Support NeoGAF

[Gemüsepizza]

ITT: Young, uneducated people who are completely ignorant of 100+ years of progress in our society and justice system, and, going by the numerous ways listed here on how Breivik should be shot, decapitated , starved to death or something else, people who are also full of primitive hate. This is really shameful.

I whole heartedly disagree.

So unless you live there you're not entitled to an opinion?

So the US has no say on anything that goes on in Iraq or Afghanistan or Iran or anywhere else apart from the US?

Well last time I checked.......



Oh I'm very knowledgable in this subject thank you very much, more than most probably.

Having worked in a prison they have more freedoms and privacy in such a confined space than most people in Africa and poor people throughout the world.

Where would you rather be, starving with possible diseases, no medical facilities, no schooling or poor schooling, drinking dirty water if you even get any that is and rags as clothes, no job or such a poor paying one that there is a constant worry to make ends meet, do I need to go on?

Or in a prison with a PS2, 3 square meals a day, your own toilet and bed, gym facilities, social groups, skill training, medical care all for free etc.

No offence, but maybe some of you guys need to look at the bigger picture here and step out from the bubble that you seem to be living in.

The world isn't all roses and unicorns, if you think that people in westernised prisons are treated 'poorly' enough to merit the place being worthy to such punishment for mass murders then quite frankly it doesn't surprise me that society is the way it is.

There probably isn't much point in continuing this discussion as it's clear that we are at total opposite ends of the spectrum on this issue, which is fair enough, I respect your opinion but I cannot say that I agree on it in the slightest.

So because people in certain African countries are living in horrible conditions, we should treat our prisoners like shit? Did I get your "bigger picture"? Why do you even compare those conditions? Norway isn't some African country. Normal, free people in Norway are living a much, much better life than any prisoners there.

 

[Kalnos]

ITT: Young, uneducated people who are completely ignorant of 100+ years of progress in our society and justice system, and, going by the numerous ways listed here on how Breivik should be shot, decapitated , starved to death or something else, people who are also full of primitive hate. This is fucking shameful.

No, you.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Maybe you should try to formulate complete sentences and explain what you meant so people can actually understand what you are saying.

 

[AkuMifune]

Maybe you should try to formulate complete sentences and explain what you meant so people can actually understand what you are saying.

The insistence of some that leniency against convicted murderers is somehow enlightened or evolved as compared to the harsh justice systems of other countries is continually amusing in its naiviete.

And if we needed further proof this clown was beyond redemption its his insult at the great Rayman Revolution!

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

Those playing judge, jury, and excecutioner are idiots. Similarly, those suggesting his requests for the latest vidya games are reasonable are also idiots.

Nobody wins. We joke about how Revolution is a good game etc. but those people he killed remain tragically dead and he himself remains dangerously unhinged. Don't go for vengeance. He's where he needs to be; away from anybody he can harm.

 

[Souldestroyer Reborn]

So because people in certain African countries are living in horrible conditions, we should treat our prisoners like shit? Did I get your "bigger picture"? Why do you even compare those conditions? Norway isn't some African country. Normal, free people in Norway are living a much, much better life than any prisoners there.

Like I said, there's no point in continuing this discussion as it's only going to result in one of us getting too emotionally invested in our posts/ this subject and getting banned.

To humour you I'll answer your questions.

1) You made the distction that we should treat our prisoners like shit because of Africa. Not me. I DID NOT SAY THAT, YOU DID.

My point was/is, that there are people all around the world, millions of people who would love nothing more than to be In one of our "prisons" in comparison to the lives that they unfortunately live. Which should not be the case. In fact some of those people stay in our own countries and are repeat offenders purely to get back into the prison system.

When there are these apparent "free people in Africa or X country" living in poorer, worse off conditions than those of which are placed into a system to be punished for their wrongdoings (in this case mass murder of 77 people most of which can be regarded as children) then yes I think it is wrong and yes I sure as hell have a problem with that.

2) Why do I even compare to people in those countries?

Well why not?

Are those people any less human or any less entitled to live the same quality of life than any other average Norwegian or American or Brit or X country? Are they second rate human beings?

I don't see what your point is here.

So to wrap up, no. No you did not get my "Bigger picture" at all. Not even in the slightest.

 

[Log4Girlz]

I don't get how anyone can just hate someone just because they kill over 70 people in cold blood. Primitive barbarians. This man's life is precious. :/

 

[GetemMa]

The insistence of some that leniency against convicted murderers is somehow enlightened or evolved as compared to the harsh justice systems of other countries is continually amusing in its naiviete.

And if we needed further proof this clown was beyond redemption its his insult at the great Rayman Revolution!

Yeah but the Norweigan prison is far more successful than ours here in the U.S.

Arne Kvernvik Nilsen, the departing governor of a prison with a reoffending rate of just 16%, compared with around 70% for prisons across the rest of Europe and the US

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/sep/04/bastoy-norwegian-prison-works

There also seems to be a big misconception about this guys sentence. He is probably never getting out. He has to be reevaluated every 5 years and if they still think he is crazy they can extend his 21 year sentence and keep extending it for the rest of his life, which based on his current complaints they definitely will.

 

[Exterminieren]

What is this trying to imply?

That wading into a 15 page discussion with "KILL THIS MAN IMMEDIATELY" doesn't add particularly much. It's a position that has been debated a lot in this thread, with many points made on both sides. Reading it will enable you to see why some think that it's good that "this asshat hasn't been put to death", that's all.

 

[The Abominable Snowman]

That wading into a 15 page discussion with "KILL THIS MAN IMMEDIATELY" doesn't add particularly much. It's a position that has been debated a lot in this thread, with many points made on both sides. Reading it will enable you to see why some think that it's good that "this asshat hasn't been put to death", that's all.

Yeah, I've seen that silly sentiment thousands of times and I'm hardened to it. I've tried listening to the "Let people who maliciously killed 10+ people in cold blood live" crowd hundreds of times before, and it all boils down to the same debate. And even worse when they bring abortion or other completely unrelated topics into it.

And I'd wager to say GAF is mostly against the side I'm on, based on prior threads I've read.

Either way, "Click a little more so you learn something" is a bit of a baseless attack. I could click a thousand pieces of your literature but I doubt my mind will change, in this case especially.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

The insistence of some that leniency against convicted murderers is somehow enlightened or evolved as compared to the harsh justice systems of other countries is continually amusing in its naiviete.

And if we needed further proof this clown was beyond redemption its his insult at the great Rayman Revolution!

You know, what I really find amusing is how arrogantly you are demonstating us your ignorance of the reasons behind such a justice system. A couple of them are, that for example there is no advantage in treating prisoners bad. There is no deterrence effect. People won't commit less murders because they can't play 14-year-old video games. Then there is the effect on the lifes and the psych of guards, and our whole society. Additionally, the justice system in Norway is highly effective. Similar things can not be said about for example the USA. But it speaks for yourself that you are seemingly totally incapable of even explaining your opinion.

Like I said, there's no point in continuing this discussion as it's only going to result in one of us getting too emotionally invested in our posts/ this subject and getting banned.

To humour you I'll answer your questions.<

1) You made the distction that we should treat our prisoners like shit because of Africa. Not me. I DID NOT SAY THAT, YOU DID.

My point was/is, that there are people all around the world, millions of people who would love nothing more than to be In one of our "prisons" in comparison to the lives that they unfortunately live. Which should not be the case.

You can't honestly believe this nonsense? So "millions of people" would love to spend the rest of their life isolated in a prison? This is crazy. And if you did not mean what I wrote, then why are you even bringing this as an example? This doesn't make any sense.

In fact some of those people stay in our own countries and are repeat offenders purely to get back into the prison system.

So they are living here in our society where they are free, have a nice appartment, can have a social live and where they can play the latest video games and then they commit crimes so that they can be put into prison and have a small cell with a bed, a table, two chairs, an old videogame console and no social life. Again, this doesn't make any sense.

When there are these apparent "free people in Africa or X country" living in poorer, worse off conditions than those of which are placed into a system to be punished for their wrongdoings (in this case mass murder of 77 people most of which can be regarded as children) then yes I think it is wrong and yes I sure as hell have a problem with that.

Yes. But again, why are you bringing this as an example. Those people should certainly have a better life. But what is your point?

2) Why do I even compare to people in those countries?

Well why not?

Are those people any less human or any less entitled to live the same quality of life than any other average Norwegian or American or Brit or X country? Are they second rate human beings?

I don't see what your point is here.

Neither do I.

So to wrap up, no. No you did not get my "Bigger picture" at all. Not even in the slightest.

Probably because you have failed to explain it properly.

I don't get how anyone can just hate someone just because they kill over 70 people in cold blood. Primitive barbarians. This man's life is precious. :/

Who said you aren't allowed to hate him? Who said that he is "precious"? Nobody. But that doesn't change the fact that those violent fantasies in here are plain and simply disgusting.

Yeah, I've seen that silly sentiment thousands of times and I'm hardened to it. I've tried listening to the "Let people who maliciously killed 10+ people in cold blood live" crowd hundreds of times before, and it all boils down to the same debate. And even worse when they bring abortion or other completely unrelated topics into it.

And I'd wager to say GAF is mostly against the side I'm on, based on prior threads I've read.

Either way, "Click a little more so you learn something" is a bit of a baseless attack. I could click a thousand pieces of your literature but I doubt my mind will change, in this case especially.

So I take it from your post that you are a supporter of the death penality? Then tell me please, how do you want to prevent innocent people from getting killed by the death penality. It is a fact that in our justice system, innocent people get convicted on a regular basis. It is also a fact that innocent people were victims of the death penality before. Please tell me how you want to solve this dilemma? Hint: You can't. If you believe you can create a law/system which can prevent this, then you are dumb. And if you believe that a few innocent deaths aren't that bad, then you are evil. So if you really, as you say, have listened to the arguments of the people against the death penality, then you must surely know of this dilemma. So what are you - are you dumb, evil or both?

 

[Nasym]

Would anyone question if an inmate wanted to borrow a specific book? Im sure the have movie nights and a ping pong table, why cant they have video games? long live the medium

 

[Naminator]

What an attention whore!

Thats all this is guys, anyone actually believing that his hunger strike will amount to shit is gullible at best.

 

[Broder Salsa]

I whole heartedly disagree.

So unless you live there you're not entitled to an opinion?

So the US has no say on anything that goes on in Iraq or Afghanistan or Iran or anywhere else apart from the US?

Well last time I checked.......

Again I never said that you didn't have a right to an opinion..

and yes, while you can invade middle eastern countries or force smaller ones that are a danger to not do things, you're not exactly in a position to influence a Norwegian prison system that actually works very well.

and as I said, it's fine to disagree, but you came in here asking what was a stupid question if you had read the thread, cause it had been explained many many times. Go ahead and disagree with that, but the reason (good or bad for you) it is the way it is, has been posted several times.

 

[remnant]

Those playing judge, jury, and excecutioner are idiots. Similarly, those suggesting his requests for the latest vidya games are reasonable are also idiots.

Why?

15 pages and I haven't seen a single post offer exactly why Brevik should be treated differently from other inmates?
If anything its been nothing but "let him play bad games." Which is kind of counterproductive to his "rehab"

 

[Paladin CL]

And how is this supposed to work out?

"Hey, this guy has raped children. I'm 100% sure. The victims have even identified him!!!1111"

"Ha! it's some POS like Breivik, kiiiilllllll hiimmmm!!!!!eleven!!111"

guy gets killed

"DNA tests have shown, that the guy wasn't the rapist, sry, mistakes happen, well he is dead now, can't do anything about it, sad mistake, cry cry etc."

There is a reason why civilized countries don't have death penalty for any type of crime w/o exceptions.

Do you have any doubt about this case? I dont, so Im speaking about cases like this.

ps: a bullet its not expensive.

 

[Orayn]

Do you have any doubt about this case? I dont, so Im speaking about cases like this.

ps: a bullet its not expensive.

It's the principle of the thing. It's not hard to imagine why someone might thing that killing innocent people is an unacceptable drawback to killing guilty ones.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Do you have any doubt about this case? I dont, so Im speaking about cases like this.

ps: a bullet its not expensive.

What is "a case like this"? Can you characterize this case? Because then I can create a situation where all your criteria are met for the death penality - except that the convicted person is innocent. It doesn't seem like you understand laws, how they work and how they are created.

 

[Log4Girlz]

Who said you aren't allowed to hate him? Who said that he is "precious"? Nobody. But that doesn't change the fact that those violent fantasies in here are plain and simply disgusting

Wanting someone to suffer or even die for merely killing dozens of people is pretty disgusting. How terrible and plain blood thirsty. :/

Listen. ..the Justice system of that country is fine. But acting like the desire for vengeance for such crimes. .. even if they were perpetrated on strangers in some distant land that we happen to sympathize with. ..is somehow disgusting is insulting.

 

[The Abominable Snowman]

So I take it from your post that you are a supporter of the death penality? Then tell me please, how do you want to prevent innocent people from getting killed by the death penality. It is a fact that in our justice system, innocent people get convicted on a regular basis. It is also a fact that innocent people were victims of the death penality before. Please tell me how you want to solve this dilemma? Hint: You can't. If you believe you can create a law/system which can prevent this, then you are dumb. And if you believe that a few innocent deaths aren't that bad, then you are evil. So if you really, as you say, have listened to the arguments of the people against the death penality, then you must surely know of this dilemma. So what are you - are you dumb, evil or both?

I hate this train of thought. Its like you think everyone who has a conviction will be automatically put to death, or that everyone who is pro death penalty has some agenda that mandates it be used at least x times per year.

I don't. I'm just of the opinion that in cases like Breivik's and hell even Manson's, there's no real reason for keeping them alive and allowing them press and popularity (through infamy). Not every murderer proclaims innocence.

 

[Paladin CL]

What is "a case like this"? Can you characterize this case? Because then I can create a situation where all your criteria are met for the death penality - except that the convicted person is innocent. It doesn't seem like you understand laws, how they work and how they are created.

Killer caught in the act? I think that´s good enough.

 

[Oersted]

I hate this train of thought. Its like you think everyone who has a conviction will be automatically put to death, or that everyone who is pro death penalty has some agenda that mandates it be used at least x times per year.

I don't. I'm just of the opinion that in cases like Breivik's and hell even Manson's, there's no real reason for keeping them alive and allowing them press and popularity (through infamy). Not every murderer proclaims innocence.

So did Mandela.

 

[Melter]

wait, he has a PS2??

damn prison is pretty cool

 

[Illiterate Actual]

Give this dude Xbox One I want to play against him in Titanfall.

 

[hooijdonk17]

Yeah but the Norweigan prison is far more successful than ours here in the U.S.



http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/sep/04/bastoy-norwegian-prison-works

There also seems to be a big misconception about this guys sentence. He is probably never getting out. He has to be reevaluated every 5 years and if they still think he is crazy they can extend his 21 year sentence and keep extending it for the rest of his life, which based on his current complaints they definitely will.

Ok, so Norway has 16% reoffending rate compared to 70% in US..

That still doesn't change the fact that killing Breivik brings the reoffending probability to 0% from 16% (which is statistical; the man is practically incurable).

Furthermore, it also will help the first time offending rate go down because people will likely thing more than twice about going on a kid shooting rampage when they are faced with death by torture than when they are faced with 21 years of Rayman in solidarity.

Can you argue against this?

 

[jimi_dini]

In fact some of those people stay in our own countries and are repeat offenders purely to get back into the prison system.

source?

Do you have any doubt about this case? I dont, so Im speaking about cases like this.

Why should it matter if I have doubts or not. I'm not sure about Breivik's mental state for example.

I simply won't agree to kill people, because there is always the possibilty to be wrong and even if there was a way to be 100% sure (there isn't), I would still not agree, because it wouldn't solve anything.

Do you really think that the judge and jury did have doubts in those cases in US, where innocent people got sentenced to death? They surely didn't have doubts, but in retrospect they were definitely wrong.

ps: a bullet its not expensive.

Yeah and that would help whom? The bloodlust of people?

And while we are at it, can we then kill Obama as well? He is responsible for the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent people. Or is that different, because all of those were so called "accidents"?
And then I guess jury members + judges, who ordered the killing of innocent people, should also get killed. That would at least make it consistent.

 

[redcrayon]

Ok, so Norway has 16% reoffending rate compared to 70% in US..

That still doesn't change the fact that killing Breivik brings the reoffending probability to 0% from 16% (which is statistical; the man is practically incurable).

Furthermore, it also will help the first time offending rate go down because people will likely thing more than twice about going on a kid shooting rampage when they are faced with death by torture than when they are faced with 21 years of Rayman in solidarity.

Can you argue against this?

Yes. I doubt the death penalty would have deterred him. It doesn't seem to have have acted as a deterrent where it is used, as most people that kill either aren't planning on getting caught or aren't thinking clearly. Besides, going on a kid-killing rampage is as likely to end in death-by-armed-police as anything else. In Breivik's case, he was planning full well on being killed at the scene.

Applying clear-thinking regarding the logic of possible punishments in the event of survival to people planning mass killing sprees based on some bonkers politics doesn't exactly make sense.

Killing Breivik's involves making exceptions to a system that is one of the best in the world at protecting society as a whole. People can dislike the lack of vengeance within it, but ultimately it leads to a safer society for all concerned if the state doesn't murder it's own criminals. To kill Breivik would mean drawing a line, where the massively successful rehabilitative stance stops, and torture and death begins. Where is that line? Killing one person? Raping two kids? Killing three people? Ten? What exactly is the line between your common-or-garden murder of, say, 'only' one or two people with an infinitely extendable 21 year sentence and a rampage that demands death?

As to your line that he is 'practically incurable', I'm sure you are right, but we aren't psychiatrists, nor do we know how the field will advance in the next 40+ years. Giving the death sentence to the mentally ill but not to murderers who commit a crime of passion that they deeply regret (hint- the death sentence does nothing to deter people who aren't thinking clearly, whether permanently or for a few critical seconds) seems like a poor idea to me. No human being should be able to make the call of life or death over whether another human life should be snuffed out in revenge based on their ability for critical thinking.

His mental heath will be constantly evaluated over the next 21 years. Removing freedom of movement and locking someone in a small cell for decades (and almost certainly for life in Breivik's case) is punishment enough, keeping society safe, conditions in the prison calm rather than anguished, and not sanctioning the state to execute anybody. The state should be above inflicting final vengeance, as it has been proven time and again that it does not act as a deterrent. If it did, murder rates per head of population would be much lower in places where the death penalty is in place. They aren't.

 

[hooijdonk17]

Yes. I doubt the death penalty would have deterred him. It doesn't seem to have have acted as a deterrent where it is used, as most people that kill either aren't planning on getting caught or aren't thinking clearly. Besides, going on a kid-killing rampage is as likely to end in death-by-armed-police as anything else. In Breivik's case, he was planning full well on being killed at the scene.

It wouldn't have stopped Breivik doesn't mean it wouldn't have stopped someone else. More to the point, knowing you'll probably live after the fact is actually encouraging to most such minded individuals. Even more to the point, your assertion that Breivik or like minded people are not thinking straight is bullshit, the amount of planning that went into the incident clearly demonstrates that not only is he sane, but also that he is capable of quite clear and genious thought.

Applying clear-thinking regarding the logic of possible punishments in the event of survival to people planning mass killing sprees based on some bonkers politics doesn't exactly make sense.

And why, exactly? Again, you argue against it with no logic, only your personal presumptions.

Killing Breivik's involves making exceptions to a system that is one of the best in the world at protecting society as a whole. People can dislike the lack of vengeance within it, but ultimately it leads to a safer society for all concerned if the state doesn't murder it's own criminals. To kill Breivik would mean drawing a line, where the massively successful rehabilitative stance stops, and torture and death begins. Where is that line? Killing one person? Raping two kids? Killing three people? Ten? What exactly is the line between your common-or-garden murder of, say, 'only' one or two people with an infinitely extendable 21 year sentence and a rampage that demands death?

His mental heath will be constantly evaluated over the next 21 years. Removing freedom of movement and locking someone in a cell for decades (and almost certainly for life in Breivik's case) is punishment enough. The state should be above sanctioning final vengeance, as it has been proven time and again that it does not act as a deterrent. If it did, murder rates per head of population would be much lower in places where the death penalty is in place. They aren't.

That it's the BEST system in the world is debatable, and that people come in here to reiterate that no matter what the sentence may be Breivik will NEVER walk suggests that an exception has ALREADY been made, so your whole argument is bogus. If the system worked, they wouldn't have had to tamper with their own system to make sure he stays in there. They will re-evaluate a sane man on his sanity every five years and shamelessly deny that he is sane enough to be let out. You know what? Hypocritical Bullshit is what that is.

 

[questionmark]

Ok, so Norway has 16% reoffending rate compared to 70% in US..

That still doesn't change the fact that killing Breivik brings the reoffending probability to 0% from 16% (which is statistical; the man is practically incurable).

Furthermore, it also will help the first time offending rate go down because people will likely thing more than twice about going on a kid shooting rampage when they are faced with death by torture than when they are faced with 21 years of Rayman in solidarity.

Can you argue against this?

Killing every criminal is a sure way to keep the reoffending rate at 0%. Can't believe no one has thought of that before.

 

[maniac-kun]

I dont think he should have access to violent games.

 

[hooijdonk17]

Killing every criminal is a sure way to keep the reoffending rate at 0%. Can't believe no one has thought of that before.

Your cynical remark only serves to prove that a low re-offense rate does not a great justice system make. A good justice punishes crime (and as a side benefit discourages it). The penal system is responsible for reoffense rate. We are not talking about Norwegian prisons vs US prisons here, we are discussing whether Breivik's sentence was just.

Which is exactly why bringing the reoffense rates into this argument is demagoguery.

 

[remnant]

That it's the BEST system in the world is debatable, and that people come in here to reiterate that no matter what the sentence may be Breivik will NEVER walk suggests that an exception has ALREADY been made, so your whole argument is bogus. If the system worked, they wouldn't have had to tamper with their own system to make sure he stays in there. They will re-evaluate a sane man on his sanity every five years and shamelessly deny that he is sane enough to be let out. You know what? Hypocritical Bullshit is what that is.

clap.gif

it's a little interesting people are 100% sure this guy will be declared insane again and again like it's just a technicality, despite already been deemed not insane by a judge and psychiatrist.

 

[BishopLamont]

Ok, so Norway has 16% reoffending rate compared to 70% in US..

That still doesn't change the fact that killing Breivik brings the reoffending probability to 0% from 16% (which is statistical; the man is practically incurable).

Furthermore, it also will help the first time offending rate go down because people will likely thing more than twice about going on a kid shooting rampage when they are faced with death by torture than when they are faced with 21 years of Rayman in solidarity.

Can you argue against this?

Wow its that simple huh, wonder why no one has tried this successfully.

Do you really think people who go on a mass murdering spree are deterred by their punishment in jail?

Killer caught in the act? I think that´s good enough.

There's many people who confess or are found to killing someone, that doesn't mean they're definitely found guilty of murder, the law goes beyond simply whether you did the act or not, but the reasons, the intentions and the motive for that act determines whether you're actually guilty of murder or not.

 

[hooijdonk17]

Wow its that simple huh, wonder why no one has tried this successfully.

Do you really think people who go on a mass murdering spree are deterred by their punishment in jail?

Because, as I said earlier, a low reoffense rate means nothing, and the person who brought it into the argument was a demagouge who was using the merits of the Norwegian penal system to argue that the punishment given to Breivik was just, which has nothing to with the matter whatsoever. Your disagreement only proves my point.

They are not as deterred by going to jail and playing Rayman Revolution on their own as they are by being painfully put to death by electrocution.

 

[redcrayon]

It wouldn't have stopped Breivik doesn't mean it wouldn't have stopped someone else. More to the point, knowing you'll probably live after the fact is actually encouraging to most such minded individuals. Even more to the point, your assertion that Breivik or like minded people are not thinking straight is bullshit, the amount of planning that went into the incident clearly demonstrates that not only is he sane, but also that he is capable of quite clear and genious thought.

Ok, so you think he's sane. What's your personal line for the death penalty? One murder in the heat of the moment? Or two, or ten? You'll need to be specific here.

Again, If the death penalty was a deterrent to people who can plan a murder, states with the death penalty would have lie murder rates. They don't.

And why, exactly? Again, you argue against it with no logic, only your personal presumptions.

No. The evidence shows that the death penalty is zero deterrent to both sane and insane murderers. The only personal presumption is your idea that, despite conceding that it wouldn't have stopped Breivik, other anonymous 'sane' murderers might be deterred instead. That absolutely isn't the case, as proven by the murder rates per capita in states that use the death penalty.

That it's the BEST system in the world is debatable, and that people come in here to reiterate that no matter what the sentence may be Breivik will NEVER walk suggests that an exception has ALREADY been made, so your whole argument is bogus. If the system worked, they wouldn't have had to tamper with their own system to make sure he stays in there. They will re-evaluate a sane man on his sanity every five years and shamelessly deny that he is sane enough to be let out. You know what? Hypocritical Bullshit is what that is.

I didn't say it was the best, I said it was one of the best, as I haven't seen a better system with such a low reoffending rate yet.

Do you understand that we can only predict what the outcome of his 21 year outcome will be? We don't know, it isn't fixed, it isn't definite and it isn't rigged. It's designed so that different people can re-evaluate a case 21 years later, that's not hypocrisy, that's the sanity of ensuring a safer prison for two decades by letting even the committers of the worst crimes know that they will have a fair hearing. Where are you getting five years from? You also seem determined to rule that Breivik is 'sane' despite all manner of medical mental professionals saying he is not.

 

[questionmark]

And why, exactly? Again, you argue against it with no logic, only your personal presumptions.

Pot, meet kettle.

Furthermore, it also will help the first time offending rate go down because people will likely thing more than twice about going on a kid shooting rampage when they are faced with death by torture than when they are faced with 21 years of Rayman in solidarity.

Nothing but assumptions.

 

[hooijdonk17]

Do you understand that we can only predict what the outcome of his 21 year outcome will be? We don't know, it isn't fixed, it isn't definite and it isn't rigged. It's designed so that different people can re-evaluate a case 21 years later, that's not hypocrisy, that's the sanity of ensuring a safer prison for two decades by letting even the committers of the worst crimes know that they will have a fair hearing. Where are you getting five years from? You also seem determined to rule that Breivik is 'sane' despite all manner of medical mental professionals saying he is not.

Are you for real? A PSYCHIATRIST appointed by COURT testified that he was sane and a JUDGE sentenced him as a sane man, and you ask me how I am sure he is sane? Are you sure you are defending this judgement system???

And you know what, if we can't determine the outcome and if Breivik walks out in 21 years, then fuck that judgement system.

And if we can determine it and he stays put in, fuck that system again, for being hypocritical bullshit for keeping a sane man in on the grounds that he is insane because the arms of justice are tied by supid laws.

 

[BishopLamont]

Because, as I said earlier, a low reoffense rate means nothing, and the person who brought it into the argument was a demagouge who was using the merits of the Norwegian penal system to argue that the punishment given to Breivik was just, which has nothing to with the matter whatsoever. Your disagreement only proves my point.

They are not as deterred by going to jail and playing Rayman Revolution on their own as they are by being painfully put to death by electrocution.

If capital punishment was such a big deterrent, why does the US have such a high crime rate? You're making nothing but assumptions.

Are you for real? A PSYCHIATRIST appointed by COURT testified that he was sane and a JUDGE sentenced him as a sane man, and you ask me how I am sure he is sane? Are you sure you are defending this judgement system???

And you know what, if we can't determine the outcome and if Breivik walks out in 21 years, then fuck that judgement system.

And if we can determine it and he stays put in, fuck that system again, for being hypocritical bullshit for keeping a sane man in on the grounds that he is insane because the arms of justice are tied by supid laws.

Just because he is sane, doesn't mean he is fit to go back into society.

Fuck the system twice? So whichever way the dice rolls, you think the system is bad, tell me then, whats your solution to it? Anyone with a little bit of common sense already knows capital punishment is not the answer.

 

[redcrayon]

Are you for real? A PSYCHIATRIST appointed by COURT testified that he was sane and a JUDGE sentenced him as a sane man, and you ask me how I am sure he is sane? Are you sure you are defending this judgement system???

And you know what, if we can't determine the outcome and if Breivik walks out in 21 years, then fuck that judgement system.

And if we can determine it and he stays put in, fuck that system again, for being hypocritical bullshit for keeping a sane man in on the grounds that he is insane because the arms of justice are tied by supid laws.

Apologies. I was referring to 'sane' as in the chances of him being released in 21 years hinging on the assessment of his mental health at the time. Judging someone fit to stand trial and judging them a danger to society based on their bonkers worldview are two different barometers of sanity, and lots of psychiatrists were involved, not just one. Hell, I bet every head-doctor in the land wanted to interview him.

Ah, those arms of justice, stopped from executing members of a society by those stupid laws. You may want to live in a place with the death penalty. I don't, as as far as I can see it is linked to a far more violent society as a whole. 'Justice' isn't 'an eye for an eye', that's just naked vengeance when we have a range of more humane punishments that don't involve killing people, making prisons hopeless cycles of criminality and violence for the inmates and dangerous and stressful places for the staff to work. I'd rather the state worried about making a safer society than have it taking a special interest in torturing people.

Having a system of review and analysis over time while suspecting that somebody won't ever be able to safely rejoin society isn't hypocrisy. It's about not letting vengeance in the aftermath of an atrocity demand exceptions to a system that works very well for the greater good.

 

[questionmark]

Are you for real? A PSYCHIATRIST appointed by COURT testified that he was sane and a JUDGE sentenced him as a sane man, and you ask me how I am sure he is sane? Are you sure you are defending this judgement system???

It wasn't quite that simple. Several psychiatrists were appointed, and they did not all agree.

And you know what, if we can't determine the outcome and if Breivik walks out in 21 years, then fuck that judgement system.

And if we can determine it and he stays put in, fuck that system again, for being hypocritical bullshit for keeping a sane man in on the grounds that he is insane because the arms of justice are tied by supid laws.

Grounds that he is insane? No... If they keep him imprisoned it will be because he is deemed a danger to society.

 

[koolio76]

You know, what I really find amusing is how arrogantly you are demonstating us your ignorance of the reasons behind such a justice system. A couple of them are, that for example there is no advantage in treating prisoners bad. There is no deterrence effect. People won't commit less murders because they can't play 14-year-old video games. Then there is the effect on the lifes and the psych of guards, and our whole society. Additionally, the justice system in Norway is highly effective. Similar things can not be said about for example the USA. But it speaks for yourself that you are seemingly totally incapable of even explaining your opinion.



You can't honestly believe this nonsense? So "millions of people" would love to spend the rest of their life isolated in a prison? This is crazy. And if you did not mean what I wrote, then why are you even bringing this as an example? This doesn't make any sense.



So they are living here in our society where they are free, have a nice appartment, can have a social live and where they can play the latest video games and then they commit crimes so that they can be put into prison and have a small cell with a bed, a table, two chairs, an old videogame console and no social life. Again, this doesn't make any sense.



Yes. But again, why are you bringing this as an example. Those people should certainly have a better life. But what is your point?



Neither do I.



Probably because you have failed to explain it properly.



Who said you aren't allowed to hate him? Who said that he is "precious"? Nobody. But that doesn't change the fact that those violent fantasies in here are plain and simply disgusting.

i actually think he makes sense about the states the prisoner lives. my someone does something bad he is to be punished
not pampered. making him feel comfortable just means he wont learn from his mistakes and continue to transgress

 

[hooijdonk17]

If capital punishment was such a big deterrent, why does the US have such a high crime rate? You're making nothing but assumptions.

Just because he is sane, doesn't mean he is fit to go back into society.

Because of very many different reasons. Your argument that despite capital punishment crime rate is higher in US vs Norway where there is no capital punishment does not take into account a great many variables. For comparison you would have to remove capital punishment in US and see if crime rate goes up or down. We can only speculate, but I'd say it would probably go up. Studies on capital punishment and deterrence is usually skewed by political prejudice. The most common comparison is states with death penalty vs. states without, but that research is awfully non-scientific, because it neither takes into account causality between crime and capital punishment and the demographic/societal differences between states (for political correctness), but if you go back and look at historical rates in countries where the capital punishment was removed, it usually goes up. For example, from 1967 to 1976, there was a moratorium on executions in the United States. Researchers have used this freeze in practice to further quantify the deterring effect of capital punishment. In one study, higher rates of homicide were found in 91% of the states after suspension of the death penalty; the reinstatement of capital punishment legislations was followed by a decrease in homicide rates in 70% of states across the US. Again, you make logically unsound arguments to support a slippery argument.

And again, they will evaluate him and not let him go free on terms of mental health. You can't twist that around.

 

[SHADES]

Give him the same access to technology that his victims have, fuck all!

"You've sent me to hell", if only that statement were true.

 

[hooijdonk17]

Pot, meet kettle.



Nothing but assumptions.

Read above post. For shame.

 

[Hellcrow]

To people arguing that victims and families of the victims would wish the death penalty on him: Most of the victims were members of AUF, the youth political party of the largest party in Norway. Most likely the victims themselves held strong political beliefs that death penalty is wrong, and would be proud of Norway's stance on keeping to our principles.

I believe one of the more controversial discussions in the wake was if Breivik was criminally insane or not, and if he should be held isolated, but I can't remember being ANY prominent discussion about death penalty.

Also, I'm mostly dissappointed of media that prints everything the fucker utters.

 

[Gaf_SentMe]

Can't wait till he is released from prison.

Spoiler

So someone related to one of the 70+ victims he murdered, may kill him. That is all.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

I'm not for killing him since personally I don't think quickly and painlessly ending a mass murderer's life really helps anything (though the fact he doesn't have a life sentence is appalling), but why the hell is he being given access to video games in the first place? I don't even see how there's a quality of life debate going on here in the first place; proper food, shelter, bathroom, health, etc. are basic human rights, sure, but how does a 1st world luxury like video games factor into that at all?

plus rayman revolution/rayman 2 is great, fuck 'im

 

[Atruvius]

Every Breivik thread's name should be like this "*thread Name* - They can extend his sentence, he's not getting out ever". Because in every thread most of the posts are complaining how short the guy's sentence is.

I can't be the only one who gets super annoyed about this?

 

[AbandonedTrolley]

Give him an Atari Jaguar, or Ouya

Get to fuck! The Jaguar has Tempest 2000 the guy deserves no such luxuries. I'm with the let him go without. But if they really wanted to be bad, get him a CDi

 

[Techies]

someone create a flappy bird game where the goal is to murder this dude please

Or remove his PS2, give him a Ouya with only Flappy
Bird installed and no internet connection.

He will kill himself...