Anders Breivik found sane. Going to prison, as he wanted.

@A_Talking_Donkey: Yeah, it is, that's very much correct. I guess when I typed up there that comment, I wasn't exactly thinking about it. What I mean is, anyone that's going to do something, like murder, is not normal. Crap, it's time to go to bed.

@TruthTellah said:

@scalpel said:

"Got what he wanted"? You mean they should've declared him insane, despite evidence or lack thereof, just to spite him?

Definitely not. I believe the evidence is on the side of him legitimately being insane.

The guy's a nutjob, but he's sane. Insanity is a law term, not a medical one.

@TruthTellah said:

A guy who thinks the trial is being run by enemies of the Templars in an effort to keep down their new champion is sane?

Maybe they just figured he was a moron.

@TruthTellah: There many divergent opinions among the various psychiatric witnesses. A number of them believed he was mentally disturbed, but not psychotic, and thus met the threshold for legal sanity.

They should just slowly scrape layers of skin off of his body and throw him in a dark room full of fire ants.

ITT: Lots of irrational, ignorant, presumably Americans.

Monster I love how people like to dehumanize these people simply put there isn't a person on the planet that's not capable of doing exactly what that guy did. We as a people would rather think that's not the case. Violence is in human nature it's not a mystery that needs to be solved . You have people who kill people for a living that we damn near worship and people who kill people that we demonize. Tell me what's really the difference between them?

I don't really care if Breivik got what he wanted or whether he's in a well-furnished prison, in these situations people always get focused on revenge, and the justice system shouldn't be about revenge, it should be about having a peaceful, functional society. Whatever we think people like Breivik "deserve", a very poor way to handle things would be striving to become murderers or torturers ourselves to fulfil our own sick fantasies, we're better than that kind of savagery. While it may or may not be possible for Breivik to be reformed, I think overall Norway's more modern system of rehabilitation, as opposed to the brute force method of "lock them in a building with lots of other criminals for x years and everything will work itself out, right?" is a more intelligent way to treat crime.

I believe Breivik didn't get close to achieving what he wanted though. He got not to be declared insane, that was important for him, but he wanted to be a martyr and a major political figure. He wanted to spark off a new political age where Islam was pushed out of Europe and Norway adopted selective breeding among others things, and he was obviously never going to get remotely close to doing that. I'm also reminded of what was mentioned when the Colorado shootings were discussed on these forums, that the media should stop making big stories out of these kinds of things. I know people are interested in murderers, but when you start to cover something too heavily you only risk further killings, because you show the future Breivik's that their actions really can have a great effect and that they can get their name known by millions if they do horrible things.

@Gamer_152 said:

I don't really care if Breivik got what he wanted or whether he's in a well-furnished prison, in these situations people always get focused on revenge, and the justice system shouldn't be about revenge, it should be about having a peaceful, functional society. Whatever we think people like Breivik "deserve", a very poor way to handle things would be striving to become murderers or torturers ourselves to fulfil our own sick fantasies, we're better than that kind of savagery.

no no we're not that's the entire point of my last post. We are no better then this guy he's not some kind of monster he only did what comes natural for human beings.

@Brodehouse

@Demoskinos

@TaliciaDragonsong

I won't mind if this guy gets murdered in or outside prison, he deserves nothing less.
77 murders should be equal to being blown to bits.

Nah, that's too easy. Slow torture is where its at. A quick death would be way to merciful.

Torturing monsters only makes you a monster. Causing suffering does not alleviate suffering.

Bah. I dont buy into that. The guy caused tons of suffering and he deserves to suffer. It not about alleviating the pain of the people he hurt its about making him absolutely miserable until hr takes his last breath.

The man was not insane. And for him to get simple treatment would be an even worse outcome. He knew exactly what he was doing and why, out of pure hate. He deserves nothing else but to be locked up for the rest of his life.

@darkdragonmage99: So you believe what he's done is simply human nature, that his actions were not unthinkable, well outside social norms, and monstrously evil? That borders on sociopathic.

I want death sentence, think of the 152 parents knowing that their child is dead and this man is probably in jail reading a book.

@Renahzor: Tell me what do you think of the military is it only monstrous only when a single man kills a small number or people? is it just as monstrous when a large number of people kill 100s of 1000s of people.

Social norms seem to me to accept mass murder but only when you're getting paid for it. Certainly not unthinkable it happens every day more then 70 people die by violent means every day. So tell me a society that accepts the slaughter of Innocents in other countries but not in it's own is some how better then one guy that does the killing in his own country.

You can only pretend that you're better then this man because the blood isn't on your hands personally.

21 years??

Norway make an exception, thats fucking ridiculous.

@zombie2011: That's one year longer then american prison sentences 20 to life does in fact mean you can get out in 20 years.

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@darkdragonmage99 said:

@Gamer_152 said:

I don't really care if Breivik got what he wanted or whether he's in a well-furnished prison, in these situations people always get focused on revenge, and the justice system shouldn't be about revenge, it should be about having a peaceful, functional society. Whatever we think people like Breivik "deserve", a very poor way to handle things would be striving to become murderers or torturers ourselves to fulfil our own sick fantasies, we're better than that kind of savagery.

no no we're not that's the entire point of my last post. We are no better then this guy he's not some kind of monster he only did what comes natural for human beings.

OK I think im going to report you, for the safety reasons of what ever country you live in.

So I'm some how more dangerous because I accepts that the guy is just a guy then all the crack jobs in here who want the guy to be skinned alive ? Do these people not prove my point rather well? People love to believe they are above violence but when it comes right down to hit they're not. We as a people revel in it man watch the news play some video games watch some movies tell me violence isn't just as much part of the human condition is anything else.

@darkdragonmage99 said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@darkdragonmage99 said:

@Gamer_152 said:

I don't really care if Breivik got what he wanted or whether he's in a well-furnished prison, in these situations people always get focused on revenge, and the justice system shouldn't be about revenge, it should be about having a peaceful, functional society. Whatever we think people like Breivik "deserve", a very poor way to handle things would be striving to become murderers or torturers ourselves to fulfil our own sick fantasies, we're better than that kind of savagery.

no no we're not that's the entire point of my last post. We are no better then this guy he's not some kind of monster he only did what comes natural for human beings.

OK I think im going to report you, for the safety reasons of what ever country you live in.

So I'm some how more dangerous because I accepts that the guy is just a guy then all the crack jobs in here who want the guy to be skinned alive ? Do these people not prove my point rather well? People love to believe they are above violence but when it comes right down to hit they're not. We as a people revel in it man watch the news play some video games watch some movies tell me violence isn't just as much part of the human condition is anything else.

No more because you think this behavior is normal...

He won't walk as a free man upon the surface of the Earth ever again. The 21 years thing is a silly holdover from whenever Norway wrote down it's laws the last time, that's a thing that they should change.

Does anyone seriously think that they will let Norway's worst peacetime mass murderer have his freedom?

@Gamer_152 said:

I don't really care if Breivik got what he wanted or whether he's in a well-furnished prison, in these situations people always get focused on revenge, and the justice system shouldn't be about revenge, it should be about having a peaceful, functional society. Whatever we think people like Breivik "deserve", a very poor way to handle things would be striving to become murderers or torturers ourselves to fulfil our own sick fantasies, we're better than that kind of savagery. While it may or may not be possible for Breivik to be reformed, I think overall Norway's more modern system of rehabilitation, as opposed to the brute force method of "lock them in a building with lots of other criminals for x years and everything will work itself out, right?" is a more intelligent way to treat crime.

You're probably right, but I think these things should be judged on a case-by-case basis. Maybe this guy could be "reformed" - but should we give him that chance? Isn't there a line where we should stop being so forgiving and just use punishment instead? Though that has the problem of figuring out the value of human life and suffering. But it just doesn't seem quite right to judge a criminal who kills dozens of people, on the same level as another criminal that kills one or two people. And when we're talking about kids, the loss of life seems even more tragic.

In these kinds of clear-cut situations when we know for certain that he is guilty of the crimes he is accused of and when the magnitude of the crime is so huge - death penalty seems like a much more 'just' way of dealing with it. I just don't think he deserves to be considered a human anymore. He voided that right with his actions and he shouldn't be treated as one. And we have no qualms about putting down dogs that bite people.

@BlackLagoon said:

@TruthTellah: There many divergent opinions among the various psychiatric witnesses. A number of them believed he was mentally disturbed, but not psychotic, and thus met the threshold for legal sanity.

Yeah. It was a tough case for the prosecutors. They were -convinced- he was legally insane. I still think the evidence is on that side, but I can understand how they might find him disturbed but legally sane to be responsible for his actions. Norwegian prisons are pretty nice, but perhaps they'll make special exception for him.

If I was a parent I would just shoot him in the head and go to prison for 3 months, if thats their punishment for taking a life.

@Bourbon_Warrior: It isn't ? how many wars are going on right now ? How many people do you think got shot world wide while i was typing this post? ? How many virtual people got killed while I was typing this? how many murders happened oh last month? How exactly is something that happens so much not normal? I do believe people killing people is classed normal by 2 definition of the word normal that I know of.

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

If I was a parent I would just shoot him in the head and go to prison for 3 months, if thats their punishment for taking a life.

Why do you want him dead so much? Why does it really matter if he lives or dies?

@darkdragonmage99: As much as I hate to agree with you, I have to. It's a sad reality that there are people who crave harming and killing others in the same way normal people crave food and sex.

@Gamer_152 said:

I don't really care if Breivik got what he wanted or whether he's in a well-furnished prison, in these situations people always get focused on revenge, and the justice system shouldn't be about revenge, it should be about having a peaceful, functional society. Whatever we think people like Breivik "deserve", a very poor way to handle things would be striving to become murderers or torturers ourselves to fulfil our own sick fantasies, we're better than that kind of savagery. While it may or may not be possible for Breivik to be reformed, I think overall Norway's more modern system of rehabilitation, as opposed to the brute force method of "lock them in a building with lots of other criminals for x years and everything will work itself out, right?" is a more intelligent way to treat crime.

I believe Breivik didn't get close to achieving what he wanted though. He got not to be declared insane, that was important for him, but he wanted to be a martyr and a major political figure. He wanted to spark off a new political age where Islam was pushed out of Europe and Norway adopted selective breeding among others things, and he was obviously never going to get remotely close to doing that. I'm also reminded of what was mentioned when the Colorado shootings were discussed on these forums, that the media should stop making big stories out of these kinds of things. I know people are interested in murderers, but when you start to cover something too heavily you only risk further killings, because you show the future Breivik's that their actions really can have a great effect and that they can get their name known by millions if they do horrible things.

I came in here to post this for the most part. I always hate when these stories come about and you get the flock of people with angry revenge in mind. That's exactly why the US prison system is screwed up, and it won't be fixed until we collectively realize that it only makes the problem worse.

Giving Breivik a nice cell to spend the rest of his life in will show him the humanity and civility that he rejected. Breivik's head might not be "fixable", but countless other criminals always have the chance to redeem themselves if we allow them to.

@darkdragonmage99: No it's not and if you can't see why I feel sorry for you.

@Fattony12000: Why should it change when the system works quite well the way it is? It already has measures in place to make sure he won't be free as long as he is a threat to society, which seems is going to be a very, very long time. If anything is to be learnt from this, it has more to do with how PST and the Police handled this, both before and during the incident.

It would be really interesting to see how the Norwegian public would like Breivik's sentencing handled; it's their tax money, after all.

@Giantstalker said:

It would be really interesting to see how the Norwegian public would like Breivik's sentencing handled; it's their tax money, after all.

http://www.publicopiniononline.com/nationalnews/ci_21391202/jailing-breivik-is-praised-by-norwegians

I found this? I dunno if that's what you're looking for or not

@Ghostiet said:

@Funkydupe said:

The way this type of sentence works basically means that the justice system can extend it for as long as he remains a threat, which means: He will rot in prison for life and we'll forget he exists.

He won't rot. He'll live like a king. This is his prison cell:

http://wiadomosci.onet.pl/kiosk/w-tym-luksusowym-wiezieniu-odbedzie-kare-breivik,5225232,0,fotoreportaz-maly.html#photo12635450

The link is in Polish, but it doesn't matter, just browse the photos. It's not a prison. It looks like a fucking recreational lodge for artists with writer's block. It's constructed and decorated to improve creativity, there are no bars in the windows, they can invite families for evenings, every room has a "21 TV, there's a beautiful view. It's the worse kind of place for such a sociopath like Breivik.

I don't advocate the death penalty at all, even in this case, but this is a prison for people that actually can be rehabilitated - for victims of the system, of living in the streets, for people who committed fraud, for Kevin Mitnicks, not for a sociopath.

I'm a bit weirded out by that article, as just days ago the Norwegian prison that holds this guy published these photos from his three cells and they look nothing like that: http://www.hs.fi/ulkomaat/Oslolainen+vankila+valmis+Breivikin+vastaanottamiseen/a1305594619006 (that one is in Finnish but just check the pictures).

In regards to the news, either he'll rot in prison for the rest of his days, or he is set free and someone shoots him. Either way, we'll never be bothered by him again. I'm not really that in to the death penalty and certainly don't wish it upon even this man, but he kind of put himself into a position where the only chance of survival is imprisonment.

@darkdragonmage99: I disagree with your statement that what Breivik did was a the result of "human nature". Perhaps murdering people could be considered "human nature" back when we were all cavemen living like little more than animals, but just by the simple fact that every person in the developed world today isn't wandering around killing people, we can tell murder obviously isn't in the nature of civilised humans. Extremely few people ever go setting off car bombs and laying waste to tens of people with assault rifles, what Breivik did stands out as wildly distant from normal behaviour, meaning whatever he did, he must have done due to something not inherent within the rest of us.

@Dunchad said:

@Gamer_152 said:

I don't really care if Breivik got what he wanted or whether he's in a well-furnished prison, in these situations people always get focused on revenge, and the justice system shouldn't be about revenge, it should be about having a peaceful, functional society. Whatever we think people like Breivik "deserve", a very poor way to handle things would be striving to become murderers or torturers ourselves to fulfil our own sick fantasies, we're better than that kind of savagery. While it may or may not be possible for Breivik to be reformed, I think overall Norway's more modern system of rehabilitation, as opposed to the brute force method of "lock them in a building with lots of other criminals for x years and everything will work itself out, right?" is a more intelligent way to treat crime.

You're probably right, but I think these things should be judged on a case-by-case basis. Maybe this guy could be "reformed" - but should we give him that chance? Isn't there a line where we should stop being so forgiving and just use punishment instead? Though that has the problem of figuring out the value of human life and suffering. But it just doesn't seem quite right to judge a criminal who kills dozens of people, on the same level as another criminal that kills one or two people. And when we're talking about kids, the loss of life seems even more tragic.

In these kinds of clear-cut situations when we know for certain that he is guilty of the crimes he is accused of and when the magnitude of the crime is so huge - death penalty seems like a much more 'just' way of dealing with it. I just don't think he deserves to be considered a human anymore. He voided that right with his actions and he shouldn't be treated as one. And we have no qualms about putting down dogs that bite people.

The problem is, Breivik isn't a dog, either he largely thinks like a human, feels like a human, and acts like a human, making him human, or he's insane. If the former is true then if we kill him, we're killing a human being, and as much as we may not want it to be true, he didn't just magically stop thinking or feeling like a human when he did something greatly immoral. If he's insane then he can't be judged as a human being in control of his own actions. In fact you've said that this is a clear-cut situation but I don't think it is, he was legally declared sane but that still doesn't mean there wasn't significant evidence to the contrary and I think there's still ambiguity over Breivik's mental state.

I believe we should judge things on a case-by-case basis, and I'm not saying that someone who murders dozens has committed a crime equivalent to those who murdered one or two people, but even if Breivik is sane, I don't see why our principles go out of the window based on the number of people he murdered. We shouldn't become murderers, and if we know better ways to handle criminals that have a reasonable chance of being effective, I see no reason to revert back to more archaic methods. The best argument I've heard for why punishing this guy gains us anything is that if he's executed it costs the tax payer less money, but getting into attaching price tags to human lives is a whole other problematic territory.

@Gamer_152: I'm not sure how to say this so bare with me here I'll start with the analogy I guess. You would not claim a sex atticted is somehow less human then any other person would you? It's a basic human desire it calls to some people stronger then others. Some people take it to an extreme some don't but it's still just the basic human sex drive sure it's been taken to an unhealthy extreme but it's still completely natural and human.

I don't see the different when it comes to the human bloodlust we have millions of people fake killing people everyday call of duty anyone. We have action movies and snuff films we still have gladiatorial combat as entertainment for god sakes. Hell if you live in america we dam near worship trained killers "soldiers". You're claim seems to be we're grown out of this bloodlust I say that's clearly not the case. Just because Breivik took it to an extreme most don't doesn't make what he did any less human or any less the same drive. Everyone has it the question is the level of control or the outlet used.

@Gamer_152 said:

I don't really care if Breivik got what he wanted or whether he's in a well-furnished prison, in these situations people always get focused on revenge, and the justice system shouldn't be about revenge, it should be about having a peaceful, functional society. Whatever we think people like Breivik "deserve", a very poor way to handle things would be striving to become murderers or torturers ourselves to fulfil our own sick fantasies, we're better than that kind of savagery. While it may or may not be possible for Breivik to be reformed, I think overall Norway's more modern system of rehabilitation, as opposed to the brute force method of "lock them in a building with lots of other criminals for x years and everything will work itself out, right?" is a more intelligent way to treat crime.

I believe Breivik didn't get close to achieving what he wanted though. He got not to be declared insane, that was important for him, but he wanted to be a martyr and a major political figure. He wanted to spark off a new political age where Islam was pushed out of Europe and Norway adopted selective breeding among others things, and he was obviously never going to get remotely close to doing that. I'm also reminded of what was mentioned when the Colorado shootings were discussed on these forums, that the media should stop making big stories out of these kinds of things. I know people are interested in murderers, but when you start to cover something too heavily you only risk further killings, because you show the future Breivik's that their actions really can have a great effect and that they can get their name known by millions if they do horrible things.

One of the best and well thought out view points I've seen on this issue. I totally agree.

I'm glad we have an army of criminal justice experts here. This is a resource the GB staff should seek to make more use of.

@haffy said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

If I was a parent I would just shoot him in the head and go to prison for 3 months, if thats their punishment for taking a life.

Why do you want him dead so much? Why does it really matter if he lives or dies?

I summed it up before, the 154 parents who lost their kids to this madman will never see them again, yet this guy could spend the rest of his life reading books and eating food.

@Gamer_152 said:

The problem is, Breivik isn't a dog, either he largely thinks like a human, feels like a human, and acts like a human, making him human, or he's insane. If the former is true then if we kill him, we're killing a human being, and as much as we may not want it to be true, he didn't just magically stop thinking or feeling like a human when he did something greatly immoral. If he's insane then he can't be judged as a human being in control of his own actions. In fact you've said that this is a clear-cut situation but I don't think it is, he was legally declared sane but that still doesn't mean there wasn't significant evidence to the contrary and I think there's still ambiguity over Breivik's mental state.

I believe we should judge things on a case-by-case basis, and I'm not saying that someone who murders dozens has committed a crime equivalent to those who murdered one or two people, but even if Breivik is sane, I don't see why our principles go out of the window based on the number of people he murdered. We shouldn't become murderers, and if we know better ways to handle criminals that have a reasonable chance of being effective, I see no reason to revert back to more archaic methods. The best argument I've heard for why punishing this guy gains us anything is that if he's executed it costs the tax payer less money, but getting into attaching price tags to human lives is a whole other problematic territory.

But that argument assumes that people are either sane or insane. I think sane people are plenty capable of evil deeds, in which case what is lacking is not sanity, but humanity. And if someone is lacking humanity, I don't think they have the right to be treated as a human. Though I guess this could be debated and depends largely on the definition on 'insane'. Is a sane person capable of committing atrocities or do they stop being 'sane' once they cross that line? Are religious zealots sane? Are soldiers sane?

EDIT: But I'll agree with your sentiment of trying new ways to deal with criminals. I just don't see our current methods being worthwhile when it comes to individuals like Brevik. Perhaps once science and medicine advances further, we can figure out some way to reprogram these guys (Babylon 5 style mindwipe) and put them to work.

Killing him seems so final. Maybe letting him think on what he's done will prove to be fruitful at some point. Maybe he's tortured by his conscious for what he's done. I'd rather he live and be haunted by his deeds than be given the swift and painless death of a lethal injection.

@Example1013 said:

I'm glad we have an army of criminal justice experts here. This is a resource the GB staff should seek to make more use of.

All those hours of Pheonix Wright really come in handy.

@darkdragonmage99 said:

@Gamer_152: I'm not sure how to say this so bare with me here I'll start with the analogy I guess. You would not claim a sex atticted is somehow less human then any other person would you? It's a basic human desire it calls to some people stronger then others. Some people take it to an extreme some don't but it's still just the basic human sex drive sure it's been taken to an unhealthy extreme but it's still completely natural and human.

I don't see the different when it comes to the human bloodlust we have millions of people fake killing people everyday call of duty anyone. We have action movies and snuff films we still have gladiatorial combat as entertainment for god sakes. Hell if you live in america we dam near worship trained killers "soldiers". You're claim seems to be we're grown out of this bloodlust I say that's clearly not the case. Just because Breivik took it to an extreme most don't doesn't make what he did any less human or any less the same drive. Everyone has it the question is the level of control or the outlet used.

Lust is something that's shared by almost every single one of us, but while the strength of our sex drives may change from person to person, the very large majority of human beings have sexual desires which fit within a certain range of intensity. Sex addicts have a obsession with sexual acts that clearly goes far above and beyond that of the vast majority of people, and sexual addiction is often considered an obsession to the point where it's actively damaging to the person and/or the people around them. Because this kind of behaviour is clearly outside of the inherent shared behaviours of human beings, it can't be considered part of human nature.

Human nature or not though, that doesn't make this simple in the least, and there are answers here to look for. Problems like sex addiction or a strong propensity for violence the way a person has been brought up, has interacted with the world around them, problems with their neurochemistry, and/or the genes they've inherited, and as such is the concern of complex sociology, psychology, anthropology, and more. In fact it's often not just a case of an overdeveloped want for violence, but also a lack of empathy or control. Things like murder and sex addiction also obviously need to be prevented to stop people ruining their own lives and the lives of others, so even if all murders were just about an overdeveloped want for violence, this is definitely a mystery that needs solving.

I don't believe what Breivik specifically did was part of some overactive obsession with violence though, or at very least it wasn't just about that. He appeared to have a very strong political motive and may well be insane. And while I agree there can be some moral ambiguity involved with the people in the military and the way they're put to use, there is a big difference between Breivik and the average soldier. Breivik was a delusional man who killed dozens of kids and injured over 200 more people in the name of becoming highly recognised and spreading his incredibly damaging and xenophobic philosophy. Soldiers on the other hand aren't just guys who having an overwhelming sense to kill who have guns put in their hands, they are psychologically strengthened, put into a very different sociological situation, and have their victims dehumanised, so that they may self-sacrifice up to the point of giving their own lives, often out of some sense of duty to their country or because they believe it is the moral thing to do. When properly utilised they kill not to fulfil some kind of violent desire, but to secure the freedom and well-being of innocent people.

@Dunchad said:

@Gamer_152 said:

The problem is, Breivik isn't a dog, either he largely thinks like a human, feels like a human, and acts like a human, making him human, or he's insane. If the former is true then if we kill him, we're killing a human being, and as much as we may not want it to be true, he didn't just magically stop thinking or feeling like a human when he did something greatly immoral. If he's insane then he can't be judged as a human being in control of his own actions. In fact you've said that this is a clear-cut situation but I don't think it is, he was legally declared sane but that still doesn't mean there wasn't significant evidence to the contrary and I think there's still ambiguity over Breivik's mental state.

I believe we should judge things on a case-by-case basis, and I'm not saying that someone who murders dozens has committed a crime equivalent to those who murdered one or two people, but even if Breivik is sane, I don't see why our principles go out of the window based on the number of people he murdered. We shouldn't become murderers, and if we know better ways to handle criminals that have a reasonable chance of being effective, I see no reason to revert back to more archaic methods. The best argument I've heard for why punishing this guy gains us anything is that if he's executed it costs the tax payer less money, but getting into attaching price tags to human lives is a whole other problematic territory.

But that argument assumes that people are either sane or insane. I think sane people are plenty capable of evil deeds, in which case what is lacking is not sanity, but humanity. And if someone is lacking humanity, I don't think they have the right to be treated as a human. Though I guess this could be debated and depends largely on the definition on 'insane'. Is a sane person capable of committing atrocities or do they stop being 'sane' once they cross that line? Are religious zealots sane? Are soldiers sane?

EDIT: But I'll agree with your sentiment of trying new ways to deal with criminals. I just don't see our current methods being worthwhile when it comes to individuals like Brevik. Perhaps once science and medicine advances further, we can figure out some way to reprogram these guys (Babylon 5 style mindwipe) and put them to work.

I think we could start debating what makes a person human or the criteria by which we work out what makes someone insane, but the important things as I see them are that the person feels and thinks at least approximately like a human being. In that sense, whether you want to call them human or not, any punishment enacted on them would obviously be received as though it were administered to a human being, and so in my mind can be considered equal to administering it to a human.

@PolygonSlayer: Ah. Still doesn't look all that bad.

@PolygonSlayer said:

@TaliciaDragonsong: There is a very good reason the use of the death penalty has been abolished by the majority of developed countries in the world.

What would that be?

@TheHT: an eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind

(also the death penalty is just as expensive as life in prison for developed countries)

Norway has never once had a prisoner spend the rest of their life in prison.

He will probably be the first, unless all the judges die in those 21 years and the replacements don't grasp the crime.

@Animasta said:

@TheHT: an eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind

(also the death penalty is just as expensive as life in prison for developed countries)

An eye for an eye makes the whole world one-eyed and obedient.

Is that the 'very good reason' though? Money?

@TaliciaDragonsong said:

I won't mind if this guy gets murdered in or outside prison, he deserves nothing less. 77 murders should be equal to being blown to bits.

My sentiments exactly.

Being someone that doesn't believe in the death penalty but instead believes in life imprisonment, I look at this sentence and say "good, keep him out of society forever". To people saying "I hope he gets murdered/raped/etc", you are proving to be no better than the murderer you are condemning. You just try to justify it by saying "he killed people, so we have a right to kill him". No one has a right to kill anyone ever in my own eyes.

Also, most people don't realize that it's actually cheaper in the long run to give someone life in prison than death row.

The cunt should be going to the chair not jail 

What kind of message does it send out to other monsters out there that you can do something as fucking horrific as kill 77 innocent people and then live in relative comfort with no fear of repercussions? Many criminals are redeemable but cunts like this should be put down so they can do no more harm to society.

I always thought of Breivik as a man desperate to be remembered, I don't even think he cares about multiculturalism and all that nonsense. What he cares about is being remembered, tired of being some random guy nobody ever gave a fuck about.

And it seems he succeeded, he will go down in history next to Hitler and the likes, never ever forgotten, as unfortunate as it may be.