Massacring the freedom of the press

A tenet of a free and democratic nation's judicial system is that its courtroom proceedings be visible to the public. Although often to the distress of the accused (commonly seen covering their faces to the camera), the purpose of this is not to shame anyone. It is to ensure that miscarriages (and abortions) of justice never go undetected. Such is not the case in my neighboring country. When the decision was made that Anders Behring Breivik's own account of the events of July 22 not be broadcast out of "understanding" for the victim's families and friends, there was a consensus of meek agreement in the media. I was surprised and enraged. Who are the judges to decide what the public may or may not see, and why is there no outrage that the (it should be noted, assumed) feelings of the concerned are considered to be of higher importance than the people's right to an open courtroom? Any such notion is thrown out the window; the judges pick-and-choose what you're allowed to see, lest the delusions of an extreme narcissist influence you or hurt the feelings of the easily hurt.

Enough of this sobfest; shame on the judges, shame on the NRK and shame on those who try to justify censorship.

A tenet of a free and democratic nation's judicial system is that its courtroom proceedings be visible to the public. Although often to the distress of the accused (commonly seen covering their faces to the camera), the purpose of this is not to shame anyone. It is to ensure that miscarriages (and abortions) of justice never go undetected. Such is not the case in my neighboring country. When the decision was made that Anders Behring Breivik's own account of the events of July 22 not be broadcast out of "understanding" for the victim's families and friends, there was a consensus of meek agreement in the media. I was surprised and enraged. Who are the judges to decide what the public may or may not see, and why is there no outrage that the (it should be noted, assumed) feelings of the concerned are considered to be of higher importance than the people's right to an open courtroom? Any such notion is thrown out the window; the judges pick-and-choose what you're allowed to see, lest the delusions of an extreme narcissist influence you or hurt the feelings of the easily hurt.

Enough of this sobfest; shame on the judges, shame on the NRK and shame on those who try to justify censorship.

What the hell are we talking about? Can somebody provide a link to the story in question, or a general synopsis?

What

@Video_Game_King: Come on man, the Utøya shooter, Anders Behring Breivik, who killed 77 people last year with a bomb in Oslo and on a massacre in a political party's youth camp on an island.

Anyway, I'm norwegian and yep, this is disgraceful. Together with this story (for those who can read norwegian or use an auto-translator) I'm pretty pissed with our government at the moment.

@Harkat:

Oh, the Christian extremist guy who wrote like a treatise on the Crusades or some shit?

I think this is pretty disgusting..

"Some teenagers were frozen in panic, unable to move even when Breivik ran out of ammunition. He changed clips. They didn't move. He shot them in the head."

He is going to kill you people, please, for the love of all higher powers, do something!

That's messed up. There is a positive though - He won't be getting the exposure he wants.

@Still_I_Cry said:

I think this is pretty disgusting..

"Some teenagers were frozen in panic, unable to move even when Breivik ran out of ammunition. He changed clips. They didn't move. He shot them in the head."

He is going to kill you people, please, for the love of all higher powers, do something!

You'd be surprised how easily fear can freeze your feet to the ground. I can't say whether I would do anything or not unless I was actually in that situation, though I'd like to think that I would have run up to him and gave him a thrashing to remember.

Abortions of justice huh?

@believer258 said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

I think this is pretty disgusting..

"Some teenagers were frozen in panic, unable to move even when Breivik ran out of ammunition. He changed clips. They didn't move. He shot them in the head."

He is going to kill you people, please, for the love of all higher powers, do something!

You'd be surprised how easily fear can freeze your feet to the ground. I can't say whether I would do anything or not unless I was actually in that situation, though I'd like to think that I would have run up to him and gave him a thrashing to remember.

I wouldn't be surprised, not in the least. No one wants to die but if you're in a situation like this you are going to die unless you do something. I wish people would realize this.

It reminds of of Columbine.

People need to come to terms with death if something like this is happening and figure out a way to overpower the would be killer.

@Still_I_Cry said:

@believer258 said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

I think this is pretty disgusting..

"Some teenagers were frozen in panic, unable to move even when Breivik ran out of ammunition. He changed clips. They didn't move. He shot them in the head."

He is going to kill you people, please, for the love of all higher powers, do something!

You'd be surprised how easily fear can freeze your feet to the ground. I can't say whether I would do anything or not unless I was actually in that situation, though I'd like to think that I would have run up to him and gave him a thrashing to remember.

It reminds of of Columbine.

People need to come to terms with death if something like this is happening and figure out a way to over power the killer.

Again, this is nature and instinct here. It would take an incredible amount of willpower to overcome those, an amount that you or I most likely don't have.

@believer258 said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

@believer258 said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

I think this is pretty disgusting..

"Some teenagers were frozen in panic, unable to move even when Breivik ran out of ammunition. He changed clips. They didn't move. He shot them in the head."

He is going to kill you people, please, for the love of all higher powers, do something!

You'd be surprised how easily fear can freeze your feet to the ground. I can't say whether I would do anything or not unless I was actually in that situation, though I'd like to think that I would have run up to him and gave him a thrashing to remember.

It reminds of of Columbine.

People need to come to terms with death if something like this is happening and figure out a way to over power the killer.

Again, this is nature and instinct here. It would take an incredible amount of willpower to overcome those, an amount that you or I most likely don't have.

No, it isn't.

You train yourself to react, not think.

That is how I was taught to react to a situation like this, it is how I have reacted to situations, you stay calm and keep your head.

If you think, you lose time and you die.

If you run, he stands still, lines up his shot, hits you and you die.

He expects you to run, he expects you to fear him.

The guy with the gun is out of ammunition, he wants to kill and he intends to kill you, he can't hurt you now because he's just a pussy with a gun. You outnumber him.

Where is the herd mentality now?

People think one bullet will always kill you. Guess what? A man was stabbed 30+ times and then disemboweled and he still lived. He is still alive to this day.

If 5 people, even 3, even 2, had reacted in that scenario, or even just one guy or woman, instead of begging for their lives when they know, they must know, he is going to kill them anyway, then how many lives would have been saved?

I realize there is no point to speculating but stuff like this just baffles me.

@Still_I_Cry: Well then I hope that you're there the next time something fucked up like this happens. That way when you're stupid ass gets killed we can all gather around and say 'I told you so" and be all blase and unsympathetic like you're being.

Edit: That sounded a little harsh. I don't actually want you to die. I'm just trying to tell you that you're being a total douche.

@Still_I_Cry said:

@believer258 said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

@believer258 said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

I think this is pretty disgusting..

"Some teenagers were frozen in panic, unable to move even when Breivik ran out of ammunition. He changed clips. They didn't move. He shot them in the head."

He is going to kill you people, please, for the love of all higher powers, do something!

You'd be surprised how easily fear can freeze your feet to the ground. I can't say whether I would do anything or not unless I was actually in that situation, though I'd like to think that I would have run up to him and gave him a thrashing to remember.

It reminds of of Columbine.

People need to come to terms with death if something like this is happening and figure out a way to over power the killer.

Again, this is nature and instinct here. It would take an incredible amount of willpower to overcome those, an amount that you or I most likely don't have.

No, it isn't.

You train yourself to react, not think.

That is how I was taught to react to a situation like this, it is how I have reacted to situations, you stay calm and keep your head.

If you think, you lose time and you die.

If you run, he stands still, lines up his shot, hits you and you die.

He expects you to run, he expects you to fear him.

The guy with the gun is out of ammunition, he wants to kill and he intends to kill you, he can't hurt you now because he's just a pussy with a gun. You outnumber him.

Where is the herd mentality now?

People think one bullet will always kill you. Guess what? A man was stabbed 30+ times and then disemboweled and he still lived. He is still alive to this day.

If 5 people, even 3, even 2, had reacted in that scenario, or even just one guy or woman, instead of begging for their lives when they know, they must know, he is going to kill them anyway, then how many lives would have been saved?

I realize there is no point to speculating but stuff like this just baffles me.

Okay, well why don't you get caught in a situation like this, and we'll see how fucking calm and cool-headed you stay.

@somnambulist said:

@Still_I_Cry: Well then I hope that you're there the next time something fucked up like this happens. That way when you're stupid ass gets killed we can all gather around and say 'I told you so" and be all blase and unsympathetic like you're being.

I am not being unsympathetic. I am saying, what if they had done x. I am expressing how dumbfounded I am that people could sit there and watch the guy reload knowing he would shoot them.

And guess what? If I get killed in a situation like this, you're all going to die anyway because the guy would have been reloading to shoot you. I want to know what he would kill me with though, seeing as he had no weapon because he was occupied with reloading his guns.

I think I would be the one laughing at your stupid ass for waiting on your killer to take his time and reload his weapons anyway.

I am sorry if I am coming off as a douche, I don't mean to say these people deserved to die.

@Still_I_Cry said:

I realize there is no point to speculating but stuff like this just baffles me.

Even in combat you need to think. A section commander needs to operate radios, fire his weapon(s), lead subordinates, and in some cases even manage his vehicle all at the same time. He will probably be required to do this while exhausted, deprived of sleep, or even injured. It's impossible to perform any complex activity without some thought, and leadership is a very complex activity. It gets even harder when you aren't sure how the men next to you will react. That's what training is for and why sections spend months together - when possible - before they ship out overseas.

In the civilian situations above, these are generally untrained people who probably barely know each other. They can't predict what other people will do, even if it makes sense to swarm the attacker. They don't have a leader they know or trust to guide them, so nothing happens. I've only ever been a 2ic, and not the actual leader of a section, but I can't really blame civilians for not acting. Even with the advantages of leadership, training, and familiarity its not easy working with others in a stressful situations. That's part of why these attacks are so unfortunate; they take advantage of this knowledge and exploit it.

@Giantstalker: By thinking, I meant, "oh god I am going to die what if what if what if." I realize it is part of human nature to succumb to this but what I was trying to say is that we need to learn to overcome this.

Sorry for not being clear there.

I was trying to point out that the killer expects people to not put up any resistance, which is why they would have had the advantage with superior numbers and the element of surprise.

I wouldn't be surprised, not in the least. No one wants to die but if you're in a situation like this you are going to die unless you do something. I wish people would realize this.

It reminds of of Columbine.

People need to come to terms with death if something like this is happening and figure out a way to overpower the would be killer.

@somnambulist said:

@Still_I_Cry: Well then I hope that you're there the next time something fucked up like this happens. That way when you're stupid ass gets killed we can all gather around and say 'I told you so" and be all blase and unsympathetic like you're being.

I am not being unsympathetic. I am saying, what if they had done x. I am expressing how dumbfounded I am that people could sit there and watch the guy reload knowing he would shoot them.

And guess what? If I get killed in a situation like this, you're all going to die anyway because the guy would have been reloading to shoot you. I want to know what he would kill me with though, seeing as he had no weapon because he was occupied with reloading his guns.

I think I would be the one laughing at your stupid ass for waiting on your killer to take his time and reload his weapons anyway.

@Still_I_Cry said:

@believer258 said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

@believer258 said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

I think this is pretty disgusting..

"Some teenagers were frozen in panic, unable to move even when Breivik ran out of ammunition. He changed clips. They didn't move. He shot them in the head."

He is going to kill you people, please, for the love of all higher powers, do something!

You'd be surprised how easily fear can freeze your feet to the ground. I can't say whether I would do anything or not unless I was actually in that situation, though I'd like to think that I would have run up to him and gave him a thrashing to remember.

It reminds of of Columbine.

People need to come to terms with death if something like this is happening and figure out a way to over power the killer.

Again, this is nature and instinct here. It would take an incredible amount of willpower to overcome those, an amount that you or I most likely don't have.

No, it isn't.

You train yourself to react, not think.

That is how I was taught to react to a situation like this, it is how I have reacted to situations, you stay calm and keep your head.

If you think, you lose time and you die.

If you run, he stands still, lines up his shot, hits you and you die.

He expects you to run, he expects you to fear him.

The guy with the gun is out of ammunition, he wants to kill and he intends to kill you, he can't hurt you now because he's just a pussy with a gun. You outnumber him.

Where is the herd mentality now?

People think one bullet will always kill you. Guess what? A man was stabbed 30+ times and then disemboweled and he still lived. He is still alive to this day.

If 5 people, even 3, even 2, had reacted in that scenario, or even just one guy or woman, instead of begging for their lives when they know, they must know, he is going to kill them anyway, then how many lives would have been saved?

I realize there is no point to speculating but stuff like this just baffles me.

Are you in the army or something? Then yeah, maybe you have had experiences in life or death situations more than others. But if you aren't, then maybe you shouldn't talk big like that. Bystanders let crimes go uninterrupted all the time, hoping that someone else will intervene or call 911, cause who wouldn't if they saw someone being mugged? But that's the problem, everyone expects someone else to make the first move before they even think to intervene. That's probably what happened here. They were all probably waiting for someone to tackle the dude, waiting for someone to signal, hey it's okay to fight back at this person who has a gun. In situations like this you can't think clearly, worse so when you're stricken by fear.

We all like to run these scenarios in our heads where we are held at gunpoint, or being mugged, or have our house being intruded, or happen to be in a zombie apocalypse and say "Well shit, this is what I'd do! I'd get it right!" But you can't say for sure unless you're actually in the shit.

@ZeForgotten said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

@somnambulist said:

@Still_I_Cry: Well then I hope that you're there the next time something fucked up like this happens. That way when you're stupid ass gets killed we can all gather around and say 'I told you so" and be all blase and unsympathetic like you're being.

I am not being unsympathetic. I am saying, what if they had done x. I am expressing how dumbfounded I am that people could sit there and watch the guy reload knowing he would shoot them.

And guess what? If I get killed in a situation like this, you're all going to die anyway because the guy would have been reloading to shoot you. I want to know what he would kill me with though, seeing as he had no weapon because he was occupied with reloading his guns.

I think I would be the one laughing at your stupid ass for waiting on your killer to take his time and reload his weapons anyway.

I was kinda with you at first but then you kept going with the whole "I'm a giant cocksucker, fuck you all, I am the best around!"-act and now I just hope you get in a situation like this and get shot down by a guy like this. Might sound harsh but at least it would be a step in the right direction

"I am the best around"

That isn't what I was saying.

I was saying, if it was in this exact situation, in which the guy was reloading, I would laugh at that one guy who said he would be laughing because I did something more than just sit there and wait to be executed.

Sorry If it came off the other way. I forgot to change the pronouns to singular.

Which is why I said, " would be the one laughing at your stupid ass." Not asses.

@MiniPato said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

@believer258 said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

@believer258 said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

I think this is pretty disgusting..

"Some teenagers were frozen in panic, unable to move even when Breivik ran out of ammunition. He changed clips. They didn't move. He shot them in the head."

He is going to kill you people, please, for the love of all higher powers, do something!

You'd be surprised how easily fear can freeze your feet to the ground. I can't say whether I would do anything or not unless I was actually in that situation, though I'd like to think that I would have run up to him and gave him a thrashing to remember.

It reminds of of Columbine.

People need to come to terms with death if something like this is happening and figure out a way to over power the killer.

Again, this is nature and instinct here. It would take an incredible amount of willpower to overcome those, an amount that you or I most likely don't have.

No, it isn't.

You train yourself to react, not think.

That is how I was taught to react to a situation like this, it is how I have reacted to situations, you stay calm and keep your head.

If you think, you lose time and you die.

If you run, he stands still, lines up his shot, hits you and you die.

He expects you to run, he expects you to fear him.

The guy with the gun is out of ammunition, he wants to kill and he intends to kill you, he can't hurt you now because he's just a pussy with a gun. You outnumber him.

Where is the herd mentality now?

People think one bullet will always kill you. Guess what? A man was stabbed 30+ times and then disemboweled and he still lived. He is still alive to this day.

If 5 people, even 3, even 2, had reacted in that scenario, or even just one guy or woman, instead of begging for their lives when they know, they must know, he is going to kill them anyway, then how many lives would have been saved?

I realize there is no point to speculating but stuff like this just baffles me.

Are you in the army or something? Then yeah, maybe you have had experiences in life or death situations more than others. But if you aren't, then maybe you shouldn't talk big like that. Bystanders let crimes go uninterrupted all the time, hoping that someone else will intervene or call 911, cause who wouldn't if they saw someone being mugged? But that's the problem, everyone expects someone else to make the first move before they even think to intervene. That's probably what happened here. They were all probably waiting for someone to tackle the dude, waiting for someone to signal, hey it's okay to fight back at this person who has a gun. In situations like this you can't think clearly, worse so when you're stricken by fear.

We all like to run these scenarios in our heads where we are held at gunpoint, or being mugged, or have our house being intruded, or happen to be in a zombie apocalypse and say "Well shit, this is what I'd do! I'd get it right!" But you can't say for sure unless you're actually in the shit.

The point is, he didn't have a gun. He was reloading.

I didn't mean to come off as "talking big."

I was trying to say that I can't believe that people sat there and watched him reload. I get your point.

I understand the fear, etc etc.

I was trying, again, to say overall that I wish people would be less afraid of dying and think of ways to not die.

Enough derailing.

@scalpel said:

Enough derailing.

Yeah, sorry about that..

I disagree with the censorship. The story should be told.

I disagree, imagine the rage some people feel for what he did, demanding that he should have been shot on sight.

How much more angry do you think they will get, seeing him explaining the killing in a calm non-emphatic voice?

The biggest problem with news media today, is that its about money, it's not truth seeking, its about business. (well at least more about business than the truth, imho).

Also ignore @Still_I_Cry , he reminds me a lot of hitman57, 47 or something, a guy who used the same arguments during the 22 july events, thinking himself a superior person than others, claiming that people should act X and Y in Z situation, its despicable that people really think they can even imagine how someone felt in such a horrible situation.

@amir90: "Ignore this guy because he is like x person that we don't like even though he took the time to apologize for coming off as saying he was superior, he wasn't. And he attempted to clarify he did not mean to appear unsympathetic and let me add this little bit of bullshit in even though it has nothing to do with what he was saying. I will also use letters so it appears like I am making some king of logic based statement when it is in fact unfounded and I falsely equivocated two different people. I picked out someone who is loathed as a means of gaining support for my statement. Just ignore him for the one reason I gave that is based on equivocating two totally different people because I say so."

:)

@Still_I_Cry:" I am not being unsympathetic. I am saying, what if they had done x. I am expressing how dumbfounded I am that people could sit there and watch the guy reload knowing he would shoot them.

And guess what? If I get killed in a situation like this, you're all going to die anyway because the guy would have been reloading to shoot you. I want to know what he would kill me with though, seeing as he had no weapon because he was occupied with reloading his guns.

I think I would be the one laughing at your stupid ass for waiting on your killer to take his time and reload his weapons anyway.

I am sorry if I am coming off as a douche, I don't mean to say these people deserved to die."

@amir90: "Ignore this guy because he is like x person that we don't like even though he took the time to apologize for coming off as saying he was superior, he wasn't. And he attempted to clarify he did not mean to appear unsympathetic and let me add this little bit of bullshit in even though it has nothing to do with what he was saying."

Brilliant.

FFS, you guys. Would you stop flaming and flamebaiting for one second?

@amir90 said:

@Still_I_Cry:" I am not being unsympathetic. I am saying, what if they had done x. I am expressing how dumbfounded I am that people could sit there and watch the guy reload knowing he would shoot them.

And guess what? If I get killed in a situation like this, you're all going to die anyway because the guy would have been reloading to shoot you. I want to know what he would kill me with though, seeing as he had no weapon because he was occupied with reloading his guns.

I think I would be the one laughing at your stupid ass for waiting on your killer to take his time and reload his weapons anyway.

I am sorry if I am coming off as a douche, I don't mean to say these people deserved to die."

Yeah, "I am sorry if I am coming off as a douche, I don't mean to say these people deserved to die."

The first quote, taken out of context and you failed to put in the response that clarified it.

Off to a good start.

@ccampb89: Here we go. You are clearly not educated statements begin now.

Condoning insulting others.

Adult world? Adults don't throw insults randomly. I explained my stance further, so as to clarify that I meant no offense.

If I honestly "didn't care" I would not have taken the time to try and explain.

"make sure you know what your talking about & your coming across clearly. It's an adult world that requires adult decisions."

Hop off the pulpit. I admitted I was not clear and attempted to clarify.

You don't have to broadcast something live on TV for it to be public. Press will be there, they will witness what is said and they will report on it. It's public. Many countries (the UK, for example) do not allow video or photography in courtrooms to protect the privacy of everyone involved. But press and public do attend and do report on events. There is no real need to broadcast these things to the world in order for it to be public.

Also, freedom of the press only extends as far as things within the public interest. I don't think the live broadcast of any trial is within the public interest. The knowledge of the trial most certainly is, but I don't see why the broadcast of it is.

@Still_I_Cry: No, no, don't let scalpel bring you back on the point of all of this. The discussion of how dumb you think these kids are while in shock as someone dressed as a police officer shoots everyone around them with semi-automatic rifles is a lot more interesting than a discussion of whether all testimony in every trial should be publicly televised.

The trial is being recorded, not only on paper but also in photographs -and- in video. The whole trial is being documented for the record, and there has already been video released from the courtroom. The judge has simply denied a request to have video of his testimony released to the public during the trial out of respect for the victims. This isn't unique. Plenty of trials don't release public video of testimony like this. The public isn't the judge in this trial, and if people have a legal reason to request documentation of the testimony, they can receive it at a later date through the proper legal channels. But they are not going to give a mass murderer a platform whereby he might further damage surviving victims, victims' families, and the public at large. There is plenty of legal precedent for this in courts all across the world, and there is absolutely no reason for them to release this video during the trial. The trial is being thoroughly documented, and that will all be part of the record of the case.

Also, on a side note regarding the many who were in shock during the shootings. It should be considered that the majority of those killed in the rampage were teenagers. From survivor accounts, many did try to get away, and many hid together in various spots on the island. Unfortunately, due to Breivik being dressed as a police officer, he drew a lot of these hiding kids out with reassurances that he was there to save them just so that he could then mow them down. Many fled into the water, as well, and he purposefully waited in some spots for people to pop up for air so that he could shoot them. In one harrowing story, a teenager was shot in the leg and then decided to stay down on the ground, acting like he was dead. Breivik walked around shooting two or three extra bullets into each person who was down, but he fortunately saw all of the blood on the teen and just walked on by. The kid laid there for over a hour until Breivik actually came back around, having walked around the island for some time killing various kids, and walked past him once again as he waited for the police to finally arrive. Most of the kids -did- make an effort to get away, and of those who didn't, most of them were only in their early teens.

Yeah, I would've liked to watch that trial. Ah well.

@TruthTellah: Sorry, can you misconstrue what I meant more please?

@Still_I_Cry: Plausibly.

Though, as per my last paragraph, my main point is that your perception of the situation seems wrong. Most did try to get away, and those who were frozen stiff were rather young. Perhaps we can wonder about adults a bit, but for a 14 year old teen seeing his or her friends getting shot all around them by a cop? Seems perfectly likely to me that they might be horribly frightened and have no idea what to do. Especially only having a window of seconds between reloading a semi-automatic rifle. To a sick man like Breivik, he would portray them as weak and laugh at their frozen bodies, but they weren't cold individuals like him. They were just young kids at camp shocked to see their whole world crumble around them in an instant.

The OP should have added that during the trial, people can read what is happening during the trial, the questions the answers, sometimes the emotions. It's not that people are being held back information wise.

You do not gain anything from watching the trial, we all know what the sentence is going to be. The people involved in the incident might get some closure but to the general public everything else is just semantics.

I see no problem with media censorship in this case. The guy is clearly a nut and probably spouting harmful garbage.

Guess what?

The free press isn't being massacred. After the trial, it will continue to be able to report on the same things it was before, when you thought it was perfectly fine.