t know if you are “trolling” – as I believe it is called – but sadly your point is entirely valid. This little chap JJ – who unless he was a psychopath was as blameless as anyone else when he was born – would be very likely to turn out just like his “parents” if he had survived…how could he not, being dragged up in that environment? One perfect example is Bailey Kurariki…have you ever seen his mother on the telly?

    By about age 5, it is too late to change their destiny. Ask any primary school teacher with 20 years experience. That means to stop this, we as a society have got to take a deep breath and make some bloody difficult decisions. Otherwise it’s just going to keep on happening, as it has for a generation or more.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    Well, informed people have been calling for ‘early intervention’ as it now seems to be called, for a long, long time. Indisputably cheaper in the long run; difficult to sell to politicians who are condemned to short-term populism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    This sort of thing will go on and on. More laws will not fix it. There are plenty of existing laws that cover this already.

    We need to stop paying women to have babies. No benefit and no working for families.

    Bleeding hearts will cry “think of the children” but in my case it falls on deaf ears. There will not be thousands of homeless mothers clutching their starving babies in the street. Once we cut off the money, women will have to take responsibility for their choices. If they want to keep their baby, no problem, but they will need to support it. Mostly family will step assist in those cases were babies are not adopted out or aborted.

    This will have a flow on effect that will result in families being closer and more supportive. It will encourage young women to do well at school and act responsibly. It will save the country billions. It will reduce all types of crime.

    This is not my opinion or some radical theory. It is how most of the world works.

    You want to protect “innocent little babies” ? Well that is the way to do it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Kevin (1,122 comments) says:

    Yep, and the best early intervention is not letting the scum reproduce in the first place. Full circle.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    Good one Kea. We only see child poverty and neglect in welfare states, don’t we?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    Kea: I dont disagree with much of that..

    Mikey: Please do share your wisdom with us…What is your solution? We have been doing “early intervention” as you say, for two generations in one form or another, and the problem has only got steadly WORSE…more bashed and dead brown kids; more money thrown at the problem, and until recently, the jail population ever increasing.

    So off you go…you tell us – in as simple language as possible for country boys like me – how YOU would solve the problem of the abuse and killing of those who will follow JJ ….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Kevin (1,122 comments) says:

    Yes we’ll said kea. That is like clintons welfare reforms of the 90s and now we,are seeing crime plummeting in the US. Now over there it is well accepted that if you pop one out you will have to wait tables to pay for it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    Well David, we don’t exactly throw money at preventing child poverty or family violence. Typically, we talk about it, commission research and analysis and announce an initiative every once and a while along the lines of “we need more information sharing between agencies and maybe some more comprehensive studies of the causes”. So over that past 20 years or so, do you imagine we have spent more on new prisons than new services more young mothers. I’m not knocking the new prisons, they are great places if you like that sort of thing. The same argument goes for health. We’ve talked for decades about shift resources from the old to the young but the biggest pressure on the health budget will be coming from old and/or obese.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    My ideas may seem harsh and uncaring. But I am neither. It is about putting aside ideological considerations and doing what works. It is clear that what we are doing now is not working.

    We need less meddling by the State, not more. We need to instill personal responsibility in our society. It is hard to do that when personal choices have their consequences removed and placed upon others.

    I do care and that is why I want to see change.

    The money saved can be used towards things like top class health care and education. We need to reach for higher goals and not allow our society to be dictated to by the needs of the most anti social and destructive members.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    Mikey: You are quite wrong…my good friend Northland Wahine works in the what used to be known as “the Welfare”, and sees for herself – literally daily – how much money is handed out directly to the losers. We have been “targeting” the underachievers in school for one and a half generations, putting more resources in money and man power (sorry “human capital”) into teaching them to read and write…all the while ignoring the fact that the JJ’s of this world – if they survive long enough – return to an enviroment like the one we have seen described in horrible detail during the course of this trial.

    In those homes we have had “culturally appropriate” parenting advisors – because the Plunket reminded the tangata whenua of colonization – going into homes for at least a generation. While I am not impugning the motives of those fine people for a moment, it hasn’t worked! And it never will until there are, at the very least, major systemic changes of the kind Kea is talking about.

    But why am I wasting my time with you? You can’t even put your name to your opinions!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. liarbors a joke (1,069 comments) says:

    Well said Kea. 100% correct.

    Mikeymilk…what planet are you from ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    mikenmild

    Very poor answer to David G’s reasonable question but in the tradition of the socialist educators we’ll award a C+ for correct spelling of your pseudonym (& getting the date correct).

    What DG inferred in his question is what ELSE we could do, given that as a small barely solvent nation we already throw bucketloads of perfectly good money at feral breeders to no avail. If anything the treatment of these kids is far worse than say twenty years ago & the slags & their sperm donors are breeding replacements for the murdered babies at an astonishing rate.

    As our resident waffly lefty please tell us in your own words what can be done without throwing the remainder of the GDP of the country down the shitter to join what we already waste.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    It’s quite possible that many social ‘problems’ are relatively immune to policy changes. Welfare doesn’t create relative poverty or poor social outcomes by itself; the incidence of crime seems to be relatively unrelated to the carceral settings, etc, etc. We’re all suckers of the easy slogans and simplistic solutions: “lock ‘em up longer”, “ban smacking”, “smash the teacher unions”, “legalise all drugs”, “prohibit Muslim immigration”, “make everyone wear cycle helmets”, etc, etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    Nasska: A more earthy style than mine Sir, but you have the essence of what I was asking of our milky friend…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    nasska
    What percentage of GDP is currently spent on services targeted toward early intervention for specifically identified infants at risk?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Northland Wahine (648 comments) says:

    Excellent post Kea.

    How can anyone reap the rewards of achievement if they are not held accountable for their actions? By continuing paying some women to breed, you are condemning them and their children to poverty.

    I have no doubt that little JJ’s murderer was abusive to that woman. However, she choose to have a relationship with the prick and not leave.

    The title “mother” is not a fucking right, it’s a privilege.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Chuck Bird (4,684 comments) says:

    David, now you are not an MP you can say what you like and I must admit you make a very good case.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    “carceral settings”…there’s a new one…does that mean “imprisonment rate”?

    There you go again – to quote the Great Communicator – when you increase the certainty of detection, and increase the severity of sentences, as was done in New York City from the early 90′s, low and behold the crime rate falls… We are seeing the beginning of the same phenomenon here following our changing “carceral settings” a few years ago, but of course reducing crime rates has got nothing to do with that….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    mikenmild

    I don’t know & I’m unsure where I would start to look for figures specific to early intervention for identified infants at risk but I feel that the total would involve a large number of zeros on the right.

    In any case it would seem that you’ve answered the question with your 4.26pm which could be paraphrased to “nothing any Government does makes any difference”. As such throwing more money at the problem may not be the solution.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    David
    There are long argument for and against that, as you are well aware. I’m just trying to make one point here – cause and effect might not always be quite straightforward. Our respective political or ideological biases make it inevitable that we will see the results from different perspectives. No harm in that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    nasska
    I’m not sure that I’d reduce the argument quite so far as to say nothing makes any difference. I’m pretty sure that having more Police gets more criminals arrested, and I’m pretty sure that having less frigates makes us less defended and trusted overseas.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    I once met a lady who was instrumental in bringing about the DPB. She was a single mother and would support herself by doing-up homes and selling them, way before it was the fashion to do so. She worked as much as she could.

    She had a social conscience and was a very caring person. She wanted the Government to assist women, in the future, who found themselves in similar circumstances. She had the best of intentions. She spent a lifetime in the social work/nursing field and was able to see the changes in society first hand.

    She expressed regret at what the DPB had done and considered it a mistake.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. jedmo (30 comments) says:

    Recent visit by US scholar studying welfare – who was shocked by the mother of 12 in Porirua who had a welfare support person “she was like her persanal PA – negotiating when to attend appointments – paid by the State”. The experiment in welfare / liberalism has failed, Kea is on the right track

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    Kea is spot on in that the DPB was introduced to enable women & their kids to leave total dropkicks who made their lives hell on earth. It was never envisaged that it would be hijacked by feral breeders as an option to doing a day’s useful work during their wretched lifetimes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    Nasska: I dont have the figures to hand, but I believe the numbers getting the DPB pro rata are about 10 times what they were five years after it replaced the “Deserted wives” benefit…someone else will know the detail…

    The thing that I find hardest to take is that for guys like Mikey, the answer is “we havent done enough” and we must do MORE OF THE SAME! they just reject out of hand any initiatives that dont fit their ideological bias.

    I remember Roger Douglas saying to me a dozen times “If throwing money at poverty was the solution it would have been fixed years ago”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Yes nasska. It was implemented for all the right reasons.

    In an ideal world, I would increase the amount of the DPB and provide a great deal of assistance, to genuine cases. But this is not an ideal world. The abuse of the system is now so great, that it is the norm, not the exception. I find it sad that our societies altruistic motives have been taken advantage of by those who think only of themselves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    I remember Roger Douglas saying to me a dozen times “If throwing money at poverty was the solution it would have been fixed years ago”.

    And Africa would be like Luxembourg.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    David Garrett

    I can remember when the DPB was introduced & although the idea had its fair share of naysayers the general consensus was that it was a good thing if it enabled families to live without being dependent on violent, often alcoholic no hopers. Point is that no one in their wildest nightmares thought that it would fund untold disfunctional solo parent “families” & create more problems than it could ever solve.

    It has cost the country a fortune over four+ decades & has wrecked the lives of many it was designed to uplift.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    If we are focusing on the DPB, then – what would you do? Abolish it completely, reduce it, increase it, pay it to a guardian, time limit it, make it conditional on sterilisation, what?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Redbaiter (7,640 comments) says:

    Kea is spot on in that the DPB was introduced to enable women & their kids to leave total dropkicks who made their lives hell on earth. It was never envisaged that it would be hijacked by feral breeders as an option to doing a day’s useful work during their wretched lifetimes.

    What utter crap. Typical ignorant National party excuses, the kind that have allowed the left to walk all over them for decades, and by that means have forced the party to move away from the objectives the party was formed to seek.

    All re-distributive payments have as their objective the fostering of dependency within society. Dependency on the state. So why are the left always pushing for more and more redistribution? For two simple reasons- the more people dependent on the state, the more votes for the left, the easier is their path to power, and the more capitalism is white anted.

    The reason for the DPB was always presented as something to help mothers in trouble, but the true motive was always far more sinister. It was just another incremental step on the road to socialist totalitarianism.

    As it is with everything the left do- because all that ever drives them is the desire for greater political power.

    That Nasska apparently doesn’t know this is a measure of how stupid the National Party is and a stark reminder of why they have been losing for fourty years or more. Its full of and fully supported by too many mentally dull chattering class retards like Nasska who will never get it, even when the truth is right their in their dull ignorant clod hopping faces.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    Just thinking about the DPB, did it come in from 1972 or 73? interesting era for policies. We still have ACC and the Waitangi Tribunal, but dumped self-funding superannuation and a national health service.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    Just when I thought the red one was going to spare us his insights.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    Jesus, it’s not often I agree with you Mikey…

    Nasska: It is probably – still – the best example of the law of unintended consequences in action…although the Prostitution Law Reform Act runs a close second…Hunter’s corner has been deserted ever since it came in, coz all the girls and ladyboys are now happily self employed in their SOOB’s or working in licensed brothels, all of which have comprehensive health and safety programs, pay mimimum wages even if the girls are having an off day, and holiday pay, and none of the girls are ever pressured to service punters they don’t like…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    mikenmild

    The DPB was introduced in 1973 & was first paid out on 1 May 1974. Therefore the legislation was passed by the third Labour government.

    It may be too late to abolish it but at very least it must be ‘grandfathered’ or time limited. I would note however, that the Maori Party consider it to be an absolute right.

    Doesn’t say much for their opinion of Maori men.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    You’ve lost me David, how were those unintended consequences of reforming prostitution laws?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    David Garrett

    Parliament does seem to have a lousy track record for setting right social wrongs….maybe they should stay out of micro managing peoples’ lives.

    Fat chance!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    I’m not tying things to particular political brands. I just feel that the end of the sixties through to mid 70s was quite an interesting time – political turbulence, some radical changes, oil shocks and so on. Seems to me that politics in NZ over the last 100 years or so has oscillated between conservative (in the sense of resistant to change) and radical (in the sense of reform and change). So we have had the classic governments that changed things: Liberals 1890-1912, Labour 1935-1949, Labour/National 1984-1993. The rest of the time we have had conservative governments.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    mikenmild

    A study of social outcomes from political decisions over say the past fifty years would show a pattern of Labour implementing expensive social policies & National inheriting the financial mess they have caused. By the time National have straightened the books the electorate have tired of the administration & Labour are reelected.

    The cycle is rinsed & repeated ad nauseam.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    It may be too late to abolish it but at very least it must be ‘grandfathered’ or time limited.

    It is not too late. We could cut it in 9 months time (to allow for those already knocked-up).

    I think we should continue supporting those already on the benefit. They made that choice under different circumstances.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. KH (687 comments) says:

    Apparently this woman is not on trial and facing charges ? Even failure to provide care ?
    Or A. She will be separately and later.
    Or B. She is off scot free.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    Kea

    …”It is not too late. We could cut it in 9 months time (to allow for those already knocked-up).”…..

    That’s what I was getting at when I suggested “grandfathering” the benefit. Good luck with slipping it past Auntie Tariana though.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    nasska
    I don’t agree with that at all, but I’m going to argue it another time. RIP Greg King.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Auntie Tariana wants to rake all that DPB back by putting tobacco tax up to around $100.00 a packet. Crafty old cow :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Muzza M (291 comments) says:

    Here in the Philippines there are a lot of poor families (yes they have too many kids) but if this feral shit was to happen in a neighbourhood, the neighbours would sort it. And I mean sort it, the father would be lucky to survive and the mother would get such a bitch slapping from the local women, she too would be lucky to survive. This system seems to work well.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    David ,
    I read somewhere recently that she is already pregnant to the monster who killed her son.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. OneTrack (2,618 comments) says:

    mikenmild – “We’re all suckers of the easy slogans and simplistic solutions: “lock ‘em up longer”,…”

    But mike, we NEVER actually do any of those things – the lefties always veto those sorts of things “because they care” and it is alway “colonialisms” fault, etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Harriet (4,524 comments) says:

    “The welfare state has done to black Americans what slavery couldn’t do, what Jim Crow couldn’t do, what the harshest racism couldn’t do. And that is to destroy the black family.” — Walter Williams

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Harriet (4,524 comments) says:

    “We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker.” — Ronald Reagan

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Manolo (13,386 comments) says:

    An excellent quote, Harriet.
    If only the wowsers, tree-huggers, apologists and do-gooders of this world would hear the message. If only.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. Kevin (1,122 comments) says:

    From the cradle to the jail

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    Q.

    How can any mother do that?

    A.

    A mother who admitted she was an alcoholic who smoked P and marijuana…

    Case closed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Redbaiter (7,640 comments) says:

    ” Here in the Philippines there are a lot of poor families (yes they have too many kids) but if this feral shit was to happen in a neighbourhood, the neighbours would sort it. And I mean sort it, the father would be lucky to survive and the mother would get such a bitch slapping from the local women, she too would be lucky to survive. This system seems to work well. ”

    Yes, its a system called “moral standards”. IOW not something enforced by laws and regulations and armies of bureaucrats as most of the Kiwiblog commenters would have it. Those liberals and progressives who conform to “the if it feels good do it” mantra and then demand huge government and massive welfare budgets to try and deal with the mess.

    The Filipinos, as poor as they are, are smarter than your usual socialist state sustained NZer, for they know that money should not be wasted on such things as can be dealt with merely by a society, and every person in that society, having civilised standards of behaviour, and that these standards should be the result of custom and of heritage, and voluntary rather than resulting from regulation and law enforcement.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. Kevin (1,122 comments) says:

    Third generation foetal alcohol and drug syndrome. Stuff this, charge her, jail her so she can continue her habits safely away from the public.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    So Kevin, I guess treatment for substance addiction is not part of the rabid right’s songbook?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    A friend of mine is from the Philippines. She told me there was a young guy who was a trouble maker and did bad things. One day his horse came into the village, with his head on it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Megatron (187 comments) says:

    David Garrett@ 3.27pm. Megatron: I don’t know if you are “trolling” – as I believe it is called – but sadly your point is entirely valid.
    No I was not “trolling” but making as you call it, a valid point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Nostalgia-NZ (4,914 comments) says:

    Great news for the Crown case, a mother who was an alcoholic, dope smoker and p user who wouldn’t take her baby to hospital for treatment for a broken arm in case she ‘lost’ him is the star witness.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. Minnie1972 (42 comments) says:

    It’s time that the courts start properly terminating parental rights when children are removed from them for neglect/abuse. Not only that, but removing subsequent children and terminating rights automatically unless the parents have made fundamental changes to their lifestyle. I am sick of living in a country where the parents still have rights, even when children are abused and hurt. The children have a right to love, affection, shelter, food. Far more people would step up to be foster parents if they knew that they had a real opportunity to adopt those children – not just to have to pick up the pieces after supervised visitation with the ‘bio parents’ and to have to worry about when, not if, the child would be returned to their feral bio families. Time to stop the ‘whanau first’ method of placement of abused children and instead start allowing people who WANT to be parents to be able to step up and give children who desperately need it, a real home and family. This should all be happening ASAP. It is time for the Government to make some tough calls. Throwing more money at ‘services’ to try to keep these feral families together is not going to achieve anything. Most typically the children grow up to just repeat the same cycle their parents started. I’m waiting for this Government to really effect some change.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. Yoza (1,551 comments) says:

    The way these killings are celebrated by the right, as if these tragedies lend validity to their weird Victorian era ideas, surely must make many in New Zealand shudder in disgust.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. RightNow (6,676 comments) says:

    ” these killings are celebrated by the right”

    You’re clearly as thick as batshit

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    I used to vist KB for the balance, the idea that people could engage in a topic and look at all its facet, without fear of ideologues shutting down the debate …. but can’t really get onboard with the idea of state-enforced sterilisation. One week we get shock/horror at the desecration of jewish graves, and the next we get proposals for the kinds of eugenics mentality that was milk and honey to the same people that inspired such obviously engrained anti-semitism.

    ‘Ready, aim, fire, I’d point it out as appalling, but I’m sure there would be faux-outrage along the lines of “This wasn’t a reference to a firing squad, but a metaphor, describing how to operate an inhaler’.

    And of course, we can all be shocked an horrified that anyone from a jewish background could be likened to a nazi if they engage in throwaway hints about the promotion of sterilization or execution of undesirables – after all it’s as ridiculous as claiming a brown person could be racist isn’t it?

    So let’s not go there, let’s just suggest this is offensive, in bad-taste, and ill-considered, just like Jacinda Ahern’s rather stupid text . . .
    I assume there must be something odd in the water down there for two unlinked, unrelated people to have had such monumental mental
    black-outs in such rapid succession.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    Thankfully bad taste is not yet a crime.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    Lee C: Still a dickhead I see. But on the offchance you are simply thick, let me spell it out for you.

    By and large (there were certainly some sterilizations and murders of the mentally feeble etc.) the Nazis were purely motivated by a twisted racial ideology – the victims didnt have to DO or have done anything, other than be born the wrong race, or be from an undersirable class of person.

    Sterilization as being discussed here has got nothing to do with who the putative subject IS but what he or she has DONE, and will very much more likely than not, do again unless they are prevented from doing so.

    Whether such a grave step should be contemplated by society in response to outrageous behaviour is a whole different issue, but if you cant see a clear distinction between Nazi eugenics and sterilizing abusers and killers of children, then it is pointless debating with you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    That’s fair enough David. Not any idea one disagrees with needs to be labelled fascist or socialist, etc. I personally don’t thing forced sterilisation is warranted, as it is attacking a symptom rather than a cause as it were and it is something I don’t think can be justified in a free and democratic country. I’m all for closer supervision of families regarded as at risk, and removal of children where necessary. That is more of a resources issue. I understand it is terribly difficult to find satisfactory foster parent in anywhere like the numbers that are required now, let alone if we were to remove more children from the natural parents.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    Mikey: In this case, I believe very much in “back to the future”. If compulsory sterilization of animals like these two mongrels is a step too far – and it well may be – then compulsory removal of any future progeny is the only way to go. If we allowed adoption as we once did, there would be no shortage of parents for a little chap like JJ. Sure, some of those adoptions will have negative outcomes, but it’s hard to find a more negative outcome than being kicked to death at age two.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. Kevin (1,122 comments) says:

    Isn’t life strange. When,I was,young it was left to believe in equality and right to decent apartheid. Now the left promotes apartheid and the right just wants equality.

    The left championed liberalising abortion and now the right,thanks god they won, or we’d have another 20,000 of thee “blameless babes” to delicately nurture into careers in crime.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. Kevin (1,122 comments) says:

    I just love how these blogs being out the rabid right eh? Yep they rail against feral vermin, mongrels, animals and pond scum the whole time when they should be going after the lower forms of life that commit these atrocities :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    Like I said: “I used to vist KB for the balance, the idea that people could engage in a topic and look at all its facet, without fear of ideologues shutting down the debate”

    The response?:

    “Lee C: Still a dickhead I see. But on the offchance you are simply thick, let me spell it out for you blah blah blah …… it is pointless debating with you.”

    Is that why you advocated for Three Strike? To save you the tedium and effort of actually putting any thought into your closing arguments?

    Come to think of it, if that’s an indication of the kind of intellectual acuity you’re packing, you’ve probably done your prospective clients a favour.

    My point is about the double standards that accompany some of these outbursts, and peoples’ short memories. I’m promoting caution about rushing to judgement when it comes to letting emotion rule our thoughts about people like the one cited.

    Eugenics were a major influence at the beginning of the twentieth century, alongside Social Darwinism. Otherwise wise heads were swayed, and this provided an ‘intellectual’ basis for what would later become ‘The Final Solution’. I’m saying, if we rush out an get the pitchforks and torches at the drop of every hat, don’t be suprised when they come for you because they don’t like the colour of your eyes (or indeed your ‘taste’ in jokes).

    Just saying be aware. that’s all. Thanks for putting your view across, but there’s no need to lower the tone like that, this is a serious issue.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. Minnie1972 (42 comments) says:

    Lee you are missing David Garrett’s point. It’s not about Eugenics, unless you yourself are proposing that a certain race is more likely to be sterilised than any other in cases where child abuse/murder had taken place. Is that indeed what you’re saying?

    Given that I actually work hard and take care of my children, I’m not too concerned about pitchforks and torches….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    Minnie with respect I think you are missing my point. Do you think the George Bernard Shaw (who thought eugenics was a good idea) thought eugenics was a good idea because it could be used it to kill the jews?

    No. My point is, that once one adopts the principle of eugenics, and sterilization is step 1, there is historical evidence to support the view that it can and has been appropriated, extended and abused by people for political reasons, so I’m advocating that it is best leave that particular genie in the bottle.

    I’m not accusing DG of being antisemitic, or being a nazi, neither am I suggesting this of DF as I hope they know. They would be shocked to think that of themselves. I’m suggesting that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. Asuka (3 comments) says:

    The bitch got of scottfree from any charges, even after admitting drugs and all. What the hell is wrong the NZ system? Just because homicide was the main concern here doesn’t mean we should ignore the fact that she was stupid bitch and was neglecting her son. What does that say about NZ? Punish parents who neglect their child and abuse their child/ren. She should have been punished. Whats to stop her from doing it again?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.