My opinion after watching the pilot of Breivik-show

[Iron Criterion]

-snip-

I'm not saying he needs to be punished, I'm saying that all those nice things he gets have to be paid for by someone. In this case it gets paid for by the law-abiding Norwegian populace. Admittedly a prisoner can't just go get a beer any time they want, but many folks work 50 hours a week and can barely afford food.

I suppose if I say I think things should be different I should probably qualify that statement though.

If it were my system, I wouldn't make it about revenge or punishment, the idea would be to keep them constrained to the prison while taking as much of the cost of their living off of the people who didn't break laws as possible. It could still be nice, there could still be decent food and comfy beds, but maybe they'd work thirty hours a week to defray some of the costs.

Ok, I see your problem, and I agree. This guys standard of living is way to high when compared to some guy working for minimum wage.

The problem with your reasoning is the same one people have when discussing unemployment. Ask yourself for a second: is this guy getting to much for being a prisoner, or is the average worker getting too little? Its probably a bit of both, but for me at least the bigger issue is some guy or gal working for a Euro an hour.

Why in the fuck should he NOT be punished? If you do something like this, you should get nothing for the rest of your life, not even the freedom to take your own life.

This is a Swedes thoughts.

Ok, congrats, you just punished Breivik. Awesome. He lives a life of eternal torment (if he lives at all). Woot. And now? What have you accomplished? Absolutely fucking nothing. If you executed him, you created a martyr. If you make his life as shitty as possible, everything stays the same. Having him eat nothing but moldy bread for the rest of his miserable existence wont magically resurrect 77 people.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Sick of hearing it, eh? Think about it for a second, and think about where punishing people harshly for crimes has gotten others in history.

(Love how you through the "I'm a swede" in at the end there. As if that changes anything.)

I can understand why he did it, and he was utterly wrong. What I can't understand is why he is still allowed to live; why it is considered somehow wrong to kill him.

Murder is illegal in Scandinavia.

Annd people cannot distinguish between killing and murder. Not the same thing. For it to be "murder" it has to be somehow wrong or illegal. Judicially executing callous murderers is not.

Ah, people advocating the death penalty. Always amusing.

I see your point - the idea of NEVER experiencing anything the outside world offers ever again would be the worst punishment of all for me. Still he can only get 21 years as it is the max sentence, unless they can successfully push for the insanity plea (I think he can be detained indefinitely then).

 

[MammothBlade]

Killing people who aren't a threat is wrong and it is illegal.

Laws can be changed. And I don't believe it's wrong to kill mass murderers, armed or not.

What of euthanasia and abortion? Maybe you should come up with a more consistent criteria for wrongful killing, it is by no means a tautology.

Yes it is. This is why you don't see it happen outside of developing nations, Japan and America.

The man himself has noted that he wants the death penalty so he can be a martyr in his screwed up little fantasy. I find it worrying that you're so eager to help him achieve his goals.

That doesn't explain anything. Japan and America are two of the most successful countries in the world, they're not exceptions by any means.

Breivik's political goals are irrelevant. What he wants does not matter. There are criminals who take a prison sentence as a badge of honour, yet few people suggest they should not be punished at all.

 

[josemlopes]

They'd never let him out, he's clearly not safe to society. This man is never going to taste freedom again.

They'd have to if he minds his manners, it's the law.

Even if they don't, he's still getting rewarded. Look at this shit, it's far nicer then what anyone working a minimum wage full time job gets (and most of those people didn't even kill anyone, for the record).

http://todayilearned.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/norway-prison-6.jpg

http://todayilearned.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/norwegian-prison-2.jpg

http://todayilearned.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/shower.jpg

I'm not saying he should be drawn and quartered, but the idea that you can murder 77 innocent people and get such a nice reward for doing so makes me both angry and sad.

The thing is those prisons arent tailored to punish people. And thats a great thing.

Why? Look at the percentage of criminals in the US who go to prison, get out, and go back in again. Then compare that to the rate in Sweden, Denmark, Germany, etc.

Besides, I dont see how you can call that a reward. Does it look better than my place? Yep. More expensive tech? Ignoring my PC setup, probably. Better standard of living all round? You bet.

But you know what someone in there cant do? Go down to the pub for a beer.

But what this guy did isnt the kind of thing that can be forgiven and forgot. This kind of prison works with people that have fallen in the wrong path and that can still be straighten up if given the chance because they will be set free someday. This guy isnt and there is nothing to fix on him, he is just a lost cause.

 

[Forgetitnow344]

I see your point - the idea of NEVER experiencing anything the outside world offers ever again would be the worst punishment of all for me. Still he can only get 21 years as it is the max sentence, unless they can successfully push for the insanity plea (I think he can be detained indefinitely then)

This is the only part that snags me. I still advocate the death penalty in situations where the criminal could never be reformed, and I deeply resent the anti-death penalty crowd merely for the fact that they could high-five the moon with their high horse... But even if the death penalty is out of the question, 21 fucking years for 77 people dead? Charles Manson didn't kill a single person but he's been in jail for like, 50 years or something. This guy kills over six-dozen people and he can get out in 21 years? HOW? That is unfathomable to me! He needs to be put away for good not for the sake of punishment, but for the sake of the next 77 kills he'll carry out if he's released.

That's the reason why I advocate the death penalty, actually. There are many cases where the offender kills, goes to jail "for life," is released, and kills again in no time. That is what the death penalty is for. It's not a bunch of right-wing vengeance-hungry psycho-babble, it's a way to make sure that those with no hope don't take innocent lives.

 

[Jonluw]

I see your point - the idea of NEVER experiencing anything the outside world offers ever again would be the worst punishment of all for me. Still he can only get 21 years as it is the max sentence, unless they can successfully push for the insanity plea (I think he can be detained indefinitely then).

Terrorism has a 30 year sentence, actually, and he isn't let out after that. He's being put up for review after his sentence is up.
If they, upon review, don't deem him fit to go back into society, his sentence can be repeated up to 5 times.
Considering his fundamentally warped worldview, it's unlikely that he'll ever be let out.

 

[Jonluw]

This is the only part that snags me. I still advocate the death penalty in situations where the criminal could never be reformed, and I deeply resent the anti-death penalty crowd merely for the fact that they could high-five the moon with their high horse... But even if the death penalty is out of the question, 21 fucking years for 77 people dead? Charles Manson didn't kill a single person but he's been in jail for like, 50 years or something. This guy kills over six-dozen people and he can get out in 21 years? HOW? That is unfathomable to me! He needs to be put away for good not for the sake of punishment, but for the sake of the next 77 kills he'll carry out if he's released.

That's the reason why I advocate the death penalty, actually. There are many cases where the offender kills, goes to jail "for life," is released, and kills again in no time. That is what the death penalty is for. It's not a bunch of right-wing vengeance-hungry psycho-babble, it's a way to make sure that those with no hope don't take innocent lives.

You too:
He's not getting out after 21 years.
If he isn't deemed insane, he will receive a 30 year sentence. After that time has passed, he'll be up for review.
If they still don't deem him safe for society, his sentence can be repeated up to five times.

He's not ever getting out.

 

[Iron Criterion]

I see your point - the idea of NEVER experiencing anything the outside world offers ever again would be the worst punishment of all for me. Still he can only get 21 years as it is the max sentence, unless they can successfully push for the insanity plea (I think he can be detained indefinitely then).

Terrorism has a 30 year sentence, actually, and he isn't let out after that. He's being put up for review after his sentence is up.
If they, upon review, don't deem him fit to go back into society, his sentence can be repeated up to 5 times.
Considering his fundamentally warped worldview, it's unlikely that he'll ever be let out.

I do apologise. Just did some additional research:

"In 2008, to fulfill its requirements under the Rome Statute, Norway created a new maximal penalty of 30 years for crimes against humanity."

 

[CCountZero]

I see your point - the idea of NEVER experiencing anything the outside world offers ever again would be the worst punishment of all for me. Still he can only get 21 years as it is the max sentence, unless they can successfully push for the insanity plea (I think he can be detained indefinitely then).

After those 21 years have passed, he isn't released, he gets to go see a review board. If they deem him unfit for society, he can get another 21 years (or less). This can be done five times, for a total of 126 years in prison.

More than enough to solve any problem, yes?

 

[CCountZero]

Laws can be changed. And I don't believe it's wrong to kill mass murderers, armed or not.

What of euthanasia and abortion? Maybe you should come up with a more consistent criteria for wrongful killing, it is by no means a tautology.

Japan and America are two of the most successful countries in the world, they're not exceptions by any means.

Breivik's political goals are irrelevant. What he wants does not matter. There are criminals who take a prison sentence as a badge of honour, yet few people suggest they should not be punished at all.

First of all, countries with legal abortion have a "cut-off" rate, before which the fetus isn't considered sentient. That's why it's not murder in those countries. If you do it after the cut-off, it is.

Secondly, how can you call the USofA a successful country? They just caused a world-wide recession, all the while jacking up oil prices and having one of the lowest standards of living in the world.

 

[DJjaffacake]

Shnip

Point one: If the Norwegian people want it to be changed it will be, but they don't so it won't.
Point two: Maybe you shouldn't assume that someone who is against the death penalty is pro euthanasia and abortion.
Point three: Success has nothing to do with justice or morality.
Point four: Actually you have a point there.

 

[DoomyMcDoom]

Ok, I know the man killed 77 people, intentionally, his motive wasn't "Wooohoo I'm gonna kill me some people!" it was more of "Must defend my homeland from invasion, everyone else is blind, they will take our land." now even if his view is "wrong" and his way of dealing with the threat he percieved... When you think about it, in life there is no black and white textbook simple morality system to follow that was set in stone not by any mortal but by a god that is infallible and guides us indefinately, there is only popularily accepted viewpoints, and man made "justice", a person's viewpoint doesn't just exist, it's a thing trained into you by your surroundings and upbringing.

I do not believe he should be put to death, I think he should be put away into a facility for rehabillitation, and if that doesn't work he stays in, and that whole time he has to brood over the fact that he fucked up his entire life, with that one decision, life is finite, and his will be spent in a confined space.

Sure some people get a major revenge boner, and want him killed because that would be justice, but a man cannot suffer when he is dead... The worst prison one can have is one's own thoughts, trust me, for this I know from experience, when one is confined, for any length of time, put aside to rot, allowed only a small space to call your own, and given only opertunity enough to watch your life pass you while you sit by unable to do anything, because you are contained...

So yeah, let him sit in his seemingly well furnished place, where nothing he does will have any meaning, where his life is contained, and he cannot truly live, only exist.

 

[CAMDAWG]

Removing that man is not murder. Its justice. He will never be reformed. Give him a week to put his affairs on order, arrange a will and all that, speak to anyone he would like to speak to, then take him behind the prison and put a bullet in the back of his skull. Cheap, easy, humane. Plus its more consideration than he gave those 77 innocent people.

I was unaware you were capable of viewing Breivik's future.

That is the ultimate problem with the death penalty. The fact that none of us know for sure what will happen in the future. I happen to think that Breivik will never be reformed, and that should remain segregated from society for the remainder of his life, but does that mean he won't? No, it most certainly does not. It is arrogant in the extreme to assume that people are incapable of change, and that we should be able to kill them if we want to.

In addition to my opposition of the death penalty, there's the whole martyr thing. I believe Breivik actually said that he was expecting to die a martyr on the island, and also told the court they should either kill him, or set him free.

 

[Darkmantle]

They'd never let him out, he's clearly not safe to society. This man is never going to taste freedom again.

They'd have to if he minds his manners, it's the law.

Even if they don't, he's still getting rewarded. Look at this shit, it's far nicer then what anyone working a minimum wage full time job gets (and most of those people didn't even kill anyone, for the record).

http://todayilearned.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/norway-prison-6.jpg

http://todayilearned.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/norwegian-prison-2.jpg

http://todayilearned.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/shower.jpg

I'm not saying he should be drawn and quartered, but the idea that you can murder 77 innocent people and get such a nice reward for doing so makes me both angry and sad.

Well whatever it makes you feel is totally irrelevant. What matters is results. And that prison has them. if you look at the states, the prisons there are everything you want them to be, and they consistently fail. Don't let your emotions subvert your reasoning.

 

[JesterRaiin]

I felt like screaming "Well then stop reporting on it then you hypocritical turds!" at the T.V.

He needs to be forgotten. We need to turn our backs on him and put our fingers in our ears.

My thoughts exactly sir.

Murder is illegal in Scandinavia.

...as it should be in all civilized countries. Then again, what's wrong with Gulag-like facilities where convicts work their asses off to the rest of their lives and at least partially repay for their crimes against community they refused to live in ?

 

[Muspelheim]

To be honest, I can understand why so many would prefer him to be executed. Emotionally, I would like to see him in the gallows for what he has done. But that wouldn't do more than sate our thirst for some form of revenge and to prove his point. He wants to be executed, because it's an integral part of his christian martyr fantasy/delusion. Furthermore, there are people out there who idolize him already, and killing him will only make it simpler for them. Dead heroes can't disappoint, after all.

Really, the best solution, in my opinon, would be to simply toss him into the loony bin, where he belongs. He's not mentally fit, and not only is it his human right to recieve mental care, it's also the only way to both ensure his safety and the safety of society from him.

Some may be shouting: "But that's not a punishment! He needs to suffer, and putting him in an asylum is like putting him in a smart hotel! Why is he being rewarded for his crime?!"

Well, throwing him into an institution -would- be the more severe of punishments available for Breivik. It's the last thing he'd want. It both devalues his cause as well as his bloated self-image. He wants to be killed, both to prove his point about the evil, vile multiculti-dictatorship and to get his role as a martyr confirmed. If he's being put to death, then he and his cause are taken seriously, as opposed to a violent delusion in a mentally ill person's head.
It'd be the ultimate show of disrespect and devaluation to him and his repulsive agenda to treat him and it as a mental case to be treated.

Furthermore, a mental institution isn't some sort of luxurious resort, and a person scentenced to psychiatric care doesn't "get away scot-free". Dangerous mental patients are still kept locked-up and often sedated and on powerful drugs. Also, Breivik will always run the risk of being killed by another patient, or some other assassin. He'll never be safe from someone's need for revenge as long as he live. Even assuming he is ever let free, he's still going to be a target for the rest of his life.

Trust me, a prison or a cell doesn't have to look like a 18'th century dungeon with barren rock walls and moldy bread to be a suitable punishment. Considering everything Breivik have is his twisted fantasy ideology, seeing it for what it is, delusions and hatred, is already a punishment in itself.

Breivik is a sad, sad mental case, and he failed miserably at what he set out to do. He belongs in an institution, reguardless of if he can be cured or not. What truly matters isn't making sure he's miserable enough to sate our natural need for retribution, but to heal the damage he's caused, ensure it will never happen again, and to learn and grow stronger from the experience.

As for silencing him... That would also only prove his point, and it would make clear that we fear what he has to say. And that would give his words much more value than they deserve.

 

[ElPatron]

Seriously though, he'll be out in 21 years

Nope. He will be evaluated, deemed unsuitable to be released back to society, and the next evaluation will be 42 years from now.

Yes, it works. Norway's fallback rates are far lower than those of the US.

You're saying "it works" but you have to take into account that Norway is not the US.

Do you prefer to be released in Norway or released in the US? In the US chances are that you will probably not get a job, live in a poor and crime riddled area and actually be encouraged to commit crimes again. Totally different cultures and socioeconomic factors can't make a good comparison.