You’re still mistaking preventive detention for a prison punishment.
And that’s just the reason for preventive detention, as an alternative to a prison sentence, not as a back door for infinite incarceration
Because the desire to lock him away indefinitely isn’t the motivation for preventive detention. The reason we have preventive detention is to have the option to lock him up as long as he can’t be safely released into the streets, not so that we can lock him up and throw away the key tomorrow.
And that’s the problem. I don’t want the bastard to die happily tomorrow. I want him to realize what he’s done and that it had the opposite effect of what he wanted.
Nope, that’s the Swedish boxes. And while shopping for the right model, you can get a plate of meatballs with mashed potatoes and lingonberry jam really cheap in the café.
In other words, despite all your pretense, you are actually out for vengeance rather than just keeping a dangerous guy from being out in society. You just get the added advantage of pretending like you’re better than everyone else.
Why the fuck should I care that some dead guy thought he was some sort of martyr? He’s, get this, DEAD!
I am also a little confused as to why he can’t receive consecutive sentences. However, like somebody said, he’s your asshole (and the victims were your countrymen) and you get to decide what to do with him.
[QUOTE=The Huffington Post, April 20, 2012]
Breivik said the first shots pushed him into a “fight-and-flight” mode that made it easier to continue killing.
[/QUOTE]
If you’re so fucking stupid that you’re unable to see the difference between:
Acknowledging one’s gut feelings
and
Realizing that a civilized society should never use vengeance as a basis for a judiciary system
than I can’t help you. Good luck with getting your knuckles up from the ground, moron
That was brought up in the context of whether the death penalty is a deterrent. The threat of execution at some point in the future is not much of a deterrent to someone who sees himself as prophet and savior of his people; to him, it would be a martyr’s death, which would advance his cause. It is not to be feared, at least as long as it remains an abstract threat at some undetermined point in the future. Hell, Breivik has repeatedly said he was surprised to have survived that Friday. He was, at least according to his own boasts, not just ready to die but expecting to die.
I agree that once he’s dead, it’s not important whether Breivik’s last thoughts were about the glory of his mission or the futility of it all, or something completely different. But the question was about deterrence.
The real danger, of course, is that others who share his philosophy could see him as a martyr, and use that as inspiration to carry out further terror attacks. (See also: McVeigh, Timothy, inspirations for.) Treating him as any other accused criminal and once found guilty as any other prisoner may not prevent that, but at least we’re not actively encouraging it.
Norway does not practice serial sentencing. If you kill two people you get one sentence, not one for the first murder and another for the other and the two added together. Or if you kill a person, commit a rape, rob a convenience store, etc. You only get sentencing for the murder.
That seems rather odd. If you’re out on bail (or whatever the equivalent is) and you know you’re going to be convicted of a prior murder, what’s to stop you from killing everyone in sight?
If it’s assumed that there’s a risk of recidivism, destruction of evidence or that you’ll flee punishment, you’ll be put under detention. If none of those apply, you’re set free. For free. No bail is necessary.
If you’re arrested, the police have to let you go within 24 hours or they have to indict you for a crime. If you’re indicted there’ll be a court hearing as soon as possible to decide whether there’s probable cause for prosecution. If there’s probable cause, you’re either detained or set free pending trial depending on the criteria I’ve given above. The detention is usually for two to eight weeks, then there has to be another court hearing to determine whether there’s still a basis for detention.
ETA: In Breivik’s case, that court hearing was what happened on July 25th
Serious question for Norwegians: Do you think that that’s all kinds of fucked up? Or, more politely put, is this method of punishment controversial at all? In the U.S. the death penalty is practiced in most states, but many people (including me, in many instances) believe it is a deeply flawed system.
Quite to the contrary. We generally think that the US system of consecutive sentences is all kinds of fucked up. To us, it seems pretty weird to sentence someone to three consecutive life sentences; the guy will be fucking dead before he has any freaking chance of being released.
I guess it’s about whether a penalty system should put priority on rehabilitation or “punishment” AKA revenge. Myself, I think that the US practice of giving the victim’s family front seats to watch the execution is pretty sick.