thestigmachine Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 I'm afraid we're looking at 21 years maximum. Our system doesn't work in a way that we can sentence him per victim. But as one guy said, the worst possible sentence would probably be an immediate release from custody... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradedOnACurve Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 I'm afraid we're looking at 21 years maximum. Our system doesn't work in a way that we can sentence him per victim.But as one guy said, the worst possible sentence would probably be an immediate release from custody... 21 years max is unfortunate assuming he's guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justaminrthreat Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 when the news of this was first breaking yesterday media outlets claimed it was a muslim terrorist. shit is fucked up. Yeah, funny how once the news stations found out it was a white, right-wing nutjob they stopped saying "terrorist attack." Apparently bombing a building and shooting a bunch of innocent people is only terrorism if you're Muslim. It pissed me off trying to get news about this on TV yesterday, too. CNN brought in a fucking "behavioral expert" to talk about Amy Winehouse's death and the male/female dynamics of "sexting" for like 10-15 minutes before they covered this story for around 2 minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steventangent Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 Our prime minister has made it clear that as a nation we will respond to this attack with even more openness in our political landscape, and that this will not silence us. wow...this is 100% exactly the opposite of what would happen in America. I wish we had the kind of political and social atmosphere that would allow for this sort of thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thestigmachine Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 They just interviewed an expert on Norwegian criminal law on TV, and he said that there acutally is the possibility to extend a 21 year sentence (and at least in theory to keep him for life), but that an extension will not be considered before he's (almost) done serving his original sentence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumbycross Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 I'm hearing the max he can get is 21 years. That's fucking bull if its true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattisr1984 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 pretty sure they mean he would get 21 yrs if charged with terrorism. thats separate from murder charges which i would think would get him life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j4m35 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 maximum prison sentence in norway for anything, including murder, is 21 years. they have no life imprisonment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almightyseancore Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 maximum prison sentence in norway for anything, including murder, is 21 years. they have no life imprisonment. i support this. they also get windows in their cells and computers and stuff, and are treated like humans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appletree Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 maximum prison sentence in norway for anything, including murder, is 21 years. they have no life imprisonment. i support this. they also get windows in their cells and computers and stuff, and are treated like humans. you're kidding right? i think it is sad when criminals, of any sort, get to go to prison and have a cell, tvs, arts and crafts, hobbies, all sorts of stuff. i mean its nice to be all soft and touchy to people who committed crimes right? anyway, my heart and prayers go out to anyone affected by this. it is a shame no one on the island could defend themselves. you wonder how people feel about concealed carry licenses and the whole gun law concept. people want to get rid of guns and are scared of em but it makes you think about those that do shit like this. reminds me of playing with ant piles cause they are just defenseless in every way. i am not saying everyone needs guns and go shoot people just curious about the whole gun law thing. my coworkers (mostly french) have never even touched a gun. shittttt 100 years ago someone would have grabbed the shotgun above the mantle and blasted someone for trespassing. everyone defended themselves if need be. idk my thoughts are people (everyone at me office) think they are horrible and bad. they all make fun of me that i have a gun in my home, and a pistol in my car. i just try and tell them you would think differently if you were mugged, attacked, raped, had some horrible act committed to you yourself. i tell them i hope in a million years i never ever have to use it but i know it is there and know how to use it god forbid something ever terrible happen. sad deal if he only gets 21 years. kinda fucked up. i feel worse for the kids and the families. from my understanding it was mostly kids at a camp. i really do not know what to say in regards to it. kinda makes me sick and feel really bad for em. wish shit like this didn't happen. wish this was more talked about in the US instead of amy winehouse. nothing against amy, RIP, just against how if it doesnt affect us (even music we listen to) then it doesn't really matter. /rant (sorry do not mean at all to bring up arguments just felt like venting guyzzz) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest errolwest Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 i support this. they also get windows in their cells and computers and stuff, and are treated like humans. you're kidding right? i think it is sad when criminals, of any sort, get to go to prison and have a cell, tvs, arts and crafts, hobbies, all sorts of stuff. i mean its nice to be all soft and touchy to people who committed crimes right? man, look at the crime rate in norway, and then look at the american crime rate. theres a huge difference, and its that way for a reason. because what they are doing works. from what i know, they actually seem to want to reform inmates and not just lock them up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankmurphy Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 criminals, of any sort Please tell me you're kidding. If you support the caging and abuse of all the different non-violent offenders then you're scum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest errolwest Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 this guy in question is beyond reform though, so in this case he should probably be locked up for life Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest errolwest Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 criminals, of any sort Please tell me you're kidding. If you support the caging and abuse of all the different non-violent offenders then you're scum. ding ding ding! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appletree Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 no no no i do not mean lock martha stewart up with murders. i just meant paying thousands and thousands of dollars to keep inmates locked up and just sitting in there for years....as opposed to helping them and actually getting a large majority to reform. i worded that wrong i totally do not think we should treat all "criminals" the same way and with the same repercussions. i just do not think we should make it paradise for all those in prison (not saying it is just generally speaking) and treat people better in prisons cause we have to be loving, cannot hurt anyone's feelings, cannot make it to where they say fuck this, this sucks. i may be way off cause i know little about prisons nor have any knowledge or research on it. all i was trying to get at was i disagree with throwing money, comfort, and time at reform as opposed to actual reform (whatever that even is). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j4m35 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 the problem isn't guns, it's radicalism and lack of open political/religious discourse in a really religious country. in the US, prisoners should be provided with certain programs to help rehabilitate them. "arts and crafts, hobbies" (could you be more flippant?) and job training all are proven to lower recidivism rates. this is partly because the huge majority of people in the US who are getting arrested for misdemeanors and minor felonies (aka drugs) are people who don't have these programs available in their schools. when resocialization efforts are cut in prisons, the same people are arrested again, but this time mandatory minimums kick in and because they got caught selling a gram of crack cocaine they are in prison for 15 years and the cycle repeats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appletree Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 this is why i am a dumb american. i agree that whatever works and has proven to work should be done. so if the problem largely stems from the school system (or parenting is not what it was years ago) then i agree with a system change. i already agree with a system change just learning a little about how schools work in other countries. also my best friend, who is fairly odd, like myself, and i had talked about this one night. we were discussing rich and poor and the argument of penalties for cocaine versus crack cocaine. he was telling me all about it and how its fucked up and done on purpose to penalize and target certain groups. he went into the history of it all and when the laws came about and all that jazz. basically there is so much shit idk. i am not some gun toting southern. i am kinda just a recluse who keeps to myself in my apartment when not at the office or out of town for work. i grew up in a very conservative family who always went hunting and fishing. it just always seemed natural to learn to shoot and a way to defend myself. my guns are locked up in a safe in my closet. at the end of the day though i agree that if a system is in place where crime is reduced and the need to defend yourself diminishes then that is awesome and i am all for it. but even with minimal crime rate and a near perfect society, what happens in instances like this when people who can get items that harm people do, and use them for atrocious acts like this? is it just part of them system that has to be tolerated? i mean if even 93 people is less than if you would have spread it out, is it something that has to be shrugged at, that it is sad, but part of it because in the grand scheme it is still small (over a month or year, etc). its like on one hand you can lower crime rates but have the potential for clumps of craziness to occur or multiple small events spread out. the big has more impact to people and more of an eye opener but in reality is it better if 93 people in 5 years time vs a person a week for 5 years? thanks for the insight. i always appreciate comments even if i look like an idiot. i can honestly admit i am ignorant to a lot of political and social happenings. it is what happens when i live in my own world with one friend to talk to. i just worry and focus on work and it kind of blinds me. my own fault but i know it is true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j4m35 Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 this is why i am a dumb american. i agree that whatever works and has proven to work should be done. so if the problem largely stems from the school system (or parenting is not what it was years ago) then i agree with a system change. i already agree with a system change just learning a little about how schools work in other countries. also my best friend, who is fairly odd, like myself, and i had talked about this one night. we were discussing rich and poor and the argument of penalties for cocaine versus crack cocaine. he was telling me all about it and how its fucked up and done on purpose to penalize and target certain groups. he went into the history of it all and when the laws came about and all that jazz. basically there is so much shit idk. i am not some gun toting southern. i am kinda just a recluse who keeps to myself in my apartment when not at the office or out of town for work. i grew up in a very conservative family who always went hunting and fishing. it just always seemed natural to learn to shoot and a way to defend myself. my guns are locked up in a safe in my closet. at the end of the day though i agree that if a system is in place where crime is reduced and the need to defend yourself diminishes then that is awesome and i am all for it. but even with minimal crime rate and a near perfect society, what happens in instances like this when people who can get items that harm people do, and use them for atrocious acts like this? is it just part of them system that has to be tolerated? i mean if even 93 people is less than if you would have spread it out, is it something that has to be shrugged at, that it is sad, but part of it because in the grand scheme it is still small (over a month or year, etc). its like on one hand you can lower crime rates but have the potential for clumps of craziness to occur or multiple small events spread out. the big has more impact to people and more of an eye opener but in reality is it better if 93 people in 5 years time vs a person a week for 5 years? thanks for the insight. i always appreciate comments even if i look like an idiot. i can honestly admit i am ignorant to a lot of political and social happenings. it is what happens when i live in my own world with one friend to talk to. i just worry and focus on work and it kind of blinds me. my own fault but i know it is true. guns are popular in norway i'd think, especially when hunting is a pretty big part of life there. the issue isn't whether more or less guns would have stopped this. it's religious tension. it is a terrorist attack, the work of a madman. no amount of guns or ammo or a quicker reaction from a swat team could have stopped loss of life. this isn't some dude doing a drive by or carjacking you or breaking into your house. it's someone going onto an island and shooting up kids to make a political statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appletree Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 no i totally hear you. it goes to the argument if guns or ammo or quicker reaction could of stopped it or made it at 92 or 91 or 40 would it have been worth it? although the argument says well shit if 1% were armed and it could have been 40, then hell why not arm 2% so it is 20? i agree that it cannot be looked at that way and it is more with the religious tension instead of giving everyone a gun! i guess a population that has been fairly homogeneous and the same for the past 1000 years gets more and more riled up when things change. all in all it is just tragic. for the past day or so i have been unable to get the thought through my head of people running and kids screaming. makes my stomach churn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almightyseancore Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 the problem isn't guns, it's radicalism and lack of open political/religious discourse in a really religious country. in the US, prisoners should be provided with certain programs to help rehabilitate them. "arts and crafts, hobbies" (could you be more flippant?) and job training all are proven to lower recidivism rates. this is partly because the huge majority of people in the US who are getting arrested for misdemeanors and minor felonies (aka drugs) are people who don't have these programs available in their schools. when resocialization efforts are cut in prisons, the same people are arrested again, but this time mandatory minimums kick in and because they got caught selling a gram of crack cocaine they are in prison for 15 years and the cycle repeats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thestigmachine Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Well, if the guy wanted change, it seems he got it. Maybe not the kind of change he wanted though: In my city of Stavanger, police estimate that close to 100.000 took to the streets today, armed to the teeth with flowers and candles, in remembrance of the victims. To put it into context, the population of Stavanger is 120.000(!). (Granted, there must've been quite a few people coming in from neighboring towns). These are scenes that has never been seen before. And it's the same story in just about every single city in Norway today. In Oslo, approximately 200.000 gathered. Some pictures from Stavanger: http://www.rogalandsavis.no/bilder/article5681717.ece And even for a cold-hearted Norwegian as myself, I'm pretty much speechless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrangerwithcandy Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 To people arguing about prison / rehabilitation of inmates. You cannot run under the assumption that all inmates can be reformed, some people are just genuinely ill. I have seen / heard inmates do some absolutely insane things that no one in their right mind would do. It cannot all be attributed to lack of programs. There are many religious / anger control / therapy programs available, not to mention recreational and entertainment options, however it breaks down to whether or not these people can actually be fit for society again. Mental institutions have been all but abolished in NJ which leads to classification issues within the jails. Having inmates with mental issues being mixed in the same housing units as offenders who may actually be trying to get on the straight and narrow causes further problems. The admins of the prisons can do their best to separate the inmates accordingly and offer specialized treatments however due to the increasing rate of inmates, not to mention repeat offenders, this task is becoming steadily harder. It's such a tangled mess at this point in time it'll be a miracle if the system can reform itself let alone the inmates. As far as figures go, it costs roughly $40,000 a year for one inmate. There are just under 2000 inmates in the largest prison in NJ. There are 13 correctional facilities within the state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrangerwithcandy Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Also let me apologize if my point was a bit muddled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j4m35 Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 To people arguing about prison / rehabilitation of inmates.You cannot run under the assumption that all inmates can be reformed, some people are just genuinely ill. I have seen / heard inmates do some absolutely insane things that no one in their right mind would do. It cannot all be attributed to lack of programs. There are many religious / anger control / therapy programs available, not to mention recreational and entertainment options, however it breaks down to whether or not these people can actually be fit for society again. Mental institutions have been all but abolished in NJ which leads to classification issues within the jails. Having inmates with mental issues being mixed in the same housing units as offenders who may actually be trying to get on the straight and narrow causes further problems. The admins of the prisons can do their best to separate the inmates accordingly and offer specialized treatments however due to the increasing rate of inmates, not to mention repeat offenders, this task is becoming steadily harder. It's such a tangled mess at this point in time it'll be a miracle if the system can reform itself let alone the inmates. As far as figures go, it costs roughly $40,000 a year for one inmate. There are just under 2000 inmates in the largest prison in NJ. There are 13 correctional facilities within the state. some prisoners cannot be reformed, this is true. it's also why life sentences exist. religious, anger control and therapy programs are different from resocialization initiatives. the resocialization measures help inmates reacclimate themselves to the outside world. therapy programs and anger management classes help inmates deal with the stress of transferring to the outside world because there isn't adequate funding or resocialization. resocialization efforts confront the disease itself, whereas therapy programs only manage the symptom. also, it is worth the money to rehabilitate and resocialize a prisoner during their first stint in jail. when you don't rehabilitate someone they will usually commit another crime, costing the tax payer even more money. because of minimums, longer prison sentences are doled out on second time offenders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justaminrthreat Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert....sque-at trocity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.