If only we knew, we could perhaps stop it from happening again.
As we hear about the guilty verdicts in the Nia Glassie case, Britain has been gripped by the Baby P case.
Both cases being too barbaric to detail at length.
But they seem to have common backgrounds: Dysfunctional families, marital breakdown, people generally branded an 'underclass.'
The New Zealand media have just passed on the Nia Glassie case as just yet another poor kid dying after getting the bash. There have been so many such cases, we almost seem immune to them.
Because the victims here are largely Maori, does political correctness prevent a proper debate of the causes of such violence?
What about 'Rogernomics'? Unemployment? Drink? Drugs? The welfare state? poverty? or what?
What is the role of government in such crimes? And I don't just mean any failings in social services.
The Telegraph in Britain raises the decline of marriage and there's failings at the local council.
The issue is seen in moralistic terms, and the case became a political football involving PM Gordon Brown and his opponent David Cameron.
I doubt we will see such debate here in New Zealand, with questions raised in parliament.
But we should. How else are we to move towards the means we hope can prevent further barbaric murders.
UPDATE: Oswald Bastable links to the disgusting cruelty Baby P suffered as reported by the News of the World.
31 comments:
I'd still like to see three further murders of those fuckers that did this. And the two that got off better have up to date passports.
I blame the welfare state.
It allows people to breed who should not.
They all look a sandwich or two short of a picnic, don't think they could look after themselves, and gesticlating rudely for the press did not do them any favours, either. Justice done for once, just a shame that the Kahui twins won't ever get any.
Maybe we can blame Helen Clark too, for presiding over the disgraceful growth of the welfare state and the feclessness and lack of ireesponsibility it brings.
lack of responsibility
FFS sake, give yourselves names. This imbecilic blather from identical inbreds is annoying.
I see Paul Henry on Close Up has just raised the issue.
Let us hope the National - led government can do something.
No, let us demand it do something.
Judith Collins mentioned a few initives.
But I think it will take more than just a few measures to be implemented within 100 days.
We will need to take a look at our society, who we reward and allow bad behaviour, and try and gain what we have lost in recent decades.
'Imbecilic blather from inbreds.'
Colourful.
I thought the 'right wing,'given there is such a generalised thing, were proponents of individual responsibility... I thought it was a basic tenet of out justice system. Attribution of blame for atrocities to systemic failings really seems nothing more than the wanton mitigatory banterings of the professional orator.
This is a terrible case for sure. But what I don't understand is how so many people are justifiably outraged by this, yet don't care about the far greater and more horrific slaughter of over 18,000 babies every year before birth. Furthermore, although the Glassie case may have been influenced by legislation, our massive abortion rate is directly promoted and funded by the state.
http://sjdennis.wordpress.com/2008/11/13/the-morality-of-abortion/
"I blame the welfare state.
It allows people to breed who should not."
Destroying my often stated point the anonymous comments are a waste of bandwidth!
Not sure who's sadder. Annonymous who clearly needs more slices to complete his loaf or mr dennis who manages to turn those of us who don't share his views on abortion into murderers.
I'll have to plump for annonymous who is clearly an ignorant turd.
Would rather a retard than a turd. No disrespect intended.
There are a lot of issues involved in these cases. Its like in those 10 Seconds to Disaster programs where a few things add up to end in disaster.
In these cases it seems to be the welfare state and solo mothers but the common thread with all these cases is stepfathers - and selfish mothers who seem to have been abused themselves - probably by stepfathers.
The stepfathers in these cases tend to be young unemployed louts.
Why do 35 year old women hook up with teenagers?
Very few men will harm their own children. Another mans children seem to represent a threat to this type of stepfather hence the control using violence.
They called her ugly, but she wasn't. They were. They were and are the ugly ones, and so shall they remain.
Don't let them out, ever.
And don't say we can't do this.
We can.
We can do this.
"Very few men will harm their own children. Another mans children seem to represent a threat to this type of stepfather hence the control using violence."
Yes. That is mostly because these immature 'men' (and I use the word in the loosest possible context) are challenged by the child's competition for the mothers attention.
Real men put a child's needs first.
I should add that over the years I have been both a father and a step-father.
Bev Adair on close up was very supportive of the approach she expected from this Govt. Some of the key points on this issue are here:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0708/S00076.htm
Personal responsibility is a key element, but there are complex govt policy issues too, not helped by Labour's approach.
It's Mrs Anon, actually, and by the way, abortion is murder. Funny how the Left blogs are silent on the Nia issue, but like Labour, they don't believe in accountability and punishment (like some of the Lefties commenting here). Turds.
...like Labour, they don't believe in accountability and punishment...
Yeah, that's why Labour moved so quickly to decriminalise murder in 1999, to the resounding cheers of lefties everywhere. Why are the anonymous ones always thick?
...these immature 'men' (and I use the word in the loosest possible context) are challenged by the child's competition for the mothers attention.
Shrewd assessment, Oswald. I think you're right.
Actually, based solely on having seen a few news reports, and my long history as a mouthy git, I'm not sure even the loosest definition of men (and women in Kemp and Kuka's cases) covers this lot. In Gene Wolfe's awesomely brilliant Book of the New Sun, he includes animals called Zoanthropes, ie people who've given up their humanity and returned to the wild. The burdens of higher thought and abstract moral concepts like right and wrong were ones they were unable to carry, or simply too lazy to carry. I can't help thinking of Zoanthropes every time I see the Curtis bros on TV.
Zoanthropes
That certainly seems to fit.
Saw a lot of them in the prison system.
Oswald Bastable said:
"Yes. That is mostly because these immature 'men' (and I use the word in the loosest possible context) are challenged by the child's competition for the mothers attention."
A stepfather has a vested interest in destroying his partner's offspring with a previous mate because they represent competition for his own genes. It's perfectly simple and perfectly predictable.
Yes, New Zealand has the sad title of third-highest in the World for abortions. One baby dies from abortion every thirty minutes. These other horrific cases of child abuse and murder which make the headlines pale into something like insignificance when compared with this statistic.
Did you know, 99% of abortions are performed on mental health grounds? It's pretty ridiculous, these women are getting abortions done, and they don't even know that they are illegal.
But of course, when the abortion clinics receive $1,700 from the Govt. for each abortion they perform, they don't care so much whether or not they obey the law. Especially when they don't even need to fear the Abortion Supervisory Committee, who simply turns a blind eye to what's going on.
And by the way. Get a grip Psycho Milt. Nobody likes anonymous commenters, but to call them inbreds isn't on.
When visiting other people's blogs I offer no opinion on anonymous commenters, but on my own I'll say what I like about them.
In any case, when it comes to offering unnecessary, offensive and undeserved insult you might want to revisit telling the tens of thousands of NZ women who've had abortions that the crimes of the Glassie accused "pale into something like insignificance" by comparison.
I like to think abortion saves some littles ones from a life like Nia's.
An unloved child growing up in a wealthy family suffers, probably not physical violence, but the mental violence of knowing one is unloved, unwanted, a bit orf a drain on resources and free time. Perhaps abortion should go hand-in-hand with sterilisation...
Psycho Milt: Although you may not personally agree with those of us who see abortion as murder, we are able to back this up scientifically and believe it for very practical reasons - along with many other people. No need to throw round insults, I respect your views but reserve the right to think you're completely and utterly wrong!
Stating that over 18,000 gruesome deaths by abortion every year makes deaths by child abuse pale into insignificance is not insulting, it is just stating the facts - how many children are killed like Nia Glassie each year? Maybe 10? I rest my case.
Furthermore, we are not insulting women - I don't blame the women who have had abortions for this, as in most cases they haven't been told the full facts, they are just told the baby is just a bit of tissue that will be removed. They have chosen abortion based on false information. Rather I blame the policymakers who have allowed such misinformation to be spread using my tax.
Clunking Fist:
There's a risk you may be abused in a few years time. I'm going to kill you first just in case, ok? It's for your own good.
Mr Dennis, I agree with all you say, and none of PM's Leftist comments. Abortion undermines the value of children in general, as research and our high statistics of child abuse in NZ have shown. PM, just because it is legal doesn't make it right, same with gay marriage and prositution. Oh, and you can sit in your ivory tower and call us all thick, why do Lefties always resort to name-calling when they disagree on issues? That's a favourite tactic of the Left though, sad but true.
This lefty doesn't resort to name-calling when he disagrees on issues. He resorts to name-calling when people ignore the No Minister authors' oft-expressed wish that commenters should give themselves some kind of handle to distinguish them from everyone else, and he also resorts to name-calling when these anonymous types make unsubstantiated and quite obviously wrong statements from behind their curtain of anonymity.
This thread isn't about abortion. The attempt by various conservative Christians to make it so annoys me, as it quite plainly carries the inference, for all Mr Dennis attempts to claim otherwise, that mothers who've aborted their pregnancies are on a par with the accused in the Glassie case. It's true that making something legal doesn't necessarily make it right, but it's also true that using a horrendous crime as a prop for your own personal moral hobby-horse doesn't encourage polite responses from those you inflict it on.
Mr Dennis "how many children are killed like Nia Glassie each year? Maybe 10? I rest my case."
That's like saying only 400-odd are killed on the road each year as if that's the whole picture.
What about this: how many violent young men are jailed each year? Amongst them are the ones that were neither aborted nor murdered as a toddler...but there is a good chance that they were abused as a toddler.
"Clunking Fist: There's a risk you may be abused in a few years time. I'm going to kill you first just in case, ok? It's for your own good." Well, someone had the chance when mum was pregnant with me, but that opportunity passed and I was adopted out instead, so I guess I was one of the lucky ones.
I'm with PM on this one.
This thread is about Nia Glassie, Baby Peter and similar murders of children. It is NOT about abortion.
However, I would rather see people who are incapable of raising children successfully have abortions or give the kids up for adoption, rather than bring a child into the world where it will be ill-treated.
We also have issues of people getting pregnant, who should not.
People need to be responsible for their own actions.
But through the welfare state, how much responsibility is being taken away from people?
Though well intentioned , with the aims of caring, how much can we lay at the door of the welfare state for barbaric cruelty like we have seen, asystem allowing people to breed who should ot.
This is a view I'm moving towards and this is more the kind of debate I think we should be having.
We have unintentionally led to the arrival of a crisis in our society with our actions over the past few decades and I see no easy way out of it.
Governments need to announce that nine months from now, there will be no DPB.
Welfare will refocus to concentrate on giving the elderly a pension and the unemployed temporary support to get them back into work.
The geneuinely sick and disabled need not fear too, but certainly there is room for tightening up the definition of siickness.
It should not include druggies and alchies as at present.
Shame needs to be brought back into society. Shame from society at young girls who get pregnant to undesirable men.
Without welfare, women will see that they no longer have the option of having a baby on the state. Thus they will look for better fathers, caring ones that will stick around.
Without the DPB, the bad people will not breed. Either bad mums or bad dads.
The rise in child murders in recent years is because we have allowed the possibility for the bad to breed at the expense of the taxpayer.
And at the expense of their offspring.
This also includes the offspring who grow up to have their own problems because they weren't brought up properly, who in turn become even worse parents.
The cycle must stop.
September 2009, no more DPB!
pdq
I see Simon Power is to look at laws on child abuse, which is encourging.
Certainly, Liarbour appeared to do nothing following the various child killings over the years.
Section 59 is not the solution.
But w do seem to have a need to look at the welfare system.
Peter Creswell is arguing well over the folly of paying deadbeat scum to breed.
Believe it or not, children were killed by scumbags before November 1999. I don't doubt Mr Power will get to endure a few similar cases on his watch too. Guess what - it won't be National's fault.
Post a Comment