Mass murderer complains of a cold cell!!
 

Can you ****ing believe the nerve of this monster?
Anders Breivik Complains About Prison Life

He kills about seventy people, most of them kids, and goes to jail, then has the unmitigated gall to complain that his "human rights are being abused" because he hasn't enough butter for his bread, and his cell is cold! Never mind, it'll be real hot where you going in the end, you self-righteous, fascist killer bastard! God, I want to go to Norway and burn his cell down: how's THAT for a solution to your being cold, you moronic ****er?? :mad:

I am not surprised

Sociopathic murderers are generally selfish minded people who only care about themselves

and he prolly not used to prison yet

he seems like a newbie prisoner

Sounds like he needs a good hosing down. Maybe throw some ice blocks inside his cage. And take away his butter of course.

What do you expect, Norway have some of the best prisons in the world, so prison standards and expectations by its inmates are going to be critiqued.

I've always been in two minds about how to deal with prisoners like Anders Breivik. Do you treat them like the monsters that they are or do you try and treat them with a level of humanity. If the former, would it not be better just to eliminate them with capital punishment?

Take him to an American prison and give him lots of soap to drop and then see how much he complains about a Norway prison LOL

He has also complained because he feels his freedom of speech is being, uhm .. how do you say, limited. I didn't even know mass murderers had the privilege of freedom of speech. I mean, when you go around killing people, society takes away some privileges that apply to lawful citizens. That's like the basics of how that works.

Let him suffer for what he did. Capital punishment is such a cop-out.

But is being in a European prison these days, really suffering?

The Norwegian prison system is not a revenge system. The idea is that instead of having prisons work as boot camps for criminals, turning offenders into hard boiled criminals before they get out, Norwegian prisons should rehabilitate criminals so that they become lawful citizens once they're out. Noone suffers much in Norwegian prisons, I think, relatively and generally speaking when comparing them to prisons elsewhere in the world.

In the case of ABB, I don't really believe myself that he can be rehabilitated. I would like to be wrong, though. If I got my wish, he would gain understanding of how he's hurt so many people .. but of course that will never happen.

Whatever **** happens to him in jail, I don't really care and I hope he stays locked up for the rest of his life.

It's the same in the UK, with the ultimate aim always being to rehabilitate criminals, sometimes this does work othertimes definitely not. I'm not sure of the stats for repeat offenders here, to see how many actually return to prison for repeating crimes. The UK in the past used to operate ' a revenge system though.

Prisoners like ABB are beyond any type of help and reasoning, they are civilization's black marks.

In cases like this (or someone like a Ted Bundy or Albert Fish), I think that we would be better served by putting them in an institution. They may not be "legally" insane, but they are certainly dysfunctional to the extreme. It's so hard to learn about these people (sociopaths) since by nature, they hide their dysfunction, and the only time we ever really can say with certainty that someone is a sociopath is when they commit crimes like this. So, I think it would be in our best interest to study these people so that we can better arm ourselves against them, and even possibly learn to recognize them when they are young.

Sounds like Breivik needs to spend a little time warming up in a Syrian prison.

Guy wouldn't last a day in Tent City. Its too hot!!!! Make up your mind loser.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...WTRvmupBqgiDHQ

Prison cant be that good, even if it is Norweigan. People are locked inside a small cage. Even if it is not complete annihilation of suffering, it at least keeps people safe in the community and I dont expect normal people to want to or know how to make others suffer, even if it is for revenge.

I agree with you and I believe that would help but how would we study a sociopath? They would be lying all the time so there is no way for us to really dig deep

I thought about that too, but wouldn't it turn out to be something like Minority Report, where a person is apprehended before a crime was ever committed? What happens if they figure statistically certain music and certain video games fit their criteria or MO, then they can haul off some kid to an institution because of his taste in music?

To be honest, in a way having had him committed would have been better, because he definitely didn't want that. He actually WANTED to be executed, but (Tore can correct me if I'm wrong) seems Norway has no death penalty? But he really believed himself sane, and being found insane would have really hurt him and troubled him more. Problem is, although that would have angered him, it would also have angered the relatives of the dead, because being locked up in a loony bin is not seen really as any sort of punishment, though I have no experience of such. It doesn't seem as unremittingly hopeless as jail (should be) though.

I guess Norwegian people are just too nice, but the warders should all get together and fill his cell from top to bottom with butter while he's out for his one-hour exercise break. And jam his TV onto a history channel doc about the holocaust or something, then "not hear him" when he screams for it to be changed.

OT: Tore, does "Lilyhammer", if you've seen it, accurately portray Norwegian life at all?

I haven't really seen Lilyhammer, but my guess is that it does in a TVish sort of way ;)

You're right that there's no death penalty here. In a sense, the Norwegian legal system wasn't really equipped to deal with this sort of crime. The last time anyone killed a lot of people in Norway was during the second world war, I believe. Maximum penalty here for murder is only 21 years which I think is pretty light on someone who's killed nearly 80 people. Many has worried that he'll be out on the streets again in 20 years time, although I'm pretty sure he'll spend the rest of his days locked up, somehow. Maybe he'll be institutionalized at some psych ward when his prison days are over.

There's prisoners in some of the world's most squalid prisons who would probably give anything to be in a cold cell in Norway, eating bread with no butter and drinking cold coffee.

The guy killed 77 people in cold blood, he's lucky that Norway no longer has capital punishment. The fucking nerve.

No EU country has the death penalty do they?

None have it, its abolition is a key requirement for EU membership. Also as far as I know, not one non-EU country practices the death penalty either.

True, though Norway is not a part of the European Union. I think the only European country that has a death penalty is Belarus.

I just looked that up on wiki and saw Belarus.

Woah, you learn something new every day! Why are you guys not in the EU? You're sort of surrounded by it.

Norwegians have voted against it when it's come up in the past. I think most have done so because cheap, foreign agricultural products on the market here would outcompete Norwegian agricultural products because production costs here are so high. So people here have wanted to keep Norwegian agriculture alive, even if that means they gotta pay more for food. Norway is a very wealthy country so for the average person, it's not really much of a problem.

For the same reason, taxation will go up on some imported agricultural products like cheese next year I believe, making it so that foreign cheese which would normally be cheap becomes quite expensive which in turn makes it so that Norwegian cheese become more competitive.

The EU in general does not like that as it means we'll buy less stuff from them.

an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind smelanie.

I was as furious as Trollheart when I saw Brevik's complaints in the news.

Watched this movie recently, I think it makes a point on how to punish a murderer: The Secret in Their Eyes (2009) - IMDb

Well the UK are thinking now of leaving the EU, but I doubt it will actually happen. Now we're in the EU, all everybody does is complain about what EU memberships costs the country and how Brussels always dictates to us. Now that we're thinking of leaving, everybody is now concerned about what we would give up if we left the EU and the benefits of EU membership.

I'll be nice and concise here: If the UK leaves the EU I'll leave the UK, Belarus is a very poor example of what goes on in Europe nowadays and that dirty scumbag should be grateful he's being protected from being straight-up murdered by vigilantes in his cold, butterless cell.

Why would you leave the UK? What difference does it make to you if they're in the EU or not?

What? First of all, the only way to diagnose someone as a sociopath is with extensive psychiatric diagnosis, and even then the diagnosis is hard to pin down. And secondly, if someone is diagnosed as a psychopath and it is determined that they have homicidal tendencies, then I hope they would be hauled off to an institution.

Of course a sociopath's tendency to lie would make it difficult to study them, but certainly not impossible. If it did, then we wouldn't know as much as we do. It may take decades or centuries before we get any noticeable benefits from a policy like this that out way the risks (i.e. that they might escape and kill someone), but the long term benefits should out way the short term risks.

I realise that not everyone agrees with me, that it's not a black-and-white issue and that I'm completely exaggerating my actual reaction, but I think the EU is the best thing that's ever happened to Europe. Talk about how bad the Eurozone is in the crisis, but without it Greece and the Iberians would likely have collapsed anyway without any way of being bailed out by the significantly wealthier countries like Germany and France. It's basically a kind of international redistribution of wealth to ensure that the poorer members aren't completely wrecked without any support from the richest members. Also I think a lot of support for Euroscepticism comes from pig-headed patriotism and pure greed, two things that I despise.

I think Euroscepticism comes from people having all of it forced on them.

Given the fact that the original concept behind a full European Union was to prevent any future wars between European powers and then updated to make Europe into an economic power that can match the USA and Japan etc it has achieved its aims, I won't dispute any of this.

But why should these countries be bailed out by the richer countries? These countries are in this state because of mismanagement of their economies, rampant corruption and a spend spend mentatlity. Now they expect to be bailed out.

This is all good and well, but when the poorer members abuse that support, I think the support should stop.

I hate rampant patriotism as well, but you need to remember that throughout history, that Europe has been divided down nationalist and economic lines and there is an almost in-bred divison between a lot of the states. On top of that the UK has always had 'an island mentality' that makes us in many ways a seperate entity from much of mainland Europe.

Yeah, I fully get what you're saying with bail-outs. It's pure stupid idealism on my part but I don't like the idea of people who aren't necessarily responsible for their countries messing up their economy suffering together with the idiots who caused the problem in the first place. You could say they're beginning to learn their lessons in some cases. I can't imagine the Italians will elect another Berlusconi any time soon unless they really are that stereotypically lecherous and... well, Greece appears to be going Nazi again and the economy was pretty much the only thing they did well and I'm really grasping at straws/entering controversial territory here. I guess bailouts do have the advantage of putting the corrupt economies more in the hands of nations who are still afloat because they've gotten some of the corruption out of their system already. And honestly, I don't think most of the richer Eurozone countries could really pretend they're so innocent themselves. The UK has just as many tax-dodgers and exploitative upper-middle class dickheads as it did before the recession. The main reason we're not completely collapsing is because we have so much of an economy to burn through.

Sure, the advantage of what has happened now makes these more corrupt states tow the line more and to be more transparent in their economic dealings. They now realize how close they've fallen near the precipice and hopefully would've learnt their lessons. The economic disaster was something that most were totally unprepared for anyway.

You're right about the UK economy, it's the second most important economy in Europe and therefore had a lot to burn through than those at the other end of the barrel such as Greece.

Personally, I think the EU should be smaller and more compact in size anyway. As there are still too many countries to create a cohesive union, with too many national laws and injustices that just don't meet up to the guidelines laid down by Brussels. I really don't see what use countries like Bulgaria and Romania just to name two, are for the greater good of the EU and I dread the day if Turkey ever gains entry!

I imagine that as the EU expands it will eventually be able to occupy a role like, say, NATO, as well as its usual economic and political responsibilities. They may not seem like much, but not letting the weaksauce Balkan states into our club wouldn't reflect too well on our ideal of unified Europe. I do imagine Turkey will probably join one day, and that might not be too bad in the long run. It'll keep them distanced from Iran and Saudi, which is always a good thing.

I think that Greece is the only Balkan state in the EU so far, right? I know that Serbia is a candidate and possible Croatia as well.

It doesn't really reflect well on me that I just had to look that up, but no, Romania and the Bulgarians are in it as well. Not sure about Serbia and the Croats, but I imagine having them together in one group might be... tense.

The Eastern European states were always desired to keep them clear of any Russian influence, but that has backfired as Russia now has one of the world's best economies and these countries now need to trade with Russia, to stop them from collapsing. The old adage of Turkey as a buffer state against the Arab states is the only reason they're wanted (they're a Nato state too) But a country that has a history of rampant inflation, medieval laws, sexism and the violent supression of ethnic and sexual minorities, as far as I'm concerned has no place in an EU that prides itself on equality.

If you join a club, you abide by its rules, if you want your opinion heard once in the club, then there is the possiblity to do so. Most of these fringe countries can't quite grasp this basic principal and just want to join the EU for they can get out of it, whilst still playing by their own rules in their own country.