Letters: Forced quarantine could have prevented complete lockdown

Photo / Getty Images

I've just read Heather du Plessis-Allan's column regarding quarantine on arrival (March 29). It mirrors exactly my sentiments. The Government should have implemented this at least two weeks ago as most cases of coronavirus are coming from overseas. Had they forced quarantine we could have avoided a complete lockdown, avoiding loss of jobs and businesses to fold.

They then could have promoted NZ to Kiwis to replace their overseas trips, and instead travel throughout their own country, supporting tourism and businesses. No foresight. And would the cost of doing so been less than what the current bailout is?

In my view, if Kiwis have to stay put we can be self sufficient and keep this economy going. But letting Kiwis home without controlled quarantine is a big mistake for the economy and could extend our lockdown period.
Kay Ganley, Mt Maunganui

Keep it up, Heather

Thank you Heather for the forthrightness expressed in your opinion piece on quarantining continuing arrivals to New Zealand.

In contrast, the personal attacks I'm reading in the letters page are completely misguided, full of mawkish sentiment. Keep it up.
Ellen Carruthers, Eden Terrace

Doing her job

It would appear Heather du Plessis-Allan is a good "opinion" writer judging by some of the unhappy letters to the editor about her, but isn't that proof that she's doing her job, creating a healthy debate?

If her opinion (and everybody has one) upsets these people that much, don't read her articles and turn the page, especially if your contribution to the argument is simply a personal attack.
Glenn Forsyth, Rangatira Park

Perfect elixir

Frankly I agree that this is not a time for the negative criticism and narrow-minded thinking demonstrated by what I thought was a perceptive, fair, unbiased and respected journalist such as Heather.

I have in the past enjoyed her commentary and listening to her as a radio host. But alas. All is not lost.

Heather has redeemed herself in this week's column (March 29), which is the exact opposite of past anecdotes and gives us a clear and succinct sense of purpose and the need as a unified nation to take a personal responsibility for kicking this virus in the butt!

Indeed Heather ... the perfect elixir!

Keep it up.
Stevan Sharples, Hamilton

Left wondering

It seems to me that most of Jacinda Ardern's critics are women.
I wonder why?
John Hampson, Meadowbank

Track tourists

As one who values the freedom to roam our lively country, it amazes me that I can contemplate tracking every hired car or campervan by GPS. This facility exists in every car. It would make commonsense under the national emergency to protect the nation from those who risk thousands of lives by not obeying the lockdown.
Steve Russell, Hillcrest

The meaning of murder

Dr Jack Havill's assertion that "Thou shalt not kill" means "Thou shalt not murder" (March 29) is old news. The issue is the meaning of "murder".

Havill's narrow definition — killing that "implies malevolence [and] is totally unwanted" — should be rejected. "Malevolence" is extreme: intention is enough for murder and is why we treat accidental and negligent killing differently. "Totally unwanted" sounds like a made-up criterion: I don't agree that you can do anything you like to someone so long as they consent. If Havill is right, then killing a young healthy person who seriously and sanely wants to die is not murder.

Regardless of labels, some doctors will intentionally kill under End of Life Choice, which they have not done before. This matters.
Gavan O'Farrell, Lower Hutt