Don’t try and be sarcastic with me mate…
:dubious: What does any of this have to do with the subject of this debate, namely Norwegian maximum sentencing laws and the length of Breivik’s sentence?
Nobody here is discussing what Breivik did, why he did it, or whether his actions have tarnished the public image of other Norwegian racists. What we’re discussing is whether and why it is reasonable to apply a 21-year limit to the jail sentence accompanying his conviction.
If you’re going to remain here, TimmyTadpole, you’re going to have to follow the rules. What you’ve posted isn’t relevant to this thread, so don’t hijack the discussion.
I’m still puzzled by the prosecutor’s motive in attempting to have Breivik declared insane. Was it because it would be easier to hold Breivik for life that way? And did the defense ( ie Breivik) believe he had a better chance of eventual release if he were sentenced to imprisonment?
I think Breivik’s position was easy to understand. Political fanatics cannot stand the idea of being declared insane and hence having their political motives and beliefs devalued.
But I agree with your mystification about the motives of the prosecutor. One would think an insanity ruling might open a door to a possible earlier release.
Then again, perhaps it’s just a very honest prosecutor who actually believes Breivik is insane. What are the odds of that?
Well, I can’t, due to the rules, but yeah, that’s stupid. Vengeance is something that has caused problems since time began. It’s one of the main reason violent crime even happens. The desire for revenge overrides people’s sense of morality–you believe that torture is wrong, but then are gleeful when the guy who killed your father is waterboarded. Vengeance is irrational thinking.
And, sorry, but, on this issue, you are not at all a leftist.
The prosecutor didn’t declare that he believed that Breivik was insane. But since one of the two psychiatric reports declared him insane, the prosecutor believed there was reasonable doubt that he was insane.
The judge dismissed any reasonable doubt about insanity in a verdict that took six hours to read, and where she thoroughly and meticulously slaughtered that psychiatric report. The psychiatrists who were responsible for that report have made themselves unavailable for media…
That’s a common misconception, but it’s rarely true - in essence, being remanded into the care of the shrinks means you aren’t getting out until *they *decide you’re fit to get out - there’s no maximum duration they can keep an involuntary patient, and the latter don’t get to appeal or protest once they’re committed. In the US, according to the APA it takes on average twice as long as the “normal” jail sentence would have been to be cast out of a laughing academy.
In the case of Breivik, I think it’s safe to say he’d have been in for good. And mental institutions are not fun places to be in, even compared with prisons. For one thing, most of the people around you are nuts :).
No I misread when I was looking it up. Since finding what usually happens was much harder I assembled what I thought was the maximum sentence for the crime in that country.
Thanks for the correction on France
adds France to the list of countries to never kill someone in
The poster I was responding to was making assumptions about the mindset of posters unhappy about the sentencing, based on the idea that they had to be conservatives and was making comparisons with their other (assumed) political views.
Even if I’m on the side of the conservatives in this case, none of the other stuff he was mentioning could be applied to me (and I suspect neither to many other posters sharing my opinion). That’s why it was relevant for me to mention that not everybody disliking short sentences for murderers (regardless how repentant) was politically a conservative. To be franck, I found his post ill-advised, making unwarranted assumptions that were mostly a hijack of the thread.
Breivik is 33, he probably has 50 years of life left. If you give him a life sentence and he dies at 85 that works out to 8 months per murder instead of 3.
Norway has a recidivism rate of 20%, the US has a rate of 60%+. Norway doesn’t throw drug addicts and the mentally ill in prison like we do here, nor do the give teenagers life sentences.
Despite it all, the US has 8 times more murder per capita than Norway.
Especially since France has a bad rap in Europe regarding detention conditions, having been condemned several times by the ECHR for a variety of reasons.
There are lots of other factors to consider. Moreover, while the US has the death penalty, the vast majority of convicted murderers don’t face it. In fact, while the US may hand out sentences for murder that may seem rather stringent, due to parole it’s fairly common for people convicted of murder to be out of jail in 15 years even with a “life” sentence.
I wouldn’t be surprised if in terms of time served(as opposed to sentences), the US lagged behind most of the world in terms of the amount of time murders serve in prison.
Also, the US doesn’t put people in prison for being “mentally ill” so I’m not sure the point of that part of your comment.
DP sorry.
I seriously doubt that, you’d need to evidence that people convicted of serious crimes serve less time in the US than in other countries.
The point with the mentally ill comment was that Norway is more humane and thinks things through.
Every man’s death diminisheth me for I am involved in Mankynde.
Therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls
it tolls for thee.
Just to add: this is not simply about sentencing Brevik, this is about treating him the same as other criminals because it is their humanity that is diminished otherwise.
I’d be happy to diminish Brevik’s humanity to zero with a bullet to the head, but I recognize that this personal philosophy may have certain problem when scaled up to a national level.
Don’t get us wrong, there’s lots of people over here who’d be happy if Breivik happened to stand under a loose, overclocked ceiling fan at a bad time. We just don’t think we should put him there.
Breivik’s position is that he is not insane he is right. Right to kill children and adults in a bid to further his political agenda which is right. Now, declared sane and consigned to prison he is not just a madman he is, in his mind, a martyr for his cause.
I don’t know that for sure, but the truth is that people convicted of violent crimes in the US don’t spend nearly as much time in prison as people might think judging from shows like Law&Order: SVU, The Closer, or any of those other TV shows which bear little relation to reality.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/dope/etc/match.html
According to Frontline from PBS, the average convicted rapist only 65 months(5 & a-half years) while the average person convicted of homicide(murder or manslaughter) serves 71 months(six years) and that the average length of time served for violent crimes in America is just 43 months(just over 3-and-a-half years).
In fact, one of my old neighbors beat a man to death with a baseball bat and was out of prison in less than six years.
Obviously I don’t know if it’s typical in the UK, Australia or Canada for person who beats another man to death while screaming “Fuck you bitch!” to exit prison after six years, but I don’t think it is.
People should note that many if not most convictions of “manslaughter” are people who would have been convicted of murder had they gone before a jury but due to plea bargaining(a necessary evil that’s gotten a much worse name than it deserves) wound up pleading guilty to manslaughter.