Printable View
I cant speak for everyone but I think its because we want him to suffer, to have his entire reasoning shot down in front of him, that brevik sees the moster he is and that he is destroyed. The idea that he is enjoying it, that he wanted this to happen is pretty infuriating.
That's the beauty of it, what he is is simply being disregarded. He won't have the satisfaction of being treated any differently. Norway's ultimate revenge is simply not being out for revenge, people will still just get up, brush their teeth, have a coffee, a smoke if they smoke. Just a day as usual.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
I hope google translate does a good job here, excellent collumn by a Frenchie who got lost here and started writing good collumns.
http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/6849/Sylva...s-podium.dhtml
Norski muca's, do any of you have a link to a transcript of his 30 minutes, kinda curious.
http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/2...artid=10065238
Knock yourself out.
This, I think, is ultimately the best punishment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
It appears that today, he is being questioned about this 'network of the Knights Templar' of which he is claiming to be the representative, and is finding it rather difficult. Rather plaintively, he is reported as requesting that the prosecutor refrains from ridiculing him. Poor baby.
As Fragony says, what this man fears most is ridicule and irrelevance. I read that yesterday, several of the family members observing his opening nonsense laughed out loud. I bet that really hurt his tragic little ego.
5 seconds of googlage. forvaring=containtment.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Is that the same legal term? If so, what system of law has such a law apart from us?Quote:
Originally Posted by lars573
As I said earlier, the Dutch have a system called "Terbeschikkingstelling van de Staat" (TBS), literally "Being put at the disposal of the state". It's a measure that is formally not a punitive, but a psychiatric sanction. In cases where a judge rules that the culprit is (partially) insane and therefore can't (entirely) be held acountable, he can order that the convict is placed in TBS. If there's also a prison sentence included (in cases where the insanity is held to only partially reduce the accountability), then he has to serve out that before being placed in TBS.
Having google-translated the wiki page on Forvaring, I'm not sure it's quite the same thing. According to the translation Forvaring applies to sane convicts.
It's not the same thing at all, no. Not even related.
What we have instead of your tbs, is simply forced psychiatric care(tvungen psykisk helsevern). That term translates very well, and everyone gets the gist of what it is. If I translate "forvaring" as containment, nobody would have a clue what it is. And containment really isn't a very good translation. Containment would translate as either "oppdemming" or "inngjerding" depending on the context.
Terms describing practices only occuring in one country shouldn't be translated IMO, one should just use the foreign word. Using the foreign word means that you will intantly know what is being talked about, instead of being muddled by other associations.
Like Laicité. One could translate it as "secularism", of course. But if I say Laicite, people will instantly know that I am talking about the specific state and church-relationship in France, instead of thinking of, for example, the secular norwegian or english state. Nor will I confuse the secularist policies of Norway or England into my perception of the french system.
Sorry I had to http://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/2099...in_tranen.html
(refresh skips add)
It is translated as permanent detention in this FAQ:Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
the Norwegian word '"forvaring" does actually roughly translate to 'detention/custody' in non-legal terms, according to dictionaries.Quote:
- What is the longest penalty?
The longest penalty is 21 years’ imprisonment – or permanent detention for 21 years. A sentence of permanent detention can be imposed if there is considerable danger of repetition. Permanent detention is not subject to any timeframe. However, the court always fixes a timeframe that may not exceed 21 years. When the timeframe expires the offender may be re-assessed. If the court concludes that there is still a danger of repetition the timeframe may be extended by up to five years at a time. There is no upper limit to the number of times that the court may extend the timeframe. In principle, a person that is sentenced to permanent detention can remain in prison for the rest of his or her life.
Only offenders that are of sound mind may be sentenced to permanent detention. Persons that were not of sound mind at the time of the crime may be sentenced to the special sanctions of involuntary commitment or compulsory mental healthcare.
But why is it wrong to kill? Isn't it only the ultimate misfortune? why why why why why why why why?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
See how many times I asked why? Therefore my question is valid
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17766404
OK, I don't quite understand his plan.
He wanted to behead "former Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland during the rampage" and then post a video of it, while on an island where he intended to die, assuming he would have plenty of time to set up the cameras and everything and have a good internet connection, and assuming that the bomb going off would not alert Brundtland. All the while he was going to force 600 people into a lake so they would drown, even though there were not that many people there to begin with. In his fervor, he wanted to make 3 bombs, but got tired and decided to go for 1. Also, his idea of a "Sabbatical" is to play World of Warcraft all day every day for a year, as any true Christian would. In the end, he said that he was surprised that he survived, even though he surrendered without a fight.
I don't mean to downplay the terrible nature of this guy's action, but it just seems like he is retarded or something.
Great, not only was he retarded psychomaniac, he's opened the flood gates to a new round of "videogames are murder simulators" sensationalism.
After 16 hours of WoW per day I'm surprised he had the brainpower to tie his own shoes.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER
It makes sense, he spends days of meticulous planning and throws a hissy fit and has a mental breakdown when his plans dont go exactly as he wanted. Sounds like a WOW player to me! :wink:
Why it's wrong to kill is of course an interesting debate, and there are many arguments one could make. I would've given you one if I thought you were interested ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
And that question pops up quite often as well, though usually in a limited form, like war, criminals, abortion, etc. Heck, there are many people who want ABB shot, and those who try to counter those has to make an argument as to why it's wrong to kill ~;)
1. The beheading was meant to be shot with a small camera, which he carried his person. As it turned out the batteries didn't work, which is the only reason why he didn't make any recordings on the island.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER
2. The internet connection works just fine, he should've had no problems uploading it.
3. When the bomb went off, those on Utøya considered it the safest place to be. If Brundtland had been present, she would likely had stayed put. Bodyguards are a rare thing in Norway, and she did not have any.
4. There were 536 people on the island, IIRC. He never made a specific number, he said he wanted to kill everyone. His reasoning was that people in panic wouldn't be able to swim. Fortunately he was wrong.
5. Back in 2010, he was looking at several targets and plans. One option was to make three bombs. The bomb-making took longer than he planned, so he settled for one.
Most importantly, he is closer to radical islam than he is the populist right. The ussual blamed it all to Wilders but this is really something quite different
"Only" in the methods used. Maybe I've missed it, but I haven't heard Wilders or any of his cattle put forward a good argument that their political positions are all that different from Breivik. And they've had ample time.
Did anyone actually swim all the way across? I thought all the swimmers were picked up by boats.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Yeah, some made it across, including a friend of mine, but he's quite a good swimmer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
This piece of garbage is giving the media everything they want about the dangers of video games.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012...res-the-facts/
He is doing more damage than Jack Thompson.
Breivik is adding fuel to the fire. Australia already has heavy censoring, especially with Left For Dead 2. Now this? Goddamn.Quote:
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name
Boo! Down with pointless censorship.Quote:
Originally Posted by spankythehippo
Great mistake GC, you will hardly find a rightwinger, including me, that disagrees with him when it comes to what he calls cultural marxists. I call them multicultists but it's basicly the same thing. This was bound to happen someday but I never expected this
Do I really have to explain with what I don't agree with. Breivik is a product of leftist arrogance and it kicked back in the most horrible way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
This is as dumb as saying that the Congresswoman who was shot in Arizona was a product of right wing talk radio. I know I have may have said that myself, and if I did in the thread then I was an idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Some people are broken, you can't think for one second someone like Breivik is a fully rational man simply responding to "leftist" policies.
He IS completely rational, in the worst possible way. He has whiped out the next gen of the elite. He's no ordinary terrorist this was all thought out until the tiniest detailQuote:
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name