Members Terminus Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 Ok, so I googled recidivism, and whilst I agree that there are some very progressive and successful rehabilitation schemes going on in Europe, they should be reserved for first time offenders and youngsters. But anyone who is considered sane and massacres 70+ should probably be considered beyond rehabilitation and have no stake in society whatsoever. In away I agree with the idea that Breivik is a highly exceptional case and the normal system isn't designed for him. But in this particular case I also think they make a good point in treating him like any other criminal. It proves him wrong, which is the biggest possible punishment he can receive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HeartfeltDawn Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 To all those people saying 'yeah but they can add five years, he wont get out etc'. I don't think that's the point, the point is that the words '21 years' get mentioned at all. It kind of shows that a lot of legal systems are just insane. What is actually insane is judging Norway's entire legal system to be insane based on the sentence delivered to one man in a case that is completely exceptional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HeartfeltDawn Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 In away I agree with the idea that Breivik is a highly exceptional case and the normal system isn't designed for him. But in this particular case I also think they make a good point in treating him like any other criminal. It proves him wrong, which is the biggest possible punishment he can receive. Absolutely. By treating him as any other criminal, his own ego doesn't get the kick it needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 9520575 Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 WHOLE LEE {censored}... Bill O'Reilly is an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lanefair Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 What is actually insane is judging Norway's entire legal system to be insane based on the sentence delivered to one man in a case that is completely exceptional. So, if I go out and commit an exceptional crime, I can expect a less than proportionate punishment? And it's not the legal system's fault that they didn't have any legislation in place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members vidret Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 So, if I go out and commit an exceptional crime, I can expect a less than proportionate punishment? And it's not the legal system's fault that they didn't have any legislation in place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lanefair Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 But this was my original point. Where in the law book does it say: Mass murder - start at 21yrs. ? It's a disproportionate starting point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Terminus Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 21 is their blanket maximum starting time, for any crime. After that, he has the right to at least be evaluated. They have a great point in that too, prisoners have rights and will be treated like people, not cattle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SnowViking Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 Norway is a highly civilised country with a very low homicide rate and they simply don't do the over-reaction or hysteria that would be generated if something like that happened in the UK or USA for example. It's entirely possible he will be walking the streets in 21 years time - I don't think he should but there it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lanefair Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 Prisoners have rights, but the public have the right to be protected from mass murderers indefinitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Terminus Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 You keep switching between Breivik and the wider point. In general, a prisoner are still humans and have rights like anyone else. In Norway they believe in rehabilitation, so everyone gets an evaluation after their initial sentence time (which will be up to 21 years). Breivik is a highly unusual case (I'm pretty sure "mass murder" isn't a real legal term there, I know it isn't around here), but they're making a great point of not treating it like one. He gets the maximum sentence and will probably never walk the streets a free man again. I seriously don't see how you can have such a problem with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 9520575 Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 hey, why don't we just ripp his dick off and pour hot sauce in his butt every morning. {censored} it, lets just go back to the stone age, eye for eye. This isn't about revenge you ninnies. My brain can't comprend 21 years then we give it a revaluation, I want it to say 300 years, I can't think beyond the face value of 21 derp derp derp derp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HeartfeltDawn Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 Prisoners have rights, but the public have the right to be protected from mass murderers indefinitely. ...which is what they will get. As the Guardian said: Breivik is almost certain to end his life in prison. Although Norway has a maximum prison sentence of 21 years, Breivik could be sentenced to preventive detention, which can be extended for as long as an inmate is considered dangerous to society. The verdict of the most high-profile criminal trial in Norway since Nazi collaborators were prosecuted following the second world war is certain to provoke a strong response. Most Norwegians, including the victims' families, had wanted Breivik to be found sane so he could be held accountable for what they view as a political crime. No court would ever find Breivik to be safe for society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HeartfeltDawn Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 Norway is a highly civilised country with a very low homicide rate and they simply don't do the over-reaction or hysteria that would be generated if something like that happened in the UK or USA for example. It's entirely possible he will be walking the streets in 21 years time - I don't think he should but there it is. Absolutely. This quote from a Time magazine article says it all for me: The national media's portrayal of crime also helps foster tolerance for Norway's prison system. Newspapers rely on subscriptions rather than newsstand sales, so they don't depend on sensational headlines. And the writing style is less emotional, more pragmatic, than in other countries. In his book When Children Kill Children: Penal Populism and Political Culture, American criminologist David Green compares the British media's reaction to a murder case in which children tortured and killed a child with a similar case in Norway. The British newspapers, he writes, portrayed the murder as "alarmingly symptomatic of deep-seated moral decline in Britain." The Norwegian papers, however, presented their case as "a tragic one-off, requiring expert intervention to facilitate the speedy reintegration of the boys responsible." In Norway, acts of extreme violence are seen as aberrant events, not symptoms of national decay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sparkfriction Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 i dont understand this thread. Again, ...he will never see the light again!!!! dont pay attention and waste your time for this {censored}er!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members phel21 Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 The sentence isn't regular prison. In English you'd say that the purp is "stashed away for safe keeping". At the end of the sentence there's a review, and if the prisoner is still considered a danger to society he or she may be kept behind bars indefinitely (with periodic reviews). I do however personally consider it a waste of resources for society to keep this individual alive, but that's a different matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A.P. Ryder Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 "There isn't a prison that can hold me. I'll break out of this one, if it takes the rest of my life." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A.P. Ryder Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 "After being sentenced to 800 years in prison, he confidently told his lawyer that with good behavior he could cut his sentence in half." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jisatsu Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 You guys are being really unfair. After 21 years locked away he'll have learned his lesson. That's a long time to be out of society, and a long time to sit and think about what he did wrong. Hopefully he will do the right thing and get his degree in Counselling before he gets out so he can work with troubled children and drug addicts and help them make the right choices in life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pelliott Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 So, if I go out and commit an exceptional crime, I can expect a less than proportionate punishment? And it's not the legal system's fault that they didn't have any legislation in place? I bet you hate "innocent until proven guilty" too. They're following an established protocol for a fair trial and sentencing. In 21 years, it is almost an absolute certainty that he will have additional time tacked on considering he's a {censored}ing nutjob, as has been explained, but they cannot declare that now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RadioSilence Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 No court would ever find Breivik to be safe for society. In court he apologised to other far-right extremists for not killing more people. As long as he keeps agreeing with that sentiment no authority will judge him safe for release, and I don't imagine he'll denounce his statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lanefair Posted August 25, 2012 Members Share Posted August 25, 2012 I bet you hate "innocent until proven guilty" too. They're following an established protocol for a fair trial and sentencing. In 21 years, it is almost an absolute certainty that he will have additional time tacked on considering he's a {censored}ing nutjob, as has been explained, but they cannot declare that now. I'm more of a 'no smoke without fire' kinda guy. I've created some kind of feedback loop in this thread so I'm out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 9520575 Posted August 26, 2012 Members Share Posted August 26, 2012 You guys are being really unfair. After 21 years locked away he'll have learned his lesson. That's a long time to be out of society, and a long time to sit and think about what he did wrong. Hopefully he will do the right thing and get his degree in Counselling before he gets out so he can work with troubled children and drug addicts and help them make the right choices in life. Oh somebody can't read again. 21 years then he goes free? Is that what is going to happen? derp derp derp derp... go shoot your guns John Wayne, have fun in your black and white good and bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jisatsu Posted August 26, 2012 Members Share Posted August 26, 2012 Oh somebody can't read again. 21 years then he goes free? Is that what is going to happen? derp derp derp derp...go shoot your guns John Wayne, have fun in your black and white good and bad. You are right, I can't read. =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members A.P. Ryder Posted August 26, 2012 Members Share Posted August 26, 2012 You are right, I can't read. =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.