Reader letters of the week: Jack the Ripper panto, Syria vote and retiree only zones

Jack The Ripper The Panto. Picture: Supplied

Jack The Ripper The Panto. Picture: Supplied - Credit: Supplied

Here are some of the best reader letters we've received this week. You can join the discussion by commenting below.

•Jack the Ripper panto: We can choose

Monday December 7

Pauline Farley,

Blackwell Avenue, Norwich.

I have never written to a newspaper before, however, I feel I had to express my opinion regarding Sophie Elliot's views (EDP, December 3). May I ask her why she is not protesting about the musical 'Chicago', which glorifies murderesses in jail. There is even a dance number on Strictly this week, 'He's got it coming', which is a song about how they murdered their men — will she be protesting about that too? There is also the musical 'Sweeney Todd', another gloriously murderous affair of throat cutting and putting the victims in pies. Surely that deserves a protest or two. Where do you draw the line? Please don't protest about something that you have not seen. We all have the ability to make choices. It is a show for adults only and as an adult I am choosing to go. She has no right to stop me. However, she can express her opinion – but I would strongly suggest she sees it first before she does so.

Most Read

•Syria Vote: Any consultation?

Tuesday December 8

David Wright,

Templewood Lane, High Kelling.

I note our local MP, Norman Lamb, voted against proposed air strikes against Isis/Daesh targets in Syria. I will be interested to know on what basis he voted in the way he did. Was it a personal choice or was it what his constituents wanted him to do?

If the latter, where did he obtain their views as I do not know anyone who was consulted on this matter. I, and many others, will be interested to hear how he came to the conclusion that he did.

•Retiree home zones

Wednesday December 9

Peter Amey,

Tunstead Road, Hoveton.

There appears to be a growing campaign to stop drivers of retirement age from driving. Whilst accident statistics do not support such action the probability is that many older drivers could end up without transport.

If society does so penalise the older driver it will become essential for arrangements to be made so that retirees can get to the shops, doctors, dentists etc and reach a railway station and/or bus stop in order to use public transport. One way of achieving this would be to designate the area around every town centre as a retiree-only residential zone.

If, say, a 1,000-metre diameter zone was created where all housing was restricted solely for retirees then older people would be able to reach the shops etc without the use of a car.

All doctors' and dentists' surgeries would be required to provide facilities for older people within this zone. Also any new houses in the zone would need to be constructed specifically for retired people. As starter homes have to be provided for youngsters then why shouldn't the requirements of older people be similarly respected?