As much as I despise the killers of our society (think victims like Anita Cobby and Ebony Simpson) I feel that capital punishment is hypocrytical and simply a fancy term for legalised murder.

I believe the victims relatives should be given the choice of his punishment whatever will give them the most relief and satisfaction it doesnt have to be gruesome and agonising. I hate the fact that he may spend the rest of his life spreading his ideals and beliefs to all the other nutcases housed with him. 100% I could look into his eyes and administer a lethal dose to him if it was one of my kids he murdered

This was in the paper this morning, explains his potential sentence, which looks pretty weak, 21 years for killing 77 people..

The issue is of key importance in determining Breivik's sanity, and whether he's ultimately sent to prison or compulsory psychiatric care for carrying out Norway's worst peacetime massacre.
If found sane, Breivik could face a maximum 21-year prison sentence or an alternate custody arrangement that would keep him locked up as long as he is considered a menace to society. If declared insane he would be committed to psychiatric care for as long as he's considered ill.


Read more: www.smh.com.au/world/breivik-wants-freedom-or-death-for-murders-20120419-1x84m.html


Let's hope some nutter with a gun does the job that the courts can't, yes I recognise the irony, I don't usually support capital punishment, especially the US model but in this case the proof is just such beyond a doubt and the motives seem pretty cold blooded so I'd have no trouble with him being executed. And as a minimum, life in solitary, never to be released. I just don't see rehabilitation into society as an option.

Even if he is insane, does anyone think this is a mental illness that could be "cured" or managed, maybe someone with a medical background could comment.

Breivik wants freedom or death for murders

The right-wing fanatic on trial for massacring 77 people in Norway says he wants either freedom or death, calling the country's prison terms "pathetic" and arguing for the return of capital punishment, which was last used here to execute Nazi collaborators after World War II.

In the third day of his terror trial, Anders Behring Breivik was grilled by prosecutors about the anti-Muslim militant group he claims to belong to.

He rejected their suggestions that the Knights Templar doesn't exist, but admitted he had embellished when describing the network in the online manifesto he published before the bomb-and-shooting rampage on July 22.

"In principle it is not an organisation in a conventional sense," he said, describing it as a leaderless group consisting of "independent cells."

Prosecutors told reporters after Wednesday's hearing that they didn't believe the group is real or that the meetings Breivik claims took place in Liberia, Britain and the Baltic countries ever happened.

The issue is of key importance in determining Breivik's sanity, and whether he's ultimately sent to prison or compulsory psychiatric care for carrying out Norway's worst peacetime massacre.

If found sane, Breivik could face a maximum 21-year prison sentence or an alternate custody arrangement that would keep him locked up as long as he is considered a menace to society. If declared insane he would be committed to psychiatric care for as long as he's considered ill.

"Acquittal or the death penalty are the only logical outcomes of this case," the confessed killer said. "I view 21 years in prison as a pathetic sentence."

According to Amnesty International, the only country in Europe that still applies the death penalty is Belarus; two young men were executed there last month.

Norway abolished capital punishment in peacetime in 1905 but retained it for war crimes until 1979. After World War II, Norway executed 24 Norwegians, 13 Germans and one Dane. The last execution was in 1948.

"I think we have managed to hang on to the central humane values since then, with short sentences and a relatively speaking humane penal system," said Thomas Mathiesen, a professor of sociology of law at the University of Oslo.

Breivik described himself as a resistance fighter ready to die for his cause. He said there were too many "keyboard warriors" among Europe's far-right militants, and that they have a lot to learn from al-Qaeda, including its methods and glorification of martyrdom.

The 33-year-old Norwegian claims Muslim immigrants are colonising Europe, with the tacit approval of liberal "multiculturalist" regimes. That's why he says he chose to attack the government headquarters in Oslo and the annual summer camp of the Labor Party's youth wing.

Eight people were killed in the Oslo bombing and 69, mostly teenagers, were slain on Utoya island outside the capital.

"If I had feared death I would not have dared to carry out this operation," he said.

Survivors and relatives of those killed have expressed concern that the trial is giving Breivik a platform to express his radical views. A lawyer for the bereaved on Wednesday questioned him about his faith.

"I am a militant Christian," Breivik replied, though he added he wasn't "particularly religious."

Asked by one of the five judges of his thoughts on Nazis, he called himself an "anti-Nazi" and a "national conservative." The difference, he said, is that "I have a more liberal view on ethnicity" than Nazis. As an example, Breivik said he would find it acceptable if two per cent of the population was not ethnic Norwegian.

According to government statistics, 12.2 per cent of Norway's population are immigrants or children of immigrants.

The prosecutors seized on inconsistencies in how Breivik had described meetings of like-minded "knights" in Liberia, London, and the Baltic countries in his manifesto, and in interrogations with police.

"What is it you're getting at?" Breivik snapped at a prosecutor, then answered the question himself, saying prosecutors want to "sow doubt over whether the KT network exists."

Breivik claimed to have met a Serb "war hero" during a trip to Liberia in 2002, but he refused to identify him. He also refused to give details on what he claims was the founding session of the Knights Templar in London in 2002.

He conceded, however, that he embellished somewhat in the manifesto when he described members at the founding session as "brilliant political and military tacticians of Europe."

Breivik's defensive answers contrasted with the assertive posture he took on Tuesday when he read a prepared statement to the court, boasting that he had carried out the most "spectacular" attack by a nationalist militant since World War II.

On Wednesday, he seemed irritated at times, but never lost his calm, and smiled to his defence lawyers when the hearing was over. The trial is expected to last 10 weeks.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/8453712/breivik-wants-freedom-or-death-for-murders

If that what he wants.....................

Would cutting 77 pieces of his body off over the next 21 years and then giving him the death blow satisfy most people???

Just the fact that you came up with that^ shows your in the same boat with the sickos

Mobydisc said...

It's unlikely he will be found to be insane. His method of attack was logical and calculated to allow him to kill as many people as possible. From what he has said, he chose to kill those who he see as his enemy.

He should suffer a punishment he doesn't want. He doesn't fear death and clearly he knows what death is, having killed so many. So he should be locked up and they should devise some form of punishment work that involves helping the Norweigen Muslim community or something like that. Helping those he hates. That would be the worst form of punishment for him.

He wants to die as a warrior martyr. It is wrong to grant his wishes.

Well said !!!!

cisco said...

SP said...

This was in the paper this morning, explains his potential sentence, which looks pretty weak, 21 years for killing 77 people..

Would cutting 77 pieces of his body off over the next 21 years and then giving him the death blow satisfy most people???

I think the whole arguement over what should be done with him is pretty sick. We should be concentrating on causes rather than results.

He is no better or worse than the Bali Bombers for instance. For sure those kinds of people have to be removed from society one way or another.

From what Breivik is saying it appears he sees his actions as his form of anti-jihad.

I won't be surprised if we see more of it happen in the future.

The world's social structure needs to be altered so that these kinds of people do not emerge.

Whether you want to admit it or not, globally there is a huge amount of objection to middle eastern people and culture (read Islam if you like) moving into other cultures.

"Whether you want to admit it or not, globally there is a huge amount of objection to middle eastern people and culture (read Islam if you like) moving into other cultures." Maybe you should think about your ideas about race and religion a little more. people need to think before they dog whistle things like " stop the boats" "we're being overrun by Asians" and all the other crap that comes from the mouths of the right in Australia. There are people out there that are vunerable to the simplistic jingoistic nationalism that rings the bells for Mr Breivic.

boofy said...
Just the fact that you came up with that^ shows your in the same boat with the sickos

Like I said:-

He is no better or worse than the Bali Bombers for instance. For sure those kinds of people have to be removed from society one way or another.

I am not advocating one way or another only his removal from society.

Some people are coming up with some fairly vengeful stuff which is not healthy so I have attempted to reduce it to the ridiculous to end it.

Sorry if you were offended.

Mark _australia said...

Very very true logman

Yes really I agree.

But you must also admit some cultures are vulnerable to the extreme end of Islam that teaches all unbelievers must die.
Like ours.

NOT that I condone any sort of violence - and I hate what nutbag Breivik did - just that there are 2 sides to what you said...

Yes the extreme ends of the Islamist movement are very dangerous. Thankfully it's rare in Australia and hopefully the moderates of the Muslim faith will prevail.

Breivik 'planned to decapitate former PM'

Anders Behring Breivik has told a court in chilling detail how he had tried to kill as many people as he could during his Utoya Island shooting rampage and also planned to decapitate a former Prime Minister of Norway.

"The goal was not to kill 69 people. The goal was to kill everyone," he said of the shooting rampage at a youth summer camp held by the ruling Labour Party on an island near Oslo.

Breivik also described plans to capture and "decapitate" former Labour Party premier Gro Harlem Brundtland, who was a guest speaker at the camp that day, and then post footage of the execution on the internet.

Filming killings was "a strategy and tradition among militant Islamists," he said. "It is primarily a psychological weapon that is very effective."

In all, 564 people were on the Utoya island when Breivik arrived there on July 22, after he had set off a bomb outside a government building in Oslo that killed eight people.

The prosecution and Breivik's defence lawyer, Geir Lippestad, told reporters that Friday's session would likely be even more painful, since it would focus even more on Utoya island.

"But this is what this criminal case is about, that so many were killed and we have to go through with it," prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh said.

The 33-year-old far-right extremist also testified he had given his murder weapons names from Norse mythology, calling his rifle "Gungnir" after Odin's magical spear and his Glock pistol "Mjoelner" after Thor's hammer.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/8454420/breivik-planned-to-decapitate-former-pm

log man said...

My point is we can discuss race,religion etc etc but from a logical base...with facts not prejudices

OK. Couldn't agree more.

Talking about moderate and extreme Islamists is the same as talking about schoolboy and professional footballers.

They are both playing football to the same rule book.

With that in mind I suggest you view "Islam-What the West Needs to Know", available full length on You Tube.

" Main Idea.
Virtually every major Western leader has over the past several years expressed the view that Islam is a peaceful religion and that those who commit violence in its name are fanatics who misinterpret its tenets. This claim, while widely circulated, rarely attracts serious public examination. Relying primarily on Islam's own sources, this documentary demonstrates that Islam is a violent, expansionary ideology that seeks the destruction or subjugation of other faiths, cultures, and systems of government.

Content.
The documentary consists of original interviews, citations from Islamic texts, Islamic artwork, computer-animated maps, footage of Western leaders, and Islamic television broadcasts. Its tone is sober, methodical, and compelling. "

doggie said...

cisco said...

log man said...

My point is we can discuss race,religion etc etc but from a logical base...with facts not prejudices

OK. Couldn't agree more.

Talking about moderate and extreme Islamists is the same as talking about schoolboy and professional footballers.

They are both playing football to the same rule book.

With that in mind I suggest you view "Islam-What the West Needs to Know", available full length on You Tube.

" Main Idea.
Virtually every major Western leader has over the past several years expressed the view that Islam is a peaceful religion and that those who commit violence in its name are fanatics who misinterpret its tenets. This claim, while widely circulated, rarely attracts serious public examination. Relying primarily on Islam's own sources, this documentary demonstrates that Islam is a violent, expansionary ideology that seeks the destruction or subjugation of other faiths, cultures, and systems of government.

Content.
The documentary consists of original interviews, citations from Islamic texts, Islamic artwork, computer-animated maps, footage of Western leaders, and Islamic television broadcasts. Its tone is sober, methodical, and compelling. "

I would say no to that log man

Hello Cisco....CISCO?......is there anyone there?.......Cisco, can you hear me?.....ANYONE!...Cisc.......

You're all looking at this in the wrong way. Doesnt matter what you do to him now, he has ended the lives of these people for what ever purpose he claims.

The question is... how do we stop this sort of act from happening again?

Do we make an example of him?

Undertake a study of how his brain works so that we can test people for this sort of behaviour?

Or do we just treat the symptom and hope the problem goes away by itself.

log man said...
Hello Cisco....CISCO?......is there anyone there?.......Cisco, can you hear me?.....ANYONE!...Cisc.......

You rang!!!

Again, what is your point????

use him to test the shark shield's efficacy.