I recall con artist Frank (“Catch Me If You Can”) Abagnale saying he’d served time in a French prison, a Swedish prison and an American prison. His take was that a French prison is Hell on Earth, a Swedish prison is a Holiday Inn, and an American federal prison is smack in the middle of those two extremes.
Sounds like Norway MAY follow Sweden’s methods.
I had a laugh at this line:
An inmate in his private bathroom – one of many amenities that make Halden feel more like a college dorm than a prison.
We sure didn’t have private bathrooms at the dorms in my school.
Was already addressed earlier in this thread. The one pictured is specifically a halfway house for prisoners due to be released. The “real” Norwegian prisons are more traditional.
I saw an article on Yahoo news on the prisons in Norway today as well. The slideshow pointed out that the cells have flat screen TVs, which I sure plenty of people found galling. But prison officials mentioned that the flat screen makes it harder to hide drugs in the cell compared with larger TV’s. So there, these prisons have a similar problem that US prisons sometimes have. That kinda shocked me – the place seems so idyllic to me – but addicts are addicts, and to them the place is bleak enough to want to drop out chemically. So maybe, just maybe mind you, it’s not THAT comfortable … for everyone.
I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that Norway’s criminals are not nearly as bad as America’s criminals. How many shootings does Norway have a year? Armed robberies? Is there a large underclass that has turned to violent crime to support drug habits or drug trafficking? I doubt it. So the prisoners are probably a hell of a lot easier to deal with, they probably get along with each other better, and it’s not so bad to give them comfortable prison facilities.
But I don’t think this would work in the US. The criminals are just too hardcore.
I’m not sure its a great week to make a “Norwegian criminals are insufficiently hardcore” argument.
But the recent shooting aside, Norway certainly has fewer violent criminals per-capita then the US. I dunno if that translates to the criminals they do have not being “hardcore” though.
Think about it. Mass murderers get all the publicity, but it’s ultimately the armed robbers, drug-related killers and other career criminals who really create the majority of the problems. Anders Breivik is basically a weak loser who was only able to kill people with guns and bombs. Behind prison walls, he’d be treated as a bitch. I have seen no indications that the guy can actually fight. No, I wouldn’t describe him as “hardcore” in the sense that I am using.
The hospital where I grew up has been turned into such an institution (the only one of its kind in Sweden I understand), but I would not like to be put there should I ever have to serve a prison term. Just think of this: I know the area around as my own pocket, so how would it be to sit there seeing my childhood home and all sights around that are so familiar to me, but not being allowed to walk around freely.
Here are some pictures of the place. In this picture, which is taken just outside the fence surrounding the main building, you can even see the house where I grew up in the background.
Of course because of Human Rights and dignity, people outside prison also live better in Scandinavia than in the US. Nobody needs to commit a crime to get health care for example.
And the existing safety net that prevents people from getting desperate and broke in the first place probably prevents some crime, too.
Ah, UK. I was talking about continental Europe. The UK is halfway between Europe and the US regarding their cultural ideas; they still allow the beating of children in school, too.
I don’t have anything to add to what has already been said. However, I didn’t see anyone else mention this: Breivik is not being held in Halden Prison. He is being held in Ila, which is a converted World War II prison camp. At the moment he is in solitary confinement with no unnecessary contact with the outside world, including television. He will likely be held in that same prison, though in better conditions, until his trial. Does that make people feel better? It doesn’t make the kids any less dead 
No, it’s not. It’s borne out by hard cold numbers and facts for years and years, looking at different countries in Europe with variances in their model, as well as comparison to the US. Heck, even in the US - to rule out the influence of culture - states with death penalty (the ultimate deterrent, one would presume) don’t have lower crime rates than states with lifelong prison.
Moreover, psychological research done on prison inmates as to why they do what they do (and compared to people outside) shows that most criminals either believe they will never get caught (and therefore don’t care about punishment); are too short-sighted to think beyond 5 min. of “holding up the drugstore to get money”; or are sociopaths/ psychopaths who don’t care about other people anyway.
It’s not obvious because hundreds of experts study and research on what makes people criminals; and different approaches in many cities in the world means that we can compare how effective different methods are.
E.g. bank robberies are actually an example of short-sightedness: anybody with a minimum of research knows that about 90% of bank robbers are caught by police; and furthermore, that’s it’s a dumb crime since banks instituted safety measures like keeping only a handful of cash around (plus hidden alarms, plus bait money etc.).
That some people still rob banks despite this means that some people are too short-sighted and dumb to be stopped by consequences.
But if you’re going by what’s “obvious” to your cultural conditioning, instead of facts and research, then Norways success won’t convince you.
That is a sad confession of your low moral level, not that of an adult, but of a young child who is afraid of punishment.
We aim to teach people the higher level where you don’t do wrong things because they are wrong, and do right things not for reward but because they are right. The adult level of moral development.
Yes, Norwegian society has a lower crime rate to begin with (though it’s not a paradise free of crime). Partly that’s because of those terrible laws that e.g. forbid private gun ownership (so far less shootings); partly that terrible police state where cops try to be present and stop crime (so less gang wars); partly that terrible socialist nanny state where people don’t live on the street and therefore turn to crime, but get welfare to help out; and partly that terrible liberal approach to not start a “war on drugs” but try and help people.
While it doesn’t work 100% (otherwise Norway wouldn’t need any prisons, instead of better ones), it works much better than the American way.
But obviously those methods are unacceptable in the US.
And when the restrictions get less severe there are people who have promised they will get him.
Corporal punishment hasn’t been legal in state schools in the UK since 1987, and was banned in privately funded schools in about 1999 or so - the precise year varies by jurisdiction.
I agree with many upthread that “loss of freedom” should be the main deterrent value of prison, and that prison should be more about rehab. But this is all true within reason. I can easily imagine otherwise law-abiding people committing crimes to get into a prison where the genders are allowed to mix, there is entertainment, fine food etc.
Obviously the current prisons aren’t like this but the point is the logic does break down and so we can ask whether these prisons are already too cushy.
It’s interesting that you’ve broadened this to morality, not just the law.
It would seem to me that no adult has what you consider an “adult level” of moral development, as I’ve yet to meet one that always does the right thing.
I think you are missing my central point; the effect of prison as a deterrence factor can’t be known. I’m not stating that prison is effective at cutting or reducing crime, but consequences are most certainly deterrents for many. Are you suggesting that crime would not increase if we abolished prisons completely? If not, then prison likely serves as a deterrent for some. Comparing crime rates between states and nations is notoriously difficult. Just because homicide rates are higher in DP states doesn’t indicate that the DP doesn’t have some deterrent effect. It is nearly impossible in the world of criminal justice to effectively isolate variables and determine their correlation to behaviors and outcomes. We all know that economic indicators and addiction drive crime, but people also make calculated decisions based on what they think the outcomes are of getting caught.
Please. You make yourself look foolish. All “morally developed” adults have impulses and you are no different. You’ve made choices as an adult that weigh the emotional reaction or desire to do something with the consequences. Hesitant to tell your wife what you think of her parents? To tell your boss you disagree with his decision? Park in one of ten free handicapped spots in a full lot at the mall? Think about it. Those consequences serve as the deterrent. This is such a basic premise that I’m a little shocked you think that the moral high ground means people don’t consider the ramifications of their actions and somehow intrinsically make decisions based on right and wrong.
I do not know if that is how you mean it, but I hate it when people use the excuse, “That dosn’t bring the people he killed back.”, as though that fact means the man should not be punished.
He committed a horrible crime. He should be left to rot in the kind of prison Edmond Dantes was put in in The Count of Monte Cristo.
No, he should be treated as a person with the same human rights and dignities as the rest of us. That’s more or less the whole point of human rights - there is nothing you can do to lose them.
No, that’s not what it means at all. It means that no amount of punishment can be equal to his deeds, so all the revenge fantasies of 478 years or death penalty as gruesome as possible or life with daily rape or whatever… are not useful.