timwakefield 68 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 He's going to get 21 years in prison. 82 days per murder.Like SBriand said they can still keep him there indefinitely, but do they seriously not have consecutive sentencing beyond 21 years?! That is pretty much the stupidest judicial law that could possibly exist in a first-world country in this day and age. Basically if I kill somebody and there's a witness or 2, I have a major added incentive to kill all of them too, since leaving them alive could get me caught, and killing them will not give me an additional penalty. Unspeakably retarded, to not allow for consecutive sentences. Link to post Share on other sites
AmScray 355 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 You don't think it would be worse to allow this act to have the effect it intended?U no makey da sense. Link to post Share on other sites
El Guapo 8 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 The thing I don't hear being discussed is that there were no guns to be able to take him down as he spent 90 minutes picking people off. Not only did the citizens not have guns, but neither did the police. That is just asinine, how are they supposed to protect you? Link to post Share on other sites
Mercury69 3 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 82 days per murder? I guess wholesale is the way to go for things other than shmatta...I need a soul cleansing just for trying to make a stupid-ass joke about this. Blech...just ****ing awful for Norway and humanity in general. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,321 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 The thing I don't hear being discussed is that there were no guns to be able to take him down as he spent 90 minutes picking people off. Not only did the citizens not have guns, but neither did the police. That is just asinine, how are they supposed to protect you?I don't think that's true about the police. My understanding is that the police couldn't get to the island quickly and that there weren't any police on the island when he got there. Link to post Share on other sites
El Guapo 8 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 I don't think that's true about the police. My understanding is that the police couldn't get to the island quickly and that there weren't any police on the island when he got there.Hmm, I thought I read that the police on the island did not carry guns, and that most police do not carry guns there. Link to post Share on other sites
Skeleton Jelly 2 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Wiki:Norwegian police do not carry firearms on a daily basis; they keep them locked down in the patrol cars, and if need arises they have to get permission by the police commissioner or someone authorized by him or her. If there is no time to contact a superior, a police officer may arm himself and anyone under his command. I sure hope this turns into another gun thread! Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,321 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Hmm, I thought I read that the police on the island did not carry guns, and that most police do not carry guns there.I just did a quick wiki search and it says that police don't carry guns with them but have them in their cars for use when needed. I guess I don't know if there were any police actually on the Island. I remember reading that the police took a long time to get to the Island by boat.Edit: and while I was posting SJ beat me to it. Link to post Share on other sites
Skeleton Jelly 2 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 I just did a quick wiki search and it says that police don't carry guns with them but have them in their cars for use when needed. I guess I don't know if there were any police actually on the Island. I remember reading that the police took a long time to get to the Island by boat.Edit: and while I was posting SJ beat me to it.Not that quick, I'd say.But yes, it did take them a while to get there. link Link to post Share on other sites
brvheart 1,756 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 From SJ:Fourteen minutes later still, local police arrived at the shore of the mainland, but for a further 17 minutes waited for a boat."We asked for help from the SWAT team in Oslo, which is specially trained to deal with armed situations. We did not know about the extent of the situation that was out there," North Buskerud police chief Sissel Hammer was quoted as saying by the Dagsavisen daily newspaper."But this was not about waiting, this was 17 minutes during which we prepared ourselves."Meanwhile campers on the lake shore had taken matters into their own hands and set off in boats to pluck survivors from the water, some of them coming under fire from Breivik in the process. One camper alone rescued 40 to 50 terrified people.The cops couldn't find a boat... so the campers used their boats to save people? Link to post Share on other sites
timwakefield 68 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 It is tragic and strange that the officers couldn't find their fucking boat, or any boat, but you have to remember that there was a massive bombing just before that, so I'm sure it was very chaotic and they had perhaps thought the violence was over. The whole thing is just heartbreaking, hopefully it will at least focus energy and resources on going after other fanatic violent fascists, who are apparently on the rise in Europe. Link to post Share on other sites
AmScray 355 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 That is just asinine, how are they supposed to protect you?Overwhelming tolerance. Link to post Share on other sites
AmScray 355 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 As far as MMQB'ing the cops, I disagree with that.First off, they're in Norway. A cat stuck in a tree gets full SWAT response over there. No chance they were even remotely geared up for something like this. They learned this lesson the hard way.Secondly, there was just a huge bomb explosion, then you have some guy on a remote island going on a shooting rampage. This whole thing was dicktrain city- it wouldn't have mattered where it occurred. People were going to die, the cops couldn't have saved them all, if even many. This nightmare was planned to a tee and surgically executed. He is evil, he is a fanatic, but as can regularly be expected from people of Norwegian genetics, he was a calculating, intelligent planner. Sanity is always the first question whenever someone does something like this, but we all know this man wasn't insane. This wasn't some random lunatic with a gun. It was even scarier than that; it was a regular guy who had gone completely over the edge. The everyman who feels backed into a corner and says 'fuck it' is considerably scarier than some 19 year old Muslim mouth-breather saying "allahu akbar"If this guys goal had been loss of life, he could've probably topped the Norwegian. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer Link to post Share on other sites
Tiltinagain 973 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 The thing I don't hear being discussed is that there were no guns to be able to take him down as he spent 90 minutes picking people off. Not only did the citizens not have guns, but neither did the police. That is just asinine, how are they supposed to protect you? Overwhelming tolerance.Exactly. Another great argument for gun control. Link to post Share on other sites
AmScray 355 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Exactly. Another great argument for gun control. Fairly certain Breivik will become the poster child for anti-gun rights in Europe (what little gun rights remain over there). Link to post Share on other sites
ajs510 122 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Fairly certain Breivik will become the poster child for anti-gun rights in Europe (what little gun rights remain over there).Yup, they'll completely ignore all the laws that already exist and were broken in the course of committing his crimes. Link to post Share on other sites
speedz99 145 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 we all know this man wasn't insane.I guess he may not have been born completely out of his mind, but I think he was probably insane (by most definitions of the word) by the time he started shooting dozens of kids. Lots of insane people are decently intelligent and have been able to justify their actions. Link to post Share on other sites
AmScray 355 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 I guess he may not have been born completely out of his mind, but I think he was probably insane (by most definitions of the word) by the time he started shooting dozens of kids. Lots of insane people are decently intelligent and have been able to justify their actions.Fairly certain he wasn't insane by any definition of the word.Believe it or not, perfectly sane people can do the most heinous possible things, if they feel 'driven' to it. Living in a decent place (a city, a state, a country) and watching your standard of living slowly destroyed by the 'diversity' cancer- while a bunch of idealistic assholes rah-rah the downfall- is enough to push some men over the edge of 'civil living' and into the dark realm of 'animal response'. He may have been a bit deluded- to believe that he was going to spark some sort of bombs and bullets 'culture war' in Europe- but it seems that the man was fully aware of the consequences for his actions, knew precisely what he was doing, comprehended the gravity involved but was just willing to accept it all to 'prove a point'. Timothy McVeigh was like this. Was he a criminal murderer? Yes.Was he a piece of shit? Yes. Was he insane? No. Link to post Share on other sites
Roll the Bones 74 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Fairly certain he wasn't insane by any definition of the word.Believe it or not, perfectly sane people can do the most heinous possible things, if they feel 'driven' to it. Living in a decent place (a city, a state, a country) and watching your standard of living slowly destroyed by the 'diversity' cancer- while a bunch of idealistic assholes rah-rah the downfall- is enough to push some men over the edge. He may have been a bit deluded- to believe that he was going to spark some sort of bombs and bullets 'culture war' in Europe- but it seems that the man was fully aware of the consequences for his actions, knew precisely what he was doing, comprehended the gravity involved but was just willing to accept it all to 'prove a point'. Timothy McVeigh was like this. Was he a criminal murderer? Yes.Was he a piece of shit? Yes. Was he insane? No.Sorry, but I dissagree. Anyone that can shoot that many kids in the manner he did has a complete lack of empathy or realization of the suffering he is causing. That is a sign of an extreme sociopath, or in his case psychopath. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted July 26, 2011 Author Share Posted July 26, 2011 Perhaps we should agree on a definition of insanity first. Link to post Share on other sites
JubilantLankyLad 1,957 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Perhaps we should agree on a definition of insanity first.That's crazy talk! Link to post Share on other sites
Skeleton Jelly 2 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 That's crazy talk!Heh.Probably going to be using the insanity legal defense. Link to post Share on other sites
ShakeZuma 585 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 well did he do the same thing over and over again while expecting different results? Link to post Share on other sites
AmScray 355 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Sorry, but I dissagree. Anyone that can shoot that many kids in the manner he did has a complete lack of empathy or realization of the suffering he is causing. That is a sign of an extreme sociopath, or in his case psychopath.Would you say this man was an extreme sociopath/psychopath? (No)Why is it "non psychopathic' for a person to do that in response to someone raping their kid, but not to do the same thing to the people who he perceived to be responsible for enabling the rape of his country? The point isn't to 'defend' what he did, but to simply point out that otherwise sane people can be driven to do awful stuff. Shipping in the wolves that are 3rd World 'refugees' into the flock of sheep that is Scandinavia has a brutal social consequence, but we're supposed to ignore that and instead, chant in unison about 'diversity' and 'tolerance'. Is it really a shock when someone snaps over that bullshit?He was sane when he did this, and should be put to death. Since he's in Norway, he won't be put to death... so he should spend the rest of his life 20 years in prison. Link to post Share on other sites
Pot Odds RAC 23 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Why is it "non psychopathic' for a person to do that in response to someone raping their kid, but not to do the same thing to the people who he perceived to be responsible for enabling the rape of his country?Because that guy did indeed abduct his son but the Scores of mostly children Killed by the guy in Norway clearly did nothing to that guy nor "his" Country. Being able to understand reality and make clear cause & effect judgments is part of being Sane.That being said, he understood the consequences of his own actions. Planned them with that foresight. Clearly knew they were against the Law. And therefore in that definition is Legally Sane to be tried for his actions. The reasons for his actions make him insane, but his thought process taken to commit them makes him sane to stand judgment for them. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now