|
|
Post by dertodesking on Aug 24, 2012 13:45:32 GMT -8
So, Anders Breivik, who killed 77 people with a bomb in Oslo and a mass shooting on Utoya Island has been found sane by a court in Norway...what do people think?
He's been sentenced to 21 years (although I understand that this can be extended at five year intervals so, in effect, he never gets out)...roughly 3 months per person killed!
I understand that he apologised in court today for not killing more...
Simon
|
|
|
|
rjb
Full Member
Posts: 187
|
Post by rjb on Aug 24, 2012 19:32:42 GMT -8
Well, he's a really bad guy, but sane or insane? That gets into technical details defined by the world of psychology and psychiatry. Lots of evidence about repeat offenders suggests that the issue of insanity is not very well understood by the so-called professionals in the field. One of the soft sciences for sure.
Isn't the 21 years simply the maximum sentence allowed by their law. Who is insane... Breivik or the lawmakers who think 21 years is enough for a mass murderer to regret his crime and turn over a new leaf!
Rick
|
|
|
|
Post by colin12303 on Aug 25, 2012 0:34:12 GMT -8
I heard it was a protest about the floods of immigrants coming into Norway(and about everywhere else in Western Europe)
Most of these immigrants are not a good thing,they just take our housing and benefits, steal anything that is not bolted down,and contribute nothing.Then have the cheek to complain it's not enough,and we are racist.
I don't condone what this guy did in any way but can see someone on the edge being pushed over.
|
|
|
|
Post by africaone on Aug 25, 2012 0:59:36 GMT -8
as i remember he killed also Norway citizens ??
anyway, to kill for ideas seems completely from another age (or uncivilised countries)
its i good that is was declare sane for justice and his victims
it is dramatic as it will be instrumentalised by racist groups (in the sense that if he has been declared unsane, his act had been associated with mental illness, not so attractive for other vollunteers !)
He has now something in hands to continue his propaganda
|
|
|
|
Post by bobw on Aug 25, 2012 1:52:09 GMT -8
How do you define sane? As far as I can make out in this case it means that he was fully aware of what he was doing and was responsible for his actions. However, they were clearly not the actions of a normal, balanced human.
I guess it doesn't really matter that much as long as society is protected from him. 21 years doesn't seem much for what he did, but I can't believe that the Norwegian authorities would ever let him out - imagine the uproar if they did!
Bob
|
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Aug 25, 2012 2:56:16 GMT -8
21 years is maximum sentence here in Norway, but as said before, his sentende is like that after 21 years it can be extended for another 5 years, and so on and so on. So in theory its possible to be in prison for the rest of his life, and its 99% sure he will be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by dertodesking on Aug 25, 2012 13:16:26 GMT -8
How do you define sane? As far as I can make out in this case it means that he was fully aware of what he was doing and was responsible for his actions. However, they were clearly not the actions of a normal, balanced human. I guess it doesn't really matter that much as long as society is protected from him. 21 years doesn't seem much for what he did, but I can't believe that the Norwegian authorities would ever let him out - imagine the uproar if they did! Bob There's the rub - the M'Naughten Rules, which are the legal test of sanity/insanity in the UK, has as it's central test "did the defendant know what he was doing, or, if so, that it was wrong?"... Clearly Breivik knew what he was doing and has even acknowledged that it was wrong (although I believe he described it as a necessary evil) so is legally sane. I think it's fair to say though that he's completely bonkers! I was wondering if others thought that this test of legal sanity developed in 1843 after the attempted assasination of British Prime Minister Robert Peel still "fit" given the developments in psychiatry since then? Is it right that someone clearly stark raving mad is found legally sane? Simon |
|
|
|
Post by colin12303 on Aug 26, 2012 1:25:30 GMT -8
We know what we are doing,is it wrong what we are doing.
Many people would say yes it is wrong to kill a living being, stick a pin in it and put it in a dark drawer.
Are we mad,actually to go to some distant hell hole,risk illness and injury i'm beginning to wonder.
My son has always said i am mad spending my time on this hobby,and people who do what we do are at best weirdo's.
There is a story about a Victorian lady who's will was contested on the grounds she could not have been of right mind due to the fact she collected butterflies.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobw on Aug 26, 2012 3:56:05 GMT -8
That Victorian lady was Eleanor Glanville (actually in the 17th century), after whom the Glanville Fritillary (Melitaea cinxia) was named.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Post by colin12303 on Aug 26, 2012 4:33:30 GMT -8
Yes you are right she was not Victorian,she died in 1709,(18th century)but was she insane or not and was the contested will upheld?
|
|
|
|
Post by wingedwishes on Aug 26, 2012 10:12:37 GMT -8
Sanity is a word often misused - You voted for that guy. You're insane! What is considered insanity for some is not for others depending on beliefs or region. The etymology is Latin where the root means healthy. Since Sane means having reason or good judgement, the answer is no- he is not sane. It is never good judgement to take it upon yourself to go shoot a bunch of people and there is no reasoning I can imagine which would allow one to do so.
If I ruled the world, my question would be - "Is it safe for the human collective if this individual continues to breathe?"
|
|
|
|
Post by dertodesking on Aug 26, 2012 13:54:51 GMT -8
Yes you are right she was not Victorian,she died in 1709,(18th century)but was she insane or not and was the contested will upheld? Hello Colin, Eleanor left her estate to her second cousin, Sir Henry Goodricke, except for some small legacies to her children. Her son Forest contested the will on the grounds of his mother's insanity; in 1712 he won his case and the will was set aside. Simon |
|
|
|
Post by colin12303 on Aug 26, 2012 14:26:08 GMT -8
Proof positive.
Insect collectors are all mad and should be treated as such.
|
|
|
|
Post by papilio28570 on Aug 26, 2012 15:32:24 GMT -8
Reminds me of: "Everyone is nuts except you and me, and I'm beginning to wonder about you."
|
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Aug 27, 2012 1:02:29 GMT -8
Sometimes I really think death sentence was not so bad...
True it has been totally overused in the past and it has legitimely been stopped. But I think we should find the right middle. For Breivik we are 100% sure he is totally guilty.
Norway people will now pay a lot of money to keep this demoniac killer alive until he dies naturally... this is also insane.
+ we are already far too many on Earth... not sure we need to keep this guy...
|
|
