So much for the Hippocratic oath of the lawyer.

I think the lawyer's doing a decent job--he isn't making up @!$%# about how his client had nothing to do with the murders. If anything, American lawyers need to be more honest with the court.

I think the lawyer is doing what his client wants. Thats fair enough.

Hippocratic oath? Doctors take that oath, not lawyers...

Phenomenal112, you mistake doctor's with lawyers....Obviously, there is no comparison. Doctor's as a rule actually know something.

I hope the article isn't right when it says that if he is sane, he can get up to 21 years for this. I would fry him, rather than let him out in 20 years, but maybe that is just me. 20 years is not much incentive for me to trust the court system. If I was a relative of one of the victims, I would be outraged.

I'm normally not for the death penalty, except for cases like this where there's no doubt who the perp is...and also how heinous is crime was - murdering 77 people.

I don't think he even deserves a trial... put a bullet in the back of his head - end his suffering and that of his victims families - a win win situation for all.

After 21 years they decide whether they want to extend his sentence, and they could potentially extend it repeatedly until he dies.

I'd still say give him a trial though--everyone knows what he did, and after the show trial they should terminate him with extreme prejudice.

Different country, different rules!

The American legal system does not represent most of the rest of the world. In Europe the role of the defense attorney is mostly to ensure that all legal protections are afforded their clients. It is not to conjure up alternative possibilities based on nothing but an active imagination. His attorney is ensuring that he receives his opportunity to defend himself and is warning that this will be painful. He is not trying to spin it into something more. The concept of innocent until proven guilty in this country has been distorted by lawyers (and the judges they later become) to include any fantastical alternative they can think up and then sell it to juries.

A defense lawyer is severely hampered when he has to deal with the truth. Give him a little beak.

He may go for an insane plea, but I doubt it. He's probably boarder-line suicidal and decided to do something horrible to get a stage show. The lawyer is doing what he is told.

What will be interesting is how Norwegian courts handle this. They have a stereotype for being weak and easy on terrorists, and I'm sure this is one reason Breivik did what he did.

Mario: A lawyer does not have trouble dealing with the truth.....just telling the truth without spinning it into some fanciful tale of possibilities...........Like.......well it "could have happened this or that way"...........but never the real way it did happen

If he is found guilty can Norway ship him to Idaho or Arizona? Even though he would fit in nicely there I don't think we need any more of his kind.

I can't imagine how difficult this is for the families who not only have to relive this attrocity played out in court but at the same time see a remorseless maniac grandstand his actions. At least he should be locked away in a different room and not be present as there is no doubt he did it.

This animal is the epitome of pure evil. He wont even suffer death for his actions. People who are against the death penalty are part of the problem, whether in this country or abroad. Iv'e seen photos of people standing outside prisons protesting someone being put to death. I call them "Candle burners" because they light up their little candles during the protest. I have a solution. If any of these protesters are willing to take the murderers home and board and feed them, then they will be spared. Same deal would apply to those protesting the immigration of illegals back to Mexico.

I would personally enjoy torturing this piece of garbage for several years. I wish he had at least blown his own tiny little brain away.

I feel for all those poor kids and their families.

White supremacist and gun nut wrapped up in one package. Crazy? I don't really care, but I hope that he never is allowed human contact again.

"Not guilty"? I wonder how he's going to spin that?

He's a White Supremacist who says he does not recognize the authority of the Norwegian court.

He should be tried for treason and left on a iceberg in the North Sea.

If sane, he faces up to 21 years in prison;

Wow! Why such harsh punishments Norway? (Sarcasm) - Even if he spends the rest of his life in jail it will not be enough to pay for his horrific crimes. Man up Norway and off this piece of $h!t.

SPARTAN-501,

Please don't turn this into an anti American @!$%# parade. It has nothing to do with America except to think about what might have been different if the adult males had concealed carry weapons... Like in America...

If this man killed all those kids just to get his agenda on the news I'm going to loose it. Also ifhe gets 3 months per victim I will literally go blind and vomit from anger. Seriously what kind of backwards ass place would only give him 21 years?! I say we take him back out to that island he seems to like so much but this time we give the survivors the rifle and he gets to run around scared until a 13 year old girl blast his ass.

If he admitted to it then i say no trial needed, bring him to America w all our shifty lawyers and through him in the yard for 21 years.

Take note: this is what a dumb-ass who is also dangerous looks like.

WA-Moscow noted:

"Not only will he explain (his actions), but he will also say he regrets that he didn't go further," Geir Lippestad, Breivik's defense attorney, said before the trial began, according to Reuters.

The above human madness is an ancient echo.

Recall Baruch Goldstein? (Massacred 29 people praying in a Mosque in Hebron.)

The establishment was affected by the fact, widely reported in the Hebrew press but given little place in the foreign press, that within two days of the massacre the walls of religious neighborhoods of west Jerusalem (and to a lesser extent of many other religious neighborhoods) were covered by posters extolling Goldstein's virtues and complaining that he did not manage to kill more Arabs. Children of religious settlers who came to Jerusalem to demonstrate sported buttons for months after the massacre that were inscribed: "Dr. Goldstein cured Israel's ills." Numerous concerts of Jewish religious music and other events often developed into demonstrations of tribute to Goldstein. The Hebrew press reported these incidents of public tribute in copious detail. No major politician protested against such celebrations.

http://members.tripod.com/alabasters_archive/goldstein_significance.html

(I am not familiar with the source for this quote so take it as Internet.)

@something; through? yes our shi.ty lawyers will get him free !! a W might work minus other letters! RIP Johnny C....... Go too legal zoom to support anotherscumbag!!!

Only if those Norwegian teenagers had guns, this wouldn't have happened.

Everyone knows that he did it, I don't know why there is a trial. At this point this guy wan't all the attention, why give it to him. Just shoot him in the head and be done with it.

Norway doesn't have the death penalty, and he doesn't recognize the authority of the courts. Hmmm .... ship him to Texas .... problem solved.

I'm normally not for the death penalty, except for cases like this where there's no doubt who the perp is...and also how heinous is crime was - murdering 77 people.

I don't think he even deserves a trial... put a bullet in the back of his head - end his suffering and that of his victims families - a win win situation for all.

I too am not for the death penalty normally, but instead of shooting him, I'd suggest letting him loose in a large cage with a pack of hungry hyenas. Maybe start with 2, then increase the number. They eat their prey alive until there isn't enough of them left to stay alive, and that's what this guy deserves IMHO.

America is one of the very few countries in the world that still sanctions murder by the government. Murder is wrong no matter who is doing the killing, period. And yes I would still believe this way were it one of my own children who was murdered.

If you admit to killing 77 people YOUR GUILTY!!!! If you didn't your not guilty. You cannot be both and not reconizing the courts authority?? Was this guy born stupid or did he have to work at it?

His lawyer is duty bound to call the witnesses his client has listed , if not the court will remove the lawyer and appoint another; his lawyer is being supplied by the Government, his lawyer well knows his client is on a crusade in Norway, I do not believe he is insane(wish he was, it would be easier to accept that a person could do such a thing); Norway is a beautiful land, great people, good beer, food , not so good, except breakfast.

Lets put this animal on a small island, naked and unarmed and give the parents guns and let them hunt him down....GREAT reality TV!!!

Nothing like rewarding bad behavior. This guy's reward will be the circus and the public viewing of his "manifesto" in court.

It is too bad Norway doesn't have the death penalty. Contrary to what most people seem to think, the death penalty isn't for deterrence. And it certainly isn't punishment. (We all die, and a needle in the arm followed by going to "sleep"? Many, many people do not go out THAT easy and comfortably painless.) The death penalty is for, or should be, simply eliminating the vermin. Be done with it, that's all.

I've seen where this garbage has been described as a white supremacist in blogs. Has that been established elsewhere? I haven't seen it. The people this piece of sh!t killed were White. It appears this guy is against immigration in general, not distinctly anti-any particular ethnicity.

We really don't need to start misusing another term. "Racist" is the defacto misused term of the century it seems. We don't need another.

(Example: If a person is anti-illegal immigration, which is overwhelmingly Mexican here in the States, that person is labeled "racist." Never mind that "Mexican" isn't a race, it's a nationality.)

Phenom,

So much for the Hippocratic oath of the lawyer.

What are you talking about? Lawyers don't have a Hippocratic oath, you are thinking of doctors.

http://www.ibanet.org/Article/Detail.aspx?ArticleUid=127b51ae-36fe-44b6-9cf6-e9e4f4044e2b

@Realist - One person deliberately taking another person's life unlawfully and with malice - that's murder. A governmental authority putting a person to death as a punishment for murdering another person - that's justice.

A swift death penalty in all cases of murder would be a huge deterrent to would-be murderers.

Anders Behring Breivik raises his fist.....

A cold bloody killer and he "raised his fist" in the courtroom.

Now where have I seen folks raising their fists before......oh yeah........during protests, on the web......etc.

And some folks just eat that "provocative in your face attitude" completely up.

Politicians should be taking the Hippocratic Oath to demonstrate their hypocrisy..........:0

It will be interesting to discover more information about his family --- whether they were members of the Norwegian Nazi Party or the Nordland SS during WWII. This can't simply have sprung from nowhere.

Sounds logical rha..., except its nonsense. This is one very unusual case. The more people who routinely carry guns, the more likely EVERYONE is to be shot and killed. Witness the most heavily armed citizenry in the history of the world, the USA! Also, the nation with the highest murder rate in the industrialized world. Most heavily armed=most likely to be shot dead. When you carry a gun, you endanger everybody (including yourself, and your family). We'd all be much safer if we could duplicate Scandinavia's life style. Maybe if we stopped to think for a while, about how we got to be this irrational, instead of lecturing the rest of the world about how "exceptional" our way is, we'd have a happier, healthier, safer country, like say Norway!!!

A swift death penalty in all cases of murder would be a huge deterrent to would-be murderers.

The only thing the death penalty could eliminate is repeat offenders. It doesn't work as a deterrent for future criminals.

I'm with you, big ed, but I'm afraid there aren't a majority of Americans who would agree with us.

They consider the Scandinavian countries to be inferior, socialist places, despite the quality-of-life indexes that show them at the top.

Too many Americans think guns are the answer to everything.

Sad.

Jonathan, you are as dangerous as Breivik.

Here is the thing. People in the US judge the European justice system as lenient. As a matter of fact, the European system actually works. The US would be far better off examining the European system and instituting that type of system here. It would have to be a fresh start type program initiation, as the people locked up in prison now are already lost to the system. In Eurpe, the recidivism rates are much lower than in the US. The recidivism rates in the US are, on average, 4 times higher than the rest of the world. The US system is broken.

Now, dont think I am saying this guy doesnt deserve to fry. He is likely beyond repair and should be put down, but they dont do that there. I am just saying dont judge the whole system there because of their apparent leniency. Their system works and in most cases, is fair.

@ hellohowareyou,

"I hope the article isn't right when it says that if he is sane, he can get up to 21 years for this. I would fry him, rather than let him out in 20 years, but maybe that is just me. 20 years is not much incentive for me to trust the court system. If I was a relative of one of the victims, I would be outraged."

This is the crazy part. In their court system with the progressive agenda this man can be "rehabilitated" or he is allowed to make his "statement" to the world with little or no real consequence. 20 years from now he can leave prison his debt paid to his society and write books that instruct others in the ways of hatred with little hope of real justice for his victims. This is part of the problem his society has allowed to develop by their ideology and practice. This should be a warning to all civilizations about punishment fitting the crime. Judgement and punishment are a real struggle in this world. Blind hatred can not be allowed to flourish on either side of the political spectrum. "Evil flourishes when good men do nothing" what a reminder that is to all of us.

Sad case but one that is no different than allowing Islamics to behave the same way like the twin towers in New York.

Kaybeetoys says too many Americans think guns are the answer to everything. Not really. But outlawing guns will leave the citizenry at the mercy of thugs who will be the only ones to have them. Don't think so? I guarantee that I can go to most any street corner in the city where you live and buy an illegal firearm right now. As for this POS in Norway, I see where they give him a bulletproof vest to enter court. And as a former Green Beret in Nam, the thing that I noticed first is that it fails to protect his head.

Johnathan1982062 it really is nice to know you are such an expert and have met just about every human being in the world in that specific group so that you can make such a judgment call and we as americans protect your right to make such an idiotic statement. Kaybeetoys you hit the nail on the head hun these kind of people make a dangerous society. You always have a choice to not break bread with people that you find are not to your liking for whatever reason you may have you cant just go around knocking people off! Dburcar you screaming on deaf ears ive been telling people that forever they just dont get it!

P.S. If we do not cut off the heads of fascists (the raised fist U idiot) when they raise them, we will have to once again cut the head off from a fascist state later. This is fact.

It is unfortunate that we are going to see more and more of this sort of senseless killing as Islam continues to spread throughout the world. ALL cases of rape in 2010 in Norway were committed by Muslim immigrants. At the current rate of immigration and birth, Norway will be a a predominantly Muslim nation by 2025. Austria and Germany are on the same list. Islam is commanded to dominate the world. They practice an ideology of racism, sexism, hate and murder and procure it with their own "Taqiyya"( the practice of deceiving non-Muslims if it benefits Islam's Dominance). Though I do not agree with his methods, choice of Targets or all around ideology, it does not change the fact that the entire world is threatened and being overtaken by this horrific cult of terror.

I do agree with those calling this man evil. I cannot believe he only faces 21 years in prison if found sane. What is with Norway??? He should never see the light of day as a free man again! Unfortunately, we are heading towards those same European values. I shudder to think what this country will be like in 10 years, especially if Obama is reelected!

Linda: He has to do the maximum 21, can't be let out any earlier than that. Afterward, his request for parole/freedom is reviewed once every 5 years afterward. The judge at that hearing could (and most likely will) deny his request then. And again. And again. Until he's dead.

Alien Martian - With a quick google I found statistics that completely debunked you claim about rapes in Norway. There were more rapes committed by people identified as being of "Norwegian, Other European, or American" origin. That's from an official police report. Also, I find it hard to believe that a country (Germany) with 5.4% of it's population being Muslim is going to be anywhere near predominantly Islamic by 2025. I didn't bother looking at Austria, but would expect you're just as wrong there.

It also seems some people lack understanding of the 21 years sentence. As in most European countries, that will most likely be extended to have this lunatic put away for the rest of his life.

Linda,

You, along with several others, either failed to read further than the first few paragraphs, or have severe reading comprehension difficulty.

If found guilty and sane, Breivik faces a maximum 21-year sentence but could be held indefinitely if he is considered a continuing danger.

That means they might keep him for life.

And, really, i think indefinite imprisonment is far worse than death. If the state were to put him to death, he becomes a martyr, and will be remembered. If he disappears into prison, he will be a forgotten old man when he dies.

For instance, how many people really care any more about Charles Manson? Sure, he pops back into memory whenever he's up for parole, but then we see that he is just a sad, old man, trying to remain relevant.

Linda, can you give any example of what "European values" we are heading towards because of Obama?

Don't bother with talking points from Fox with no supporting substance.

Don't bother with the "wealth distribution" bromide, since all Obama's trying to do is to re-instate the income tax fairness we had under decades of past administrations of both parties.

Don't bother with the "whole government-run health care", or socialist labels, neither of which apply to Obamacare. Do you have some objection to making people who freeload off of guaranteed medical attention in case of an emergency pay for it like the rest of us?

If you really think that Obama and the people who support him think we should let criminals like this Norwegian P.O.S. off lightly, you've been drinking way too much Fox/Limbaugh Kool-aid.

77 people are dead because of this hate filled person in exchange for 21 years+ and a stage for him to spew his filth.

We do not have a punishment that fits this kind of crime.

Trex-4444224

Kaybeetoys says too many Americans think guns are the answer to everything. Not really. But outlawing guns will leave the citizenry at the mercy of thugs who will be the only ones to have them. Don't think so? I guarantee that I can go to most any street corner in the city where you live and buy an illegal firearm right now.

Then that's a problem for law enforcement, isn't it? The answer is not arming everyone to the teeth. Many break-ins occur because criminals are looking to steal the weapons of the gun nuts.

They won't find any in my house.

ABDELKADER HAMDAOUI should be banned.

I wish the news media would stop covering this. They're giving him what he wants.

Jonathan and Alien, you two are just as corrupt as the killer in Norway.

Why even have a defense lawyer? Only 21 years if guilty? How about 21 years for EACH victim? 1617 years seems more like it. Honestly, since there is no death penalty, this lawyer really doesn't have much to do. And knowing how plush prison accommodations can be in Europe. He's not really being punished. He's getting everything he wanted and the Media is too stupid to realize they are his free broadcast ticket. He's getting world-wide coverage for FREE. He never could have gotten his message to so many had he not broken the law.

Linda - if you don't like European values in your justice system then you'll have to do away with it entirely. Where do you think the founding fathers got their ideas from?

Rob80, the beauty of the internet is that I can find several sources that support the data that Norway will be predominantly Muslim by 2030. Some say 2040 and others say as soon as 2025. The fertility rate of the Muslim population in Norway is currently 8.17% That means the average Muslim couple in Norway has more than 8 children. The fertility rate of Norway, Germany, Austria and France are all below 2%, meaning the reproduction rate of the native people is too low to maintain, much less grow the population. (if two adults have 1 child that is a negative or declining rate) And the founding fathers got their ideas from...well themselves. Remember the lessons in school that taught you about the whole Independance from England thing. Even then, they were escaping a Monarchy, which is no longer the European basis of government. By "European Values" I believe she is refering to the "New European Values" that consist of Socialism, Fascism, Marxism and Communism. It is not debatable that the nation of Islam wants all Christians and Jews dead or converted. A quick read of the Quran will answer any questions you have about that, considering you are so apt to fact check. I would suggest starting with the 9th chapter. The fact remains is that the teach their children to hate Jews and Christians and that they are superior to them in everyway. They are taught as children that it is okay to lie (this practice is called Taqiyya) to non-Muslims as they are "less than human" anyway. The entire Agenda of Islam, as repeated in the Quran several times, is to conquer and dominate the world. They try this every couple hundred years or so, until some country or faction gets so fed up with their murder, rape, theft and lies that they amass an army and wipe them down to more managable levels. Ghengis Kahn watched his entire village and parents get murdered by Muslims when he was about 10. He grew up and consulted heads of all religions for counsel, including Bhuddist, Jewish, Christian, Hindu. But not Muslim. He succeeded in wiping out SO Many Muslims that the population of Iran did not reach similar levels of population density until the mid 1980's! The Crusades were raised in response to the Islamic invasion of France, Italy, Germany and more. The Crusaders were successful in pushing them back to the desert from whence they came. The problem now is that we have bleeding heart, ignorant wastes of pathetic shriveling flesh such as yourself that don't want to hurt peoples feelings. The Proud Courageous Hero of the past is a quickly dieing breed. Unfortunately, there is not enough of us left to fight them this time and I fear the world is doomed. Especially considering we are fighting, not only them, but you whining liberal morons as well. Here's a question, If terrorists are considered "Conservative Muslim Extremists" and "Conservatives" are "Right Wingers" and this guy is a "Right Wing Extremist" how the hell is that possible? Oh yeah, its because liberals are idiots and attach the word "Right" or "Conservative" to anything involving extremism.

Kaybeetoys wrote:

"Many break-ins occur because criminals are looking to steal the weapons of the gun nuts.

They won't find any in my house."

I hope it never happens to you. Because you would be dead. Most of the time they don't need to find guns. They are already armed. It has happened to me. They broke in a back sliding door and shot my dog. Then proceeded into the house. Their problem was I am much better trained than they were. My family is safe and one of the "gentlemen" is now dead. The other is in prison.

Alien Martian - again, hyperbole that has been debunked many times. The birth rate of muslims in European countries has dropped over the years for a start. I find it interesting that it started with muslims taking over in 2050, then it becomes more serious and it's 2040, then 2030. Now 2025. It's approaching ever faster, must do something! People who post the nonsense you do are partly responsible for lunatics like Breivik, because you do it only to inflame.

By the way, I'm english. I didn't learn about the founding fathers at school. I have however, read enough to know that they were huge admirers of the Magna Carta, which is one of the first documents that established a rule of law and justice for every man. Fairly nice principle that, isn't it. I think the founding fathers were pretty great people who did many great things, but the idea they came up with everything by themselves and were not influenced by anybody else, or anything that had already passed is utterly ridiculous. As they say, no man is an island.

The more people who routinely carry guns, the more likely EVERYONE is to be shot and killed. Witness the most heavily armed citizenry in the history of the world, the USA! Also, the nation with the highest murder rate in the industrialized world. Most heavily armed=most likely to be shot dead. When you carry a gun, you endanger everybody (including yourself, and your family).

I'm sorry Ed. The reason we have such a high crime rate is the "What's mine is mine and what's your's was obtained unfairly and should be mine too." attitude in the US. Until that changes the crime rate will stay the same only the choice of weapons may possibly change.

Also I'm calling BS on the whole "the more guns the more likely everyone is to be shot and killed." comment. You are just going to have to prove that one to me using a reputable study.

Gneisenau

Whilst I agree with you, that it’s more a cultural and social issue that results in high crime and that guns are just a weapon of choice, I do think that there is a potential for increased shootings with more people having guns, if not just for the simple math (more angry people + more guns = more shootings) but also due to a few other factors like panic.

@Big Ed - is your comment addressed to me? I'm not sure because I didn't say anything about people carrying guns. I don't believe in carrying guns. My reference was to the death penalty carried out by a governmental authority.

@Some Guy - Yes a swift death penalty is most certainly a deterrent against murder.

“And so the great democracies triumphed, and were able to resume the follies that had nearly cost them their life.” Sir Winston Churchill

(Had someone in Germany brave enough to carry this out back in 1939 against Nazism, WWII would have been avoided. This hero did what had to be done, he set an example, nipping the danger of Islamism though somewhat late in the bud, getting rid of wahhabism inspired modern day equivalent of Quislings and Hitler Youth movement (Hitlerjugend and Young Pioneers) of Norway National Socialist Labour Party)

If we don't learn from history, which most Americans have no knowledge of, we are certainly doomed to repeat the horror of it. It is sad and deplorable that people are so dismissive of reality, preferring lies and outrage of moral indignations that give them pleasure and satisfaction rather than truth that hurts. We see and believe in things as we would like them to be on face value and not what they really are beneath the sensational façade.

So someone goes out and kills a whole bunch of people, based on the premise that he doesn't like multiculturism and wants Norway to be a purer country and somehow he's the good guy and not the person who is acting like the Nazi's?

Lay off the drugs please!

@ Losmuertos -

Whilst I agree with you, that it’s more a cultural and social issue that results in high crime and that guns are just a weapon of choice, I do think that there is a potential for increased shootings with more people having guns, if not just for the simple math (more angry people + more guns = more shootings) but also due to a few other factors like panic.

I can see your point. More anything = more chances of something happening. But I think it sets a horrible precedence to give up any freedoms for perceived security. In cases like this I do believe the the perceived security it brings is much less than any actual security and the actual security is outweighed by the value of the rights we are being asked to dispense with.

Gneisenau

Well personally I’m not against guns (although I do have to question the decisions regarding some of the guns people choose to own as I see them as a tad excessive) but I would ask how is owning guns a freedom? The reason I ask is because I live in the UK which has very strict gun laws and yet if you asked the vast majority of our population would consider ourselves as free (if not freer)as Americans so how does that work?

Ps as for question some people gun choices that because I fail to see the need for a civilian to privately own “military style” weapons (so things like the AR15) as again that does seem a bit excessive even for personal defence.

Trex,

Good job! Too bad you didn't put a bullet in both of them. I'm with you on taking out the animals when they break into your home. As a retired soldier, I am a weapons person. If I don't have a weapon in my home to protect may family with, I feel like a sheep waiting to be culled.

Kaybeetoys, and others like her:

As far as the anti-gun crowd. Your choice. Hope things work out okay for you. However, if it doesn't, it will be too late to change your mind. And, No. I am not a "gun" nut. I am a "rights" nut. I want the right to possess a weapon. I don't demand that you own one. I don't demand my neighbor watch the same TV shows I watch, or listen to the same music, or eat the same food. But I see someone breaking into their home, I will call a cop. If they then come to my house (the criminals) and break in, I'll empty every round in my weapon to make sure they don't do it again. I'll also attend my neighbor's funeral.

@ Los -

Well personally I’m not against guns (although I do have to question the decisions regarding some of the guns people choose to own as I see them as a tad excessive) but I would ask how is owning guns a freedom? The reason I ask is because I live in the UK which has very strict gun laws and yet if you asked the vast majority of our population would consider ourselves as free (if not freer)as Americans so how does that work?

Well for us here in the US that right is specifically spelled out in our constitution. It seems to me that when someone tells you that you have a specific right and then someone else tells you that you can't practice that right then you are less free. Any time a government tries to curtail my rights - specifically one spelled out in that country's constitution then that government is making you less free.

@ Los

I didn't mention in my post above that my point goes far beyond our right to possess guns. The US government seems to have taken great strides in curtailing freedoms we citizens have enjoyed for 200 years. They pass laws trying to restrict our possession of guns, they pass laws making it easier to search our property. They pass laws making it easier to hold us without trial and laws that make it easier to tap our phones. We are now treated as criminals at our airports. Our government doesn't trust us as individuals. We are treated as though they expect us to commit crimes as the norm - not as the exception.

I don't feel all that free anymore.

Gneisenau

Hey fair enough, like I said I’m more middle of the road on the gun ownership issue, and yes I can see your point too my only response to it is to ask another question (maybe one you may wish to ask others in your shoes) that being “if the government doesn’t trust its citizens? They why should its citizens trust their government”

Losmuertos - Good question and one I don't understand either other than to say I don't trust the government. I certainly can't trust our government to look out for our interests. I also can't figure out why people trust the government to take care of them.

Gneisenau

When it comes to democratic governments I think the point is that we are supposed to trust them to work in our collective interests that they are there to serve the nation first and foremost, the nation of course being the people (after all I don’t thing buildings or borders make a nation) in exchange for this we pay taxes and work for the upkeep of said nation and government, now when the government (so the people we elect to represent and serve us) do not trust us then why should we trust them? Why should we continuing working and paying for the upkeep of the government and nation when it’s leaders do not trust the people?

Granted I maybe being a little naive/idealistic, and maybe even down right seditious but I think it’s a valid question

I suppose the allies were acting like nazi's for wanting to bring down the 3rd Reich, I mean, couldn't they learn to coexist with the Nazi's? Oh and the Jews, I suppose, were just as to blame because they didn't go willingly enough to the death chambers. Robo's circular logic is not only circular, but twisted. The FACT is that these people (Muslims) teach hatred and will not rest until world domination is achieved. They are, essentially, the BORG of the modern world and you people are so immersed in fuzzy "multi-culturalism" that you will not see it until AFTER they have removed your head. MANY, MANY times in history, the nation of Islam has repeated this push outward from their holy desert and attempted to take over lands that were not there own. You people really need to research the history of Islam and then you can easily predict its future. WHY did Columbus sail the ocean blue? to find a new trade route to the India, right? Why did they need a new trade route? What was the very first American foreign war? Why did the US establish the Marine Corps? What happened to the beautiful polished white casing stones on the Pyramids in Giza? I could go on and on. Islam is not "just another religion" or a culture that needs to be respected. They are NOT a RACE! So, Banning someone for being "RACIST" is ridiculous. My RACE is not Atheist or Catholic or Baptist or Hindu, If I want to put up a sign at my business that says "NO SATANISTS ALLOWED" Is that racist? NO! You people are Ignorant and I beg you to LEARN! know your sources! NEARLY ALL books, TV stations, and websites have a biased slant one way or the other. Learn ONLY THE FACTS and you will understand what we are facing in the very near future.

Additionally, Losmuertos, America exists today because citizens had weapons and tactics equal to or better than the force that was trying to subdue them. By the original intent of the US Constitution, I should be able and allowed to own a fleet of tanks, missile launchers and fully loaded black hawk helicopters. The Idea and original intent behind the constitution is to allow for the people to rise up and replace a tyrannical government, if needed, and not simply sit back and trust that they will uphold what is most valuable, ethical and constitutional. In Fact, I believe our forefathers would be pushing for a militia to overthrow our current mockery of a government, if they were here today. By the way, America is not a Democracy. We are a Republic. And If being arrested for singing "Turning Japanese" in a pub and inadvertently upsetting an Asian couple, being forced to purchase TV watching licenses and highly taxed to lavishly support a figure-head family that has no real purpose other than to make you look ignorant to the rest of the world is "more free", then I suppose you got me there. Not to mention your posted "Shari'A controlled zones" where anything Islam goes. Doesn't matter if it stands in opposition to your own laws. Your authorities just look the other way, all in the name of "tolerance". Rape, murder, domestic abuse...you name it. But, in a few years, when your praying eastward five times a day and you hear rumors about the battle successes of the American Anti-Islamic Resistance and how we have totally irradicated Islam from most of our southern states, know that it's me and people like me, planning to come liberate your lilly asses.

AlienMartian

What are you babbling about? Your last post (to me) reads like an ill-informed rant, after all the money for a TV licence isn’t used to support the Royal family it’s used to pay for the BBC (which is one of the world’s most highly acclaimed Media outlets) furthermore tolerance of Islam doesn’t equate to tolerance of Sharia, as for not doing anything about the crimes committed under Sharia well it’s kind of hard under our present legal system to arrest people for a crime if the crime doesn’t get reported.

Finally you saving us from it all is a joke, do you honestly think that people who fought from the start against Hitler and who fought a civil war over religious laws are going to be bowing 5 times a day? Because that is one of the dumbest things I ever heard.

But hey you keep living the “saving the world” dream yeah

If put in Hitler's position, this guy might have caused even more suffering. Hitler focused on killing Jews, Breivik intended to kill everyone but himself.

I agree. The article writer hones in on just one aspect of Breivik's agenda:

Anti-Islam militant Anders Behring Breivik

Obviously it was a lot broader than that. If Muslims were his obsession then he could have bombed a large mosque and/or shot up a large gathering of Muslims. Instead, he targets the ruling party headquarters and youth camp, killing scores of ethnic Norwegians.

Personally, i think he just enjoyed killing people and slapped together that rambling manifesto just to make himself and his crimes seem grander and more meaningful to "history."

Except Hitler actually allied with the Muslims, and hated jews. This guy proclaims to be anti Muslim.... but I get your point.

The absurdity and stupidity of his action is that most of the people he killed were children that could definitely be classified as "innocent victims." And it is likely that very few, if any, of them were Muslims.

If anything, this demonstrates a greater need for multi-culturalism so that Muslims and non-Muslims can learn to work together.

Adam said:

If Muslims were his obsession then he could have bombed a large mosque and/or shot up a large gathering of Muslims. Instead, he targets the ruling party headquarters and youth camp, killing scores of ethnic Norwegians.

He targets the ruling party because they are the ones who let the Muslim immigrants in. It's not unlike some of the anti-immigration furor that's going on over here in America now. I've seen comments on Newsvine like 'all Muslims should be rounded up and deported immediately to a Middle Eastern country because they are ALL evil' and 'the President is advancing his Muslim agenda by not rounding up all Muslims and deporting them all.'

Not all Muslims are middle Eastern, there are black Muslims, white Muslims, Muslims of every other shape, color and size out there and they aren't all blowing up buildings and shooting innocents. If we were (as some Americans believe) to round up all Muslims and deport them all, we'd be rounding up and deporting a lot of US Citizens. And really, if we target all Muslims like that, then how would we be any different from Hitler, who rounded up and committed genocide on a group of people simply for what they believed when the greater part of them did nothing wrong? How would that make us any different from Nazi Germany?

Think about it; the SS in Nazi Germany were originally called 'Saal-Schutz'--Home Protection. We now have Homeland Security.

Those who had no papers or who the government arbitrarily decided 'didn't belong' with the rest of the population were shipped to German deportation camps. Now in America, those with no documents (I was one; undocumented/stateless because I was abandoned as an infant at an international orphanage with no birth certificate or other paperwork and USCIS lost my adoption paper) and shipped me off to an American deportation camp.

Papers please + no papers=life in deportation. Since there was nowhere to deport me because I was undocumented/stateless, I was told I would spend the rest of my life in deportation unless I could provide the document they wanted (note: I was never told I was adopted before Dad and Mom passed away in a car accident.)

How different are we really from Nazi Germany? Before we start calling other countries' psychos 'Hitlers' maybe we should open our eyes and take a good long look at where our own country is heading.

Amazing. When a Muslim kills someone that is proof positive that all Muslims are terrorists and Islam is a hate-filled religion. When a Christian kills 77 people because he is anti-Islamic people try to downplay it.

Adam, this guy's hate for Muslims wasn't one aspect of his agenda, it was the driving force behind his whole rampage. Yet somehow you deny that and claim he was using it as a cover story. I bet if he was Muslim you wouldn't think twice about questioning his motive. Hypocritical people like you make me @!$%#ing sick.

Adam: No. He wanted to "wake up" the people responsible for letting all the immigrants into his country to the point they completely corrupted the Norwegian culture. No better way (in his mind) than to target the family members of the people (government officials) letting all the muslims in. You can let immigrants in to a certain extent, but when they ruin the country you love; well, there goes the neighborhood.

His manifesto should be removed and or deleted so as not to give other radicals the incentive to follow his lead and ideology. His sentence of 21 years should at least be two counts one for each of his attacks. He is clearly seeking self martyrdom to promote his self proclaimed extremist cause.

@ Josh47 If im not mistaken you have your right and left confused, left wing wants less goverment control.

Just sayin.

America in its current state is the perfect breeding ground for fascism and we're already seeing some fascist tendencies and policies emerging. And how exactly am I "enabling muslim terrorism" by pointing out the hypocrisy of people's reactions to this sort of stuff?

Yeah, this guy didn't discriminate like Hitler, he was more liberal in his killing spree.

@Josh47

Taken from wiki;

Traditionally, the Left includes progressives, social liberals, social democrats, socialists, communists and anarchists. Thus less goverment.

The Right includes conservatives, reactionaries, capitalists, monarchists, nationalists and fascists. Only If the King says so.

No Hangon, I'm pretty sure Josh had it right on left v. right, at least in the US.

I think he is a bit confused on what enables Muslim terrorism. Comparing the current US to the Nazis is not in any way supporting terrorism. It is pointing out that it is easy to go from claims of protection, to efforts at elimination. Both sides of the aisle are guilty of actions that errode our freedoms, but some of the right's actions are the scariest to me.

oh well...

@Hangon1minute left = more government control, right = less... Like you probably are I am a little left of center but far left is the ideal where the government is in control of the wealth distribution through welfare programs... i.e. tax the rich feed the poor. Nobel as it might sound it is a form of government control. Just and fyi far left = communism, far right is anarchy/fascism. Just goes to show being too far one way or another can be bad.

As far as this story goes... I hate to say it but I can kind of see his motives and while I despise his methods and think he should pay for his crimes, a homogeneous society is a happy society. Differences of morals, values, and ideals is what typically lead to crime, civil unrest, war... Using the US as an example if everybody agreed on abortion, there would be no clinic bombings (they either wouldn't exists, or would be welcomed). The problem with modern immigration is for every decent person wanting to better their life, there is one wanting to commit crime, scam the system, or is otherwise a dreg of society. In the end it gives the good people a bad name.

@ papag: you write:

Amazing. When a Muslim kills someone that is proof positive that all Muslims are terrorists and Islam is a hate-filled religion. When a Christian kills 77 people because he is anti-Islamic people try to downplay it.

I didn't "downplay it." I said that it was more complicated and broad-based than a simplistic "anti-Muslim" motivation. I attribute his evil more to psychosis, that he enjoyed killing. You're the one who is bringing Christianity into it. Breivik didn't go to church, he didn't pray, and he didn't read the Bible. Yet you call him a Christian. Why? He wasn't. He isn't. Who is the biased one? YOU.

Adam, this guy's hate for Muslims wasn't one aspect of his agenda, it was the driving force behind his whole rampage

So you read his whole 1500 page "manifesto?" The one where he borrows, begs, and steals from everyone up to and including the Unabomber. I doubt you did.

. Yet somehow you deny that and claim he was using it as a cover story. I bet if he was Muslim you wouldn't think twice about questioning his motive.

I didn't deny it. I said that in my opinion it was PART of his mindset, not the whole psychosis by a long shot. Maybe if you would start reading more carefully you wouldn't be so quick to smear. But apparently that is part of YOUR agenda.

Hypocritical people like you make me @!$%#ing sick.

Propagandistic smear-meisters like you make the Vine a nastier place.

Adam: No. He wanted to "wake up" the people responsible for letting all the immigrants into his country to the point they completely corrupted the Norwegian culture. No better way (in his mind) than to target the family members of the people (government officials) letting all the muslims in. You can let immigrants in to a certain extent, but when they ruin the country you love; well, there goes the neighborhood.

@ Jeanette, yes that was definitely part of it. Why does that automatically disprove what I added about his seeming enjoyment of killing? Why can't it be both? I think he really enjoyed his hunting expeditition on that island, killing those people. Why do I think that? Because numerous eyewitness reports said that he was often LAUGHING while he was shooting people dead. That seriously tells me that the guy was a psychotic nut-job who veneered his psychological disease with political cover and "justifications" in order to make his deed seem heroic and grandiose.

You can let immigrants in to a certain extent, but when they ruin the country you love; well, there goes the neighborhood.

Jeanette, I hope this was sarcasm. The U.S. is a country made up almost entirely of immigrants. The natives were treated horribly when our ancestors colonized this country.

Why does one group of people draw a line around a piece of land and then get to exclude others? We all share this Earth.

Perhaps the rate of immigration in Europe has been too rapid, or poorly handled in terms of helping immigrants to assimilate while helping the residents to accept immigrants. It's a situation that occurs everywhere, all over the world. It's an issue that has been poorly addressed. There is no good reason to blame it all on the immigrants who are only trying to make a better life for themselves.

Papag again:

America in its current state is the perfect breeding ground for fascism and we're already seeing some fascist tendencies and policies emerging. And how exactly am I "enabling muslim terrorism" by pointing out the hypocrisy of people's reactions to this sort of stuff?

But of course it never occurs to papag that his own reactions strike others as shrill and hypocritical. Maybe that's a "breeding ground for fascism" too, throwing around accusations and intimations against others who simply have a different opinion about something.

Papag: it's clear you have no idea what so ever what "fascist tendencies" are in your own country or anyone else's. Hate is hate...yours doesn't look any prettier because you think you hate the right people.

Aw crud. Hitler's name has been invoked again. Time to close this thread.

@ Rab1d78 - exactly, I'm not sure why some people refuse to verify information themselves.

@ Hangon1minute - Taken from wiki??? Great source buddy... (sarcasm intended). BTW, capitalism is what made America strong; we are weakened by the socialists (just my 2 cents).

@ papag-3094648 - You are enabling by comparing a lone psychopath to a group that acts in the name of a specific religion. Your intent is to lessen the relation of the Muslim religion to the extremist groups, by using outright lies and comparisons with other terrible acts. ...Not that you were actually looking for actual insight...

The seemingly total ignorance of the American people about the true differences between liberal and conservative, right wing and left wing and between fascist and socialist is utterly breathtaking. It represents the inability of our society to teach the true and objective differences between political extremes.

@Adam44: how in the world does your opinion of what makes this guy tick matter? Unless you've got your PhD and have psychoanalyzed him you're in no position to speculate on his inner workings.

The rest of your comment doesn't even deserve dignifying. I am in no way biased. I am against the problems caused in the world by ALL religions, and it seems to cause most of them. Point is you can't deny there is a difference in reactions when a Muslim is doing the killing. Additionally, he is a self-proclaimed Christian, albeit not a fundamentalist one. You lose all credibility when you write something so blatantly false.

www.timesunion.com/news/article/Is-Anders-Breivik-a-Christian-terrorist-1624540.php

@AP-1414066: right now in America anti-liberal and anti-leftist rhetoric is the norm; you have a dysfunctional government unable to cope with a catastrophe using traditional means and as a result people are being pushed to the political fringes; and by constantly pointing the finger at 'Islamic terrorists' you have a common enemy to direct your hatred towards and blame for your problems. Sounds like a breeding ground for fascism to me. Legislation that legalizes the stripping away of individual liberties also sounds unequivocally fascist. What exactly is it that I don't understand?

@ Adam44: how in the world does your opinion of what makes this guy tick matter?

Papag, How does your opinion of my opinion matter?

Unless you've got your PhD and have psychoanalyzed him you're in no position to speculate on his inner workings.

And you're in no position to judge what position I have, but of course you think you know everything.

Around and around in circles with go. Arguing with you any more is a waste of time. p.s. linking to someone else's opinion is not a substitute for making a decent argument yourself. in fact it suggests that you can't adequately do so yourself.

Bye.

@ Adam44 - ditto to your last comment to papag.

Multiculturalism is not about integration but about elevation of one culture above another. Since multiculturalism started in the United States I have witnessed a backlash of racism not a melting pot society I witnessed as a kid in the 60's in California. While there will always be tension between the races using an elevation of one culture over the other does not work. Read or listen to Martin Luther King's speech "I have a dream" and you will find the answer. It is through integration into the ideal that we are all American's and have equal rights guaranteed by the Constitution. If we truly live that way the results will speak for themselves.

American Journal of Medicine reported several years ago a study on the effect of television on the murder rate. If you are brave enough read it and look at the increase in murder rates in Canada (92% increase) with strong gun laws and United States (93% increase) with lax gun laws and realize there was an increase due to the influence of television regardless of guns or not. The same study followed white on white murders in South African after the introduction of television in the 1970's and the murder rate increased by 130%. It is no accident that we are affected more by what we view than the access to guns.

"Papag, How does your opinion of my opinion matter?"

That's your retort? Good move to leave the argument when that's all you've got left. What I did was called linking a source, one that in fact takes its information and quotes from the very manifesto you cited in your comment. Very different from someone's opinion. 'Bye' is right.

The Danish people (good old Vikings) are the only Scandinavians honest enough to put up a fight, unlike the feeble-minded Norwegian and Swedish who are easily susceptible to their Stockholm Syndrome.

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/05/20/goodbye-sweden/

Josh47 said:

Amanda-2017567 & papag-3094648

You are the people who enable Muslim terrorism. Comparing America today to the Nazi's??? I agree that America is slowly losing its freedoms, but not from the conservatives, but from the liberals.

What does it matter who (conservatives, liberals, left, right, etc.) is taking our rights away? The important thing is that they ARE being taken away. I must admit to some puzzlement; how was my post enabling Muslim terrorism?

Adam 44 said:

I didn't "downplay it." I said that it was more complicated and broad-based than a simplistic "anti-Muslim" motivation. I attribute his evil more to psychosis, that he enjoyed killing. You're the one who is bringing Christianity into it. Breivik didn't go to church, he didn't pray, and he didn't read the Bible. Yet you call him a Christian. Why? He wasn't. He isn't.

It's what you do that matters, not whose name you do it in.

If a Satanist saves a baby stroller from rolling off a sidewalk and being hit by a car, is the baby's life somehow worth less because it was a Satanist who saved it and not a Christian? If a nurse who helps comfort child cancer patients is a Muslim, does that somehow reduce the value of the comfort offered a child? If a Muslim rescues a bag with a litter of puppies before they drown in a river, is their good deed somehow worth less because of what they believe?

Breivik is a psycho because he blew up a building and gunned down innocent children. Despite his having identified himself as Christian, this has nothing to do with that. It doesn't matter what color he is, or what he believes or what his victims believed. He was, when you strip the layers of the onion down to the core, a sick individual who enjoyed gunning down children. Putting all religious and political ideation aside, he is a killer, pure and simple, and deserves to pay the price for what he has done.

Diolki said:

I think he is a bit confused on what enables Muslim terrorism. Comparing the current US to the Nazis is not in any way supporting terrorism. It is pointing out that it is easy to go from claims of protection, to efforts at elimination.

Papag said:

...by constantly pointing the finger at 'Islamic terrorists' you have a common enemy to direct your hatred towards and blame for your problems. Sounds like a breeding ground for fascism to me. Legislation that legalizes the stripping away of individual liberties also sounds unequivocally fascist.

The Germans painted the Jews as subhumans and lesser beings, simply by making the distinction to what they believed. And the entire premise of the SS was , as their original name stated, 'Home Protection. Then as the war went on they changed their name to the now-familiar Schutz-Staffen--'Protection Corps'. Then when the Aryan 'Master Race' became popular, suddenly other races, other political ides and different ways of thinking became 'dangerous' to the Germans.

If you look at what has been happening in our country since 9/11, we're heading down the same path Germany went down in the late 30's. Because a few individuals of a particular faith committed a terrorist act, suddenly all practitioners of that faith are vilified and demonized by the general public. Homeland Security watches mosques and other places of prayer for these believers of different faith. Recent passage of bills like the NDAA for FY2012 with its clause that says any non-USC (US Citizen) suspected of terrorism can be detained by our military until the War on Terror is over strips a basic right to liberty from those accused. Then you pair it with legislation like the upcoming Enemy Expatriation Act, which will give the government the right to strip citizenship from anyone who could potentially pose a threat to the US or its allies' interests, you can see how easy it is to go from protection to oppression.

Breivik looks like he has a nice big forehead, should accommodate a .44 slug very nicely.

Amanda, nice post.

Josh, it is the right (conservatives Christians) were are taking away our rights. Not the liberals. So please just stop listening to the people you are listening to and read and think before you post.

So, I guess the "liberals" are allowed to voice their opinion, but when someone calls them on it they get mad and want to erase all opposition. That's fine, I guess anytime someone says what I'm doing is wrong, I can call it Inflammatory as they are not agreeing with me (Amanda-2017567 & papag-3094648)... The truth hurts.

@slightlyold: Does taking a point I made earlier and repeating it to me sound intelligent to you? It doesn't to me. I bet you get all your news from John Stewart!!! You guys are getting way off subject, I'm sure there are plenty of other forums you can blast anti-American agendas on.

Josh said:

So, I guess the "liberals" are allowed to voice their opinion, but when someone calls them on it they get mad and want to erase all opposition. That's fine, I guess anytime someone says what I'm doing is wrong, I can call it Inflammatory as they are not agreeing with me (Amanda-2017567 & papag-3094648)... The truth hurts.

I've never considered myself liberal or conservative. I'm just me. I'm also open to different interpretations of known facts and new facts. I try to keep an open mind about everything. I never said I wanted to 'erase all opposition'--I enjoy discussing different points of view. One of the guiding tenets of my faith says 'there is no one true way'. I believe you have some valid points according to your worldview--I simply don't share them because my worldview is considerably different from yours, due to the fact that the life experiences that shaped me are entirely different than the ones that shaped you.

And I've never understood what 'inflammatory' on the little drop down menu was for. I've flagged as no value one-line comments like 'you're an idiot' because there was no value to it but never when someone had a point to make. While I may not believe a given comment has value, someone else did and took the time to type that comment and so that deserves respect and an open mind.

I'm not agreeing with you... and I'm not disagreeing with you. I still don't understand what it was about my initial post that made you think I was 'enabling' a terrorist--actually, by Homeland Security's definition, I am a terrorist--a threat to domestic security.

I have a sword collection at home (weapons stockpile)

I'm an active member of my municipality's Anti Animal Cruelty Task Force (animal rights activist)

I have more than 7 days worth of food in my house (food stockpile)

I do check 'alternate media' sites for differing viewpoints on the news-topic-of-the-moment (alternative media)

I do use email to encourage others to speak out about issues (technology-enabled social and political activism)

I'm a practicing pagan and as such I do have ties in the pagan community, and so I do know a couple of Odinists--those who still worship the Norse God Odin--they were placed on Homeland Security's terrorist list because, of course, Odinists are blowing up buildings left and right in the name of the AllFather Odin (in between re-enactments and Dungeons and Dragons matches.)

So yes, I'm probably on some watch list somewhere. Not to mention which, after Immigration gave me a naturalization certificate when they released me from the deportation camp in TX, they told me that if my name comes up in front of them gin fr any reason, they can strip my naturalization status and place me back deportation--and this time it will be for the rest of my life so yes, they are watching me.

But still don't know how my original post 'enables' Muslim terrorists.

Amanda –

You also have valid points, and I agree that the government is grabbing too much power, to the point of violating citizen rights, and it is getting worse.

What I disagree with is your first statement (and of course more than a few of your views on the world). "He targets the ruling party because they are the ones who let the Muslim immigrants in. It's not unlike some of the anti-immigration furor that's going on over here in America now"

This compares Americans to the acts of Breivik, and implies that we are on the verge of targeting Muslims in the same manner. The next leap of logic is that people will be afraid of being branded "bigot" and embrace all Muslims. The fact is, the largest group, from whom we call terrorists, is Muslim radicals. Not all Muslims are violent; in fact the majorities probably disapprove of the actions of the terrorists.

We all make assumptions based on our life experiences. That is how you avoid walking off of a cliff, how you know to not touch a burning stove, etc. It is a precarious edge we walk when dealing with specific cultures and "assumptions". Of course it can lead into negative stereotypes, but we have to make logical assumptions based on past actions, even when they are unpopular. It is a moral obligation to avoid saying a whole group is the same as a single individual.

The enabling I was referring to is how your comments seemed to be aimed at making people ashamed of making unpopular logical assumptions. This is natural. You wouldn't go alone to a dinner with a group of practicing cannibals would you? (I know, not exactly the same)

I know of personal accounts of Muslims in my local area celebrating 9/11 the day after it happened, as well as seen on TV many Islamic countries celebrating. I also have friends who practice Islam, but I still disagree with it at it's core. I believe it is intolerant and teaches violence against innocents. My opinion.

This country was founded on freedom of religion, and our constitution is there to protect our individual rights from any man or government. Hopefully it doesn't get eroded away. Stay open minded, and I'll do the same.

Josh said:

What I disagree with is your first statement (and of course more than a few of your views on the world). "He targets the ruling party because they are the ones who let the Muslim immigrants in. It's not unlike some of the anti-immigration furor that's going on over here in America now" This compares Americans to the acts of Breivik, and implies that we are on the verge of targeting Muslims in the same manner.

America isn't targeting Muslims, we're targeting those who don't have papers in much the same way the Germans targeted those who didn't have papers. And yes, I can say that because I've expereinced it firsthand, myself, both in the deportation camp and outside of it and I continue to deal with it. You don't know how hard it is to get a job--I am required to tell every employer I have (from now till the end of my life) that I was a former undocumented. I have a squeaky clean background check because I've never been arrested but I have a three year prison record with ICE. You know how many employers don't even want to hear anything after that? America largely doesn't understand the difference between undocumented and illegal, and the majority of you don't want to know. Now that the undocumented and illegal are being deported in record numbers, and even more legal citizens and residents are self-deporting because of the anti-immigrant furor going on, ICE is getting more and more anal in their requirements just to try and keep their numbers up and their budget growing.

My coworker's mother was adopted from Germany in 1945 as an infant. Immigration officials never told her parents at the time that citizenship wasn't automatic with adoption. 60 + years later, early in December 2011 they finally found out their mistake. Instead of apologizing and giving her a chance to fix the paperwork mistake, they seized her house, car and bank account as civil asset forfeiture and deported her to Germany two days before Christmas without ever giving her a trial, a hearing, a lawyer. She has to stay over there for ten years before her son--my coworker--can apply for her to come back. He hopes she will be back in time for them to celebrate her eightieth birthday. And in the meantime my coworker lost everything and is now homeless because he was living with her at the time to help her out while she was undergoing cancer treatments.

That's what I meant by 'Papers, please'.

We all make assumptions based on our life experiences. That is how you avoid walking off of a cliff, how you know to not touch a burning stove, etc. It is a precarious edge we walk when dealing with specific cultures and "assumptions". Of course it can lead into negative stereotypes, but we have to make logical assumptions based on past actions, even when they are unpopular. It is a moral obligation to avoid saying a whole group is the same as a single individual.

My life experiences with Homeland Security has led me to believe some unpopular assumptions. They are behind most of the anti-immigration rhetoric out there because that's how they are getting theor money. DHS asks Congress for $50k per year for every person they detain. They pay private prisons only $30k a year to house, feed, and clothe the illegals and the undocumented, many of whom are, like I was, stuck--couldn't be deported because there was nowhere to send me, but they wouldn't let me go because they lost my adoption paper (even though I had a legal BC, DL, and SS card.) So DHS keeps the extra $20k. In 2002 their budget was $49 million; in 2011 their budget was $98 billion, and the number of detainees has skyrocketed--before 9/11 there were roughly 8,000 immigration detainees and they were all illegal, referred through the prison system. In 2011, they now haveenough budgeted for 35,000 immigration detainees, half undocumented, half illegal.

The enabling I was referring to is how your comments seemed to be aimed at making people ashamed of making unpopular logical assumptions.

I'm assuming the focus of your paragraph here is this original comment from me, so I'll dissect what I said point bypoint:

Not all Muslims are middle Eastern, there are black Muslims, white Muslims, Muslims of every other shape, color and size out there and they aren't all blowing up buildings and shooting innocents.

This is not an assumption this is a fact. I see many Muslims and they are not all Middle Eastern.

If we were (as some Americans believe) to round up all Muslims and deport them all, we'd be rounding up and deporting a lot of US Citizens.

This is also a fact, not an assumption. Many, many Muslims are American citizens.

And really, if we target all Muslims like that, then how would we be any different from Hitler, who rounded up and committed genocide on a group of people simply for what they believed when the greater part of them did nothing wrong? How would that make us any different from Nazi Germany?

I drew the parallels to Nazi Germany in the above post, but I didn't go into nearly as much detail as I could have.

Home Protection=Homeland Security.

American deportation camps=German deportation camps, the only difference is that the bodies of those who die in ICE custody aren't cremated at the camp. otherwise, the physical and sexual abuse, food and sleep deprivation, death threats, maggot-ridden food and unsanitary facilities are all the same.

Germans loaded Jews in cattle cars and shipped them across country with little to no notice or warning. I was put on a plane in the middle of the night and shipped to a different facility with no notice or warning.

This is natural. You wouldn't go alone to a dinner with a group of practicing cannibals would you? (I know, not exactly the same)

Okay, I'm Wiccan. I've gone to dinner with practicing cannibals--I was raised Catholic so I know about the Body and Blood of Christ symbolized by wine and bread. But what is that except ritualized, symbolized cannibalism? Practitioners of my faith have sabbats symbolized by ceremonial knives and chalices, but it's pretty much just ritualized sex.

I know of personal accounts of Muslims in my local area celebrating 9/11 the day after it happened, as well as seen on TV many Islamic countries celebrating. I also have friends who practice Islam, but I still disagree with it at it's core. I believe it is intolerant and teaches violence against innocents. My opinion.

I know of many muslims who, like the rest of us, were shocked and crying on 9/11. They filled the mosque that sits downtown in the city that I live in. They condemn those that did it and they are sincere in their sorrow and anger against the extremists that did it. I have freinds who practice Islam; i have freinds who are Christian (Catholic, Baptist, Protestant, Unitarian)I have friends who are pagan (Georgian Wiccan, Dianic Wiccan [lesbians], Minoan Brotherhood [gays]) I have friends who are Odinists, I have friends who are Satanists, Bahai'i, Buddhist, Hindu. I have black friends, white friends, brown friends, red friends, yellow friends. And you know what? We all bleed red. We're all just people. Just human.

This country was founded on freedom of religion, and our constitution is there to protect our individual rights from any man or government. Hopefully it doesn't get eroded away. Stay open minded, and I'll do the same.

Have you seen the 15 page memo that went out from DHS with a list of what they consider to be terrorism lately? Christian Identity. Phineas Brotherhood. Jewish extremism. Muslim extremism. Odinists. Animal rights activists. Alternative media. Remember all the stuff about SOPA last month? Homeland Security was behind that too--they have absorbed the National communications System and the National Cyber Security Center. They also have the Office of civil rights and Civil Liberties, and the Office of Legislative Affairs are also divisions of Homeland Security. This is why I said we need to open our eyes. Look at whats going on. Keep an open mind, but question everything.

Your reading skills are fine.

Off with his head! Screw the 21 years in prison bullsh*t!!! Let's wipe his gene's off the face of this earth!

"Homo sapiens psychoticus"

I have to admit, that gave me a chuckle. Thanks. lol

I agree with your point, dont give this guy a stage. Put him down like a rabid dog.

Hey, the Chuck - way to go, in reinforcing the Nazi ideal. Yeah, we know this guy on trial is a piece of work. But you dont go and stoop down to his level by insinuating that there are individuals born as "subhuman" (in Germany there was a term for that - untermensch). In the USA, one of the basic tenets is that all men are created equal. Thats CREATED equal. Its what we do - the choices we make - that determine our status in society, or at least, thats what our forefathers intended (while looking the other way on slavery - even then, they were all half-baked to a certain degree).

So Chucky ol' boy, you play right into Breivik's philosophy when you insinuate that there are "mutant subhumans" that are BORN that way. You also state right off the bat, that the man is psychotic. Probably. Of course, that means he will be going to a psychiatric hospital instead of a prison.

Emotional people (that would be you, Chuck) are terrible decision makers. The man will have his day(s) in court, and that is as it should be. I know I will be giving him all the attention he very much wants - but not quite for the reasons he wants. This is a great opportunity for us non-psychiatrist types to peer into the mind of a man who has an entirely different world-view. And is, most likely, a raging sociopath. How can ANYone be sane and kill children? We really could use a good look at sociopaths. Our society is riddled with them in positions of power - in politics, and in corporate offices. They strive for positions of power. The sociopath is the most dangerous unbalanced mind there is.

Also, I doubt that if found sane, he will only see 21 years in prison. Im sure there will be several consecutive sentences, ensuring a lifetime sentence.

And part of the reason why we don't have the death penalty is because of this moral quandary: In the case of a mistake, is it better to kill an innocent man, or to let a guilty man free? There are plenty of incidents where innocent men were convicted, and given a death sentence. Happens all the time. In this situation, it is obvious that the man did this heinous crime. BUT the law has to be applied fairly. In Norway, this kind of crime is unheard of. That is part of what makes it so surreal. Norway has a crime rate far reduced from ours, and a relatively civilized society without the yawning wealth gap and poverty-induced crime we have here.

This Breivik - he has got to be sociopathic. It is likely that he will be found criminally insane. What sane person does this? Sociopaths are logical in their thought patterns, and coherent, charismatic, and intelligent- and shrewd. But they lack compassion and empathy - and therefore very dangerous. If this guy isn't sociopathic, I dont know what is. He is going to get a nice study-cage so that psychologists can give him ink blot tests till his dying days.

Realize that "mutant subhumans" cannot be identified BEFORE they commit an atrocity. It's very different from Hitler killing Jews. In fact, if we make a law that mandates immediate execution of atrocious criminals, we would get the exact same result: atrocious criminals like this one are executed immediately upon conviction.

Strength In Numbers, you said it well and I agree but I would add one thing concerning the reason such thoughts are dangerous.

The courts exist to protect us not just from criminals but also from the government itself. I know how easy it is to say that someone is obviously guilty and it would be cheaper and less painful for the victims to just kill them without bothering with a trial and incarceration. The problem is that then such tools could be used against those of us who are guilty of some other "crime" such as merely being annoying to the powers that be or possessing something a more powerful person wants. Consider the Salem Witch Trials in colonial times. Nice little land grab tactic if you check it out. I could list of thousands of such cases but what matters iis that we in this country and many others elsewhere are protected by the concept of guilty until proven innocent.

Many of the people who post that they would gladly see the criminal done in are the same ones who have strong political views which would make them easy targets of those who disagree with them. If their thoughts were followed through concerning the criminals they wish to execute immediately and brutally it would change the whole justice system allowing people to be framed and tried in the media for crimes they didn't commit. (And no that is not a Trayvon / Zimmerman comment) It would be the end of any form of democracy. Speak out too loudly against a political leader and find yourself framed for a brutal rape / murder. End up dead before you can defend yourself in court or even see the evidence. Own a piece of land a company wants to get on the cheap - find yourself blackmailed with the very same threat. Date the wrong person and find yourself competing with someone powerful and you too could find yourself in dire straits. I am not saying it doesn't happen now even with the court system in our own and many other democratic nations but imagine if our expensive, cumbersome court system didn't exist or if it were subject to the whims of the mob. Public opinion is too easily manipulated by the media and figureheads who in the end are often as dangerous (if given the opportunity) as the criminals we fear.

Better to release a few guilty men because you cannot proves the crime than to hold an entire nation hostage.

PJ-697731

Speak out too loudly against a political leader and find yourself framed for a brutal rape / murder. End up dead before you can defend yourself in court or even see the evidence. Own a piece of land a company wants to get on the cheap - find yourself blackmailed with the very same threat. Date the wrong person and find yourself competing with someone powerful and you too could find yourself in dire straits.

You have just described former Ugandan dictator Idi Amin.

A wart on the ass of world society.

I'm with Chuck. Feed him into a wood chipper, feet first and very slowly......

StrengthInNumbers

I just love it when people like you try to tear down America's forefathers, all based on slavery. Does it occur to you that there were free black men/women then too? Possibly, just possibly, they saw past the times they were in, into what could/would happen in the future??? Maybe you know best...

I agree, he should go to court. Figure out what caused it and if anyone else was involved. Should have quick punishment though, death.

Though he may appear insane, any professional would tell you his hate is a form of extreme narcissism. Don't downplay that narcissism creates narrow minds and will eventually gravitate toward massive extremism. "I want, I want, I want....my way, my way, my way"...This is something each of us has to focus on when we judge the actions of others. How much narcissism are we guilty of ourselves?

When a society becomes so totally enmeshed in narcissism, those extremes of narcissism breeds greed, advanced forms of bigotry and the final result is crime. There are those who are so embedded in themselves to the degree that their existence can only continue if they can control others, command the tides and believe they and only they are important.

This is why demonizing those from humble roots, those who have suffered misfortune through illness or financial ruin is neither liberal nor conservative. It's narcissistic. An extreme narcissist believes only in their own self-importance and therefore, only in their ability to control others.

Im pretty sure everyone was talking about a trial first, to go through the motions of establishing guilt, then drawn and quartered at dawn.

I dont generally approve of capital punishment, but this is one case I do. I put him in the same catagory as a war criminal, like a Nazi. Guilty of crimes against humanity. Speedy trial, then hang that bastard.

I agree with the capital punishment part why warehouse criminals that are obviously guilty of extreme violence once they are convicted. Just make sure there is a legitimate trial.

Sounds like the Republican Party. lol

Josh47

StrengthInNumbers

I just love it when people like you try to tear down America's forefathers, all based on slavery. Does it occur to you that there were free black men/women then too?

Oh, so that makes it alright? No seriously Josh; because this family over here is allowed to live in relative freedom somehow that justifies enslaving this family over here and selling off the pieces. Interesting how some people's minds work...or don't.

@ Ol_Doc

No seriously Doc, how naive of you. Do you think slavery was started by Americans? What about the Greeks, Persians, and the underground trafficing today? Who sold the slaves of yesterday??? This is not the topic of this discussion, and one of the reasons I was pointing out "StrengthInNumbers" ill placed comment.

Secondly, why don't you include my full comment? Is it so you can further your agenda? Is that why you left off the part: "...they saw past the times they were in, into what could/would happen in the future..."

Not sure about the Persians, but Greek slavery was very different from American slavery. For starters, the master couldn't deal out random sadistic punishments.

Yeah, they're going to have to rethink their sentencing guidelines, to say the least.

21 years hardly seems like enough time to me as well. I wonder if there is a way for the court to NOT allow media coverage to deny him his platform. I cannot imagine the anguish of all of those parents who lost their children. I pray there is a way to end their nightmare sooner than later and help them find solace somewhere.

As far as I know, after 21 years they take another look at him and decide whether he's still a threat. While the Norwegian prison system is amazing in its ability to rehabilitate criminals, this bastard is no ordinary criminal.

21 years is the maximum sentence.

However, after that is served the courts will assess if the prisoner is still a threat and can add 5 years to the sentence every 5 years indefinitely.

The best solution would be to find him guilty but insane than they could incarcerate him indefinitely. A speedy solution would be to put a swastika on his forehead and send him to hell but alas Norway does not have capital punishment.

You have to understand, in Norway the law says you can onlu sentence for 21 yers, that does not mean they will only be in jail for that amount of time. Many never get out at all. it depends on the crime and person. the sentence of 21 years only means that you have the right to ask for release. wich mostlt is denied depending on the crime.

It is obvious you don't understand their system. In their system criminals are given humane treatment so as they are able to leave the system, hopefully never to return again. Criminals get treatment. They are not locked up in solitary confinement only to cause more psychological issues.

More than likely he will be found "criminally insane". Since he can't be treated he will be put in a facility to protect society. I know a great deal of Americans don't understand this but mental illness is a sickness. Killing a sick person is no more humane that what he did. Hatred only perpetuates, it doesn't solve or justify anything. But research, (being able to recognize the illness) and coming up with treatments could make difference. It could prevent this kind of an event happening again in the future.

Perhaps sooner or later people will realize punishment alone does not work. That is why in the USA the rate of returning prisoners are SO HIGH! It simply does not work!!!!

At that point he can move to Antarctica. Not too much immigration there. (yet)

If he really only gets 21 years in prison, there is a part of me that hopes he gets the pointy end of a shank early on. This man is a monster, he has no regrets for the innocent lives he took and to have the gall to suggest self defense? None of those kids had a way to defend themselves against him, he was creating a slaughter house with those poor people; he certainly doesn't deserve to continue breathing when he gave them no chance. It's great that Norway believe in humane treatment, but what this man did wasn't human or humane.

Norwegian law doesn't allow for longer sentences. His sentence could be extended later though.

The max is 21 years before review, the system in Norway usually works and for the society it fits. This review, however, is key. After 21 years he has the right to ask for parole. That's it. However given the circumstances I highly doubt they'll ever let him out. It's essentially a life sentence.

Don't blame Norway, blame the media. They shouldn't even be giving this guy one more second of air time. Instead once the trial gets underway we will probably have to hear about it every day for months. Just let us know when he is behind bars, that is all I want to know.

I don't know much about the laws or the court system in Norway -- or "freedom of the media" there -- But couldn't the judge simply not allow cameras in the court room? --It is done every day in the U.S.A.

hiap, he is behind bars. Has been ever since he commited these crimes.

Consider yourself "in the know."

There is never a situation like that. Not if you want to be a democracy. Norway is not kidding about their democracy. They fought the nazis to keep it. They are not giving it up for this idiot.

I'd still say he needs to be convicted in a trial. Obviously the outcome is easily predictable in this case, so I'd argue that he should be put down immediately AFTER his show trial.

Isn't there a cheaper way?

Bravo Torben!!!!!!!

The application of the law is governed by precedent. Under NO circumstances should any government EVER be given the extrajudicial authority to execute its citizens without trial, no matter how heinous the crime and certain the guilt. An expeditious trial and maximum sentence is the best case scenario.

Anyone who would govern out of fear or anger is not fit to hold office.

"There is never a situation like that. Not if you want to be a democracy. Norway is not kidding about their democracy. They fought the nazis to keep it. They are not giving it up for this idiot.'

For the record, Norway is not a democracy. It's a constitutional monarchy that holds democratic elections.

As the United States ALSO is not a democracy.

Old joke: What is a democracy?

Answer: Two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Oh, your ridiculous blog name aside, I'm in agreement with you, theonlyperson...)

lol. Oh I hate when you beat me up with facts jetjoky. :)

But of course you are right, that Norway is a constitututional monarchy. They even democratically voted to become one.

They should have tried him seperate for each death, 21x77

You didn't read it wrong, however US media refuse to add the VERY WELL KNOWN FACT that after 21 years he will be assessed and the courts can add 5 years to his sentence. This can be repeated every 5 years indefinitely.

Actually,

It was in the article:

If found guilty and sane, Breivik faces a maximum 21-year sentence but could be held indefinitely if he is considered a continuing danger.

People just seem to be reading the first few paragraphs.

If you want to check out the effectiveness of gun control..look no further than Mexico. You go to prison in that country if they find only bullets in your possession. They have gun control laws that are some of the most stringent on the planet. How many people died in Mexico last year from guns?

I dont agree, this only proves that gun availablity allows anyone to pull this kind of horrendous act, if they can get ahold of the weaponry.

Gun control works if you actually get rid of all the guns. Simply making a law isnt enough. As long as people can get a gun, they can kill people with it. Basic logic. Regardless of how many others also have guns. Lots of people in Norway have guns. Lots of hunters. They are not banned there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Norway#Types_of_civilian_owned_guns

Unless you have armed guards everywhere, theres no way to prevent this, except to disarm the population. Not just make a law, but actually disarm everyone.

That's because America's mass murderers (with the exception of the Unabomber) aren't very smart. Mass murderers in the U.S. are usually disgruntled psychos with very little education (e.g. postal workers).

This Norwegian fellow wrote a 1,500 page scholarly-written political manifesto. You couldn't even get an American mass murderer to read 1,500 words, let alone write 1,500 pages.

For once in our lives we should be proud that our country ranks 14th in education.

Freedom...you are wrong. If you outlaw guns (which essentially Mexico has done)..then only outlaws will have guns. If you think you can stop the "black market"..you are a fool. What Mexico has effectively done is left it's law abiding citizens unable to protect themselves.

Read what I wrote again. Making a law is not getting rid of guns, its just a piece of paper.

If you actually get rid of guns, no more massacres.

Getting rid of guns means actually searching the country door to door using tech to find stashes.

I said get rid of guns, not make a law.

Freedum is wrong often here on the vine. Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Freedom is also a fool if he thinks a door to door search will get all the guns. Might as well make that every square inch of land where a gun can be hidden. Mexico is using their army and they aren't even making a dent in Mexico.

Not this time, they got rid of Guns in Britain, and they have no massacres since. Because they actually got rid of guns.

Just making a law is useless.

They could get them all eventually. And with todays scanner tech, getting them all will be easy. They could xray your entire property with a drone, no problem.

You truly are disconnected (and delusional)...google gun deaths in Britian...

Dont need to google it. They havent had a massacre since they got rid of guns, which was not that long ago. It will take time to get every last gun, and obviously the odd gun will find its way in. Nothing is perfect. But I guarantee they will never see a Norway type Massacre in Britain. Not unless someone brings a gun in from another country, which is unlikely. And having to do that would make it much more difficult for a nut to plan a killing spree.

You can try to deny its possible all you want. But if theres no guns, theres going to be no gun massacres.

I believe he got his guns from us...

Gun ownership is actually up in Great Britian this year. They didn't outlaw guns in GB..you can legally own them there. And they report that they don't know how many are owned illegally. You are full of BS buddy. Just because no one shot 77 people at one time in GB doesn't mean that people aren't dying from guns there.

You're full of crap, gun ownership is banned in Britain. They banned them after a school full of elementary kids were massacred in Scotland. There is no "gun ownership is up this year" crap. Its banned, period.

The authorities are always going to say they dont know how many are owned illegally, because there is no way to know that. Doesnt mean there is any.

Gun deaths have dropped steadily since the ban in Britain, and eventually there wont be any, because eventually they will get them all. When that happens, no more excuses for you NRA supporters.

@HHK He got the large capacity magazines from the US. Mailorder. Those are banned in Norway.

Hey dumbass..google it! Instead of pulling BS out of your butt.

Here..let me help you out...be in denial all you want but choke on this

www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/mar/25/gun-ownership-firearms-certificates

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom

Guns are heavily resrtricted there, its next to impossible to get a gun.. If you can even qualify for a license. Basically they are banned. They are not totally banned, because there are some rich collectors, but I promise you the average citizen cannot get a gun there, ask any Brit.

I have relatives, and they lost their guns when they changed the laws. If you arent connected and got tons of money, no gun for you.

Dude..they just don't get any more dense than you. Read the article I put up there.

Exert: "But there are still plenty of firearms around here, all held legally. These latest figures from the Home Office have released in March 2011 show that more guns have been licensed than ever before."

After mass shootings in England and Scotland in the 1980s and later by people with licensed firearms, what is considered to be some of the strictest firearms legislation in the world was enacted

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom

I dont care what you article says, these are the laws.

And if you keep calling me names like a child, im going to report you to the mods. This is a place for adult discussion. Grow up.

Dude, you are beyond stupid! From the link YOU posted, these are the only banned firearms in Britian

Prohibited firearms^[13]

The following are prohibited for civilian use:

Fully automatic or burst-fire weapons, including air guns.

Firearms disguised as another item (e.g. walking sticks, mobile telephones, etc.)

Rockets and mortars.

Air guns chambered for self-contained gas cartridges.

[edit]

Reported for breaking the COH.

You cannot get a license there, unless you have lots of money and connections.

And they are heavily restricted. Like you have to leave them lock up at the gun club and cant take them from there, etc.

Britain has the strictest gun laws in the world.

This was hard to prevent. While pistols could be banned for being concealable, his hunting rifle was purchased for seemingly legitimate purposes. His bomb was made from fertilizers, and he even registered a farming company just to cover it up. There was nothing suspicious about him buying fertilizer.

In this particular case, gun control would not have worked. His criminal record was completely clean and he was a licensed hunter, having owned and used a shotgun legally for 7 years.

Hey jacka$$..you started this. You stated that the only way to eliminate gun deaths was to go door by door and get ALL the guns. You held up Great Britain as an example. Were in fact, gun ownership is legal with some restrictions. And gun ownership has been on the rise in that country (i.e. more certificates are being given). Report yourself for being full of BS...

@spartan

I specifically said gun control wouldn't work, you would need a full gun ban, and confiscation. Eliminating all guns. Laws alone wont prevent anything.

If we got rid of all cars, no one would be able to drive. Its the same with anything else, including a gun. Its just a matter of how feasible it is to actually get rid of all guns.

----------------------------------

@ reckless

I didnt call you a name once, you however have been calling me names since you first posted. Reported, live with it. And grow up.

And I stand by what I said. Britain has some of the strictest laws on the planet. Its insanely hard to get a gun there, most people are grand-daddied, and their use and storage is restricted. If you arent rich and connected, you cant get a license there.

Get a brain! your quote "you would need a full gun ban, and confiscation. Eliminating all guns. Laws alone wont prevent anything." Well dude..GB is not eliminating all guns. If fact they issued a record number of certificates to own a gun last year.

now you're back peddling! "Its just a matter of how feasible it is to actually get rid of all guns."

A few comments back you were stating how easy it would be to get rid of all guns. You are a fool!

gun ownership is banned in Britain.

They are not totally banned

Which one is it Freedom, are they banned or not banned?

What makes you think it'll be a good idea to stop hunters from hunting? In the hands of a licensed hunter, hunting rifles and shotguns are nothing more than tools. If you're trying to confiscate tools, you're opening an entirely different can of worms.

Just because you say the issued a record number of cert. doesnt mean its true. I told you, I have relatives there. They lost their weapons when the laws changes, confiscated, license denied. They dont have records or any reason to deny them, they just arent rich.

What britain does allow is rich collectors, of collectable weapons. And they allow people to use a weapon at a club. The weapon never leaves the club. Thats for target shooters. They also allow special permits for fox hunting. Thats rich people crap.

Your average person there cant even look at a gun.

@ spartan, I never said anything was a good Idea. I simply said, if you got rid of guns, no more massacres or gun deaths. Which is true.

JustaGrunt, read this article and then you tell me if gun ownership is banned in GB

www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/mar/25/gun-ownership-firearms-certificates

Gun ownership is banned for 99.9% of Britains, ask any Brit. They dont call it a ban, they call it restrictions, but its effectively a ban for most people.

Your article isnt the law. Read the law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom

Freedom..read the article I posted above that has statistics..there are almost 2 million firearms legally owned in GB...that's a far cry from being a Ban.

Yes, mostly collector weapons, Muskets and crap. Gun clubs for official target comp shooting. Fox hunting clubs, its a national sport.

Otherwise guns are banned or severely restricted.

Did you read the article..it starts off with a statement about 4 people shot dead on New Year's day.

Yes I read it. Terrible.

That means nothing as far as gun control effectiveness.. It takes time to disarm a population. No law is perfect either. But I bet they wont have many massacres, and if they do they will be small. Eventually they may have none ever.

The stats speak for themselves, wherever they clamp down on guns, deaths go way down. Anywhere the laws have been in place long enough, gun incidents almost disappear. As long as guns are available anywhere, there will always be the odd incident. But the fact remains, if we got rid of ALL guns, there would be no more shootings.

It's just that there isn't any country on the planet that's been able to achieve that goal (get rid of ALL guns). Therefore while your statement would be true it isn't practical. No country can totally get rid of all guns. Even in the article I posted, GB says they don't know how many illegal guns are there.

I disagree, no country has actually tried to get rid of all guns. If we really wanted to get every last gun, and destroy them, we could. The tech is there to do it. 10 years ago I would agree with you, but not now. And you would have to be prepared to keep looking for a very long time, for all the people who would try to hide their weapon. 1 or 2 generations, and all guns would be gone.

But we could get 99% of them in a the first few months, maybe less.

Mexico has the strongest gun laws on the planet and they have tried and failed! Your argument is more pipe dream than reality. And the cartels appreciate the Mexican governments efforts. Means that when they break into someone's home they more than lately won't have to deal with a homeowner bearing a gun.

Mexico isnt us. They dont have drones with scanner tech that can see into the ground and through buildings. And the ability to analyze the data with image recognition software that looks for shapes, etc.

With the tech available now, we could do it if so inclined. It would be a major effort, but its certainly possible nowadays.

We could also make it so, anyone with a gun buried deep enough, would never be able to dig it up without being seen. The surveillance capability is there to do that too.

Hasn't Britain even experimented with disarming their own police? I've heard that bobbies were complaining about the increasing number of criminals using guns, regrettably forcing the police to be armed as well. Only in the UK...

Optimist..Freedom is delusional...based on his rational..why don't we just eliminate all Armies, aircraft. missiles, submarines and war ships...if we didn't have those then there couldn't be wars. It's true! (rolling eyes).

Since 911, they have started arming more of their police. The regular foot patrol is still inarmed I believe. Not fully sure, as its been changing. Years ago, they were all unarmed except for their version of a swat team. But now they have more armed cops, especially wherever they are acting as security.

Its mainly organized crime over there that has weapons. Still pretty rare to have gun crime. Nothing like N.America.

@ reckless

Nothing delutional about my statements. You sure seem emotional over the idea of it being possible though. Worried? lol

emotional?..you wish...I'm not in the least bit worried...You forget what a powerful lobby the NRA is in America. If you think you could get Congress to pass legislation to do what you are suggesting...you are a moron of biblical proportions. Forgetting for the moment that the Supreme court has already ruled on 2nd Amendment rights.

Freedom...while your argument is well intentioned...it demonstrates a juvenile quality that isn't in contact with reality. It's akin to a Miss America acceptance speech.

Your reactions to my mere suggestion of getting rid of all guns says otherwise. haha

And 15 years ago I bet you would have sworn the US would never have something like the Patriot act, where a US citizen can be assassinated without trial, or put away forever without trial. Or have due process Rights stripped away. Or search and seizure rights eliminated.

The law can change at anytime. The past means nothing, you should atleast realize that.

And the NRA isnt all powerful, they are heavily under fire aready just over the trayvon shooting.

I can promise you this, you dont do your side of the argument any favors by irrationally arguing that gun control is useless and doesn't work anywhere, when you know damn well it does. Or that dealing with criminals having guns is a lost cause, when its fairly obvious that it can be dealt with effectively. Citing Mexico as an example is lame as hell. How come you never mention Canada or most of Europe where it does work very effectively. The reason I say this is, it makes it look like you are trying to hide something, or deceive people when you argue irrationally that nothing can be done, so give up. The lost cause attitude doesnt work.

And to be honest, I would expect gun control laws are not far away, lots of politicians are starting to talk about it because of all the shootings the last couple years.. So dont count your chickens on "it'll never happen" just yet!.

And to make it clear, I dont support an outright ban at all. I just like arguing the points. :)

Freedom proposes we spend 10 TRILLION dollars to remove all guns? Good plan!

I didnt purpose anything, I was just arguing its possible. And it wouldnt cost more than a 50 million.

after 45 comments I've realized that I'm arguing with the village idiot...Yup I admit it..I can be a little slow at times.

It's also possible that pigs could fly as well. $50M..huh..care to break down the exact costs for us?

Well atleast I dont devolve into a name calling troll when I lose a debate. Grow up.

BTW, you just announced, to all ,that you lost, by doing that. :) People dont call names unless they have run out of ammo. Dont get emotional now!!

50 mil, I was being sarcastic lol

Freedom...you think that you won? Now that's funny!

Freedom, you can't possibly think there is any way that in 100 years every gun in America could be confiscated do you? I mean it would be extremely difficult in great britian, which is an ISLAND nation, with a much smaller land mass, much smaller population, and much fewer ways in and out of the country that aren't strictly monitored. Even then I think it would be impossible to get all guns off of Great Britian. Even if that was what they were actually trying to do. The US? That is beyond a pipe dream. There are what, something like 200 million guns in the US? Even if they found most of them there would still be enough for the wrong people to start an army with, and then we have no way to defend ourselves from them?

You claim to hate the patriot act, but then are actually ADVOCATING the US using advanced drones on its own people to spy in our homes and look for contraband? You don't think that is an invasion of privacy? And lets say you got all the guns, how are you going to prevent more getting in illegally? We can't prevent it today, how are we going to prevent it tomorrow?

You are correct though, gun ban LAWS don't do anything, but give only the criminals the guns, and if there were no guns people couldn't die because of a gun (although I argue that many of the same deaths would occur with knifes, improvised weapons, bows, you name it). But that is rediculously impossible. Insanely impossible. Only in a perfect world could you possibly take all of the guns out of this country, and in a perfect world we wouldn't need them in the first place; clearly we don't live in a perfect world, at least to anyone bothering to look around.

The truth is the system we have now is the best system for the IMperfect world we live in.

Actually i do think its possible to get 99% of them fairly quickly, and make it impossible for the other 1% to be accessed or dug up later, not without being caught. Now to do it, it would take changing a lot of laws etc. Im merely talking hypothetically here. But it is possible. The tech is there to do it.

If you are thinking im talking about people searching and snooping around your basement and yard, thats not what im talking about at all. Im talking about using sophisticated tech. Things like, ground penetrating radar, scanner tech like what they use at the airport on people, only way more powerful (yes they have that). Sophisticated image recognition software, to analyze all the pictures. Chemical sniffers. etc etc.

And lastly, a permanent surveillance system to catch anyone who's guns weren't found, for when they go to dig them up.. If someone can never dig up their gun again, without getting caught, its effectively gotten rid of, the same as if it were found and confiscated right away..

Now it would take a Big Brother type effort to do it. But as I have been talking all along, I was just talking hypothetically here. Pointing out "its possible" And really not that difficult. Expensive and law changing yes, but not that "difficult".

And getting rid of guns doesnt mean for the authorities too, just the public. Military and police will always be armed.

Freedom - first let me say this. A Ban of guns is unconstitutional here in the US, so any point related to a "gun ban" here is worthless talk. Ain't gonna happen.

Secondly, try looking up how Switzerland deals with guns. Automatic weapons are allowed in most homes. Most of their population is currently or formerly with the military. That country promotes gun ownership...even moreso than the US. Now...check out their crime rate. WAY below the US. So you can drone on and on about a BS gun control law and enforcement but that only proves one thing. First, only the "bad guys" will have guns; secondly, truly FREE people will not be able to defend themselves when the "bad guys" come around. And Finally, gun control is just a mirage. A case can be made that MORE guns can reduce crime.

Interesting that your name "Freedom4everyone" has nothing to do with REAL freedom. Just TAKING freedoms through a gun ban. What a tool.

Freedom - I will say one more thing....it is VERY scary that you advocate allowing the "govt" to come to our houses to search for guns. In what way has the government gained so much trust from you that you are willing to allow them SO much control over you and your rights?

Let me ask you this....if guns were outlawed and people started killing with baseball bats....I guess you'd want THOSE outlawed too, huh?

Ban handguns and automatic weapons. It seems to work in Japan.

Switzerland is also one of the most wealthy countries on Earth. They have no poverty of any kind. Poverty and Crime goes hand in hand. Neither is related to gun violence though. Gun Violence and murder is a separate issue from general crime. Switzerland has its share of killings. Any society with guns, is going to have gun related deaths, even if its just suicides.

And the constitution is changeable at any time, look at the patriot act. Your right to due process no longer exists. Not if the government wants you to disappear. They just have to declare you a domestic terrorist, and you no longer exist. No trial, no lawyer, no court. So you are not being realistic thinking the 2nd amendment is written in stone.

I recommend you read through the whole debate before commenting Chaotic. Im not going to rehash all the arguments again. If you had read through, you would see I disproved every point you made.

And just because im debating the subject, doesn't mean I support it. Or want it. Don't be so afraid, information is power. Knowing whats possible, is how you prepare for it, and be ready for possibilities.

I would rather face a nut with a knife, or baseball bat, then one with an assault rifle. When was the last massacre with any of those?

And again, im not advocating anything, just talking possibilities. Thats what this forum is for, debating issues.

when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns...hope i don't become a outlaw...they ain't get'n my gun...don't want to be #78...for some nut...

LOL bob..

Not if I scan the entire country with a drone, then nobody will have a gun. If we can find old ww2 submarines 12000 feet down on the floor of the ocean, half buried in silt.. We can find your pea shooter buried a couple feet down under the pumpkin patch, out behind the chicken coop.. lol

hahaha your're funny Freedom. Love it. lol

Freedom4Everyone: You make many valid points. The right-wing gun nuts never answer this question:

If other countries have restrictions on guns, and mass shootings are rare there, WHY?

I usually get crickets on that one.

was surpised to lean that the maximum sentence for being convicted of mass murder in Norway is 21 years --(could take be for each count and to be served consectivesly?) Also interesting that you can freely admit you shoe and killed 77 people --including chilldren -- but also pled not guilty. As far as "gun-control" as the saying goes" Guns don't kill people -- People kill people (with guns)!

Guns don't kill people They just make it easy to kill lots of them quickly. Without a gun, the shooter in this case would not have been able to kill so many on that island.

That is undeniable.

I'm seeing a bit of irony here, and narrow vision, regarding gun control.

I am not going to "debate" this with someone like Freedom4Everyone. Changing his mind would be akin to convincing Jerry Falwell that Jesus is only a myth.

But, the irony here, for the ban-all-guns crowd, is that this Breivik punk also killed, mass killed, EIGHT people with an improvised bomb. No firearm involved.

I think a point some here have tried to make is that, barring the ability to acquire a gun, a person intent on killing a lot of people will find another means by which to do it.

Another note, since Switzerland was brought up: Yes, most homes have automatic weapons in them. Consider that, in 2006 Switzerland had 34 deaths committed by firearm. It also had 64 deaths by a "bladed" weapon. Hmm...

By the way, I lived in Switzerland for a bit. Loved the country and the people. Very open and cosmopolitan.

jetjoky: I think Freedom4Everyone makes a lot of valid points. What you're arguing ignores the fact that overall crime, including gun crime, is far lower per capita in nations where guns are illegal or restricted, than ones where they are not. I've lived in South Africa, England, and Germany. Believe me, the kind of violence we see here is far worse, than what I witnessed there.

The number of guns in society is proportional to the number of gun deaths. Those figures are undeniable. I own guns, and I'm crack shot, but I also realize that American laws and attitudes are too liberal with regard to firearms. The results are plain to see.

People think that being "anti-Islam" is so wonderful; after nuts like this got there way and all the Muslims were gone, just who do you think would be next? Jews!! Hatred can't be turned off like a tap.

Your best post yet ;)

I concur!

Sour grapes makes for an excellent wine.

mad dog 20-20...

As liberal as I am, I believe he should at least get life without a possibility of parole. It is however that the courts will likely consider him ineligible of release 21 years after his sentence, effectively leaving him locked up for the rest of his life. There is also a possiliblity of charging him as a terrorist, which at least in most democratic countries, carries a life term when deaths are involved.

He killed 77 people and faces "up to 21 years in prison"?!?!?!? That's what's insane! If that's the worst they can do to him then he's already won in my opinion. No wonder he looks so calm.

ed read the post above yours, it's essentially a life sentence.

And since william doesn't have a single case or example to make his assinine point and slur hold any truth (just the usual knee-jerk, racist mouth-breathing drool bait we've grown to love from the inbred contingent of our grand country)... I'm sorry sir, a fool be you... good day!

Remember Kevin and Kyra says: Cousins shouldnt marry

With you Sir I must agree I apologize for William as he is from my country but inbreeding makes people do strange things

Wow William - put a sock in it, willya?

He is sane very sane He knew exactly what He was doing nothing wrong with him .He deserve to be executed but I don't think will happen there in that country ......... what a shame ....Why to go threw trial ,don't get it ....He admits the guilt and what He did .with pleasure ..SEND HIM TO GULAG Russian prison He d love it there He can have his ideology there let see if He would smile there .Can We try that for once ?By the way its cheaper ....He would expire faster.That all is no consolation for the victims or their loved once ,He needs to suffer for years to come .Chuck I agree He needs to fry ......slow

The popular trend of labeling someone libral , consertative, right, left, who cares! In the end it doesn't matter who is or isn't.

We are reading of someone who committed atrocities in the name of national/racial purity and who went to the extent of spreading his agenda by committing the atrocity. Wow! -- if that's not psychotic then I cannot think what is.

By the way, so many of you are outraged by the max sentance of 21 years. Did you not read that when considering parole the parole/court body could extend the sentence? Why in the world would you think that anyone would let this person out of prison since he is so committed to his agenda?

For pete's sake!

PS: Racial "purity" aka known as inbreeding eventually leads to all kinds of phsical and mental problems. A superior race is eventually a misnomer.

It just goes to show you how weak Scandinavian societies are. They don't believe in punishment. They think they can "save" everybody.

21 years is the ultimate punishment in Norway. Which seems absurd at first, but then again there is very little crime in Norway. Most people don't have guns and have no desire to use them.

They can hold him past 21 years apparently. I think they can declare him a dangerous offender or something like that, likely to commit further crimes, and then add 5 years at a time on top of his original sentence. With a hearing every 5 years, similar to a parole hearing. If thats true, he will never get out.

I doubt they think they can save everyone. However, their criminal justice system does seem to work much better than ours. Low crime, a populace that feels safe and is generally happy with how their society runs, and one of the highest standards of living in the world. If anything we should be taking notes not criticizing.

Actually, while I might quarrel with the maximum penalty available for punishing human wastage such as this perpetrator, most of what I hear of Scandinavian society is positive.

While I am actually glad that we no longer have medieval punishments like drawing and quartering, this a$$-clown really deserves to be fed into a wood chipper ...feet first.

Ah well, perfect justice is never achievable in human society. Maybe in his next life he'll be an Amway salesman, or work in a customer service call center. Ball is in your court, God.

that would be about 3 months and 3 days per life...

This issue has been brought up many times on this board. Apparently, in the Norwegian penal system, 21 years is the maximum they can give him right now. But when that 21 years comes to an end, his sentence can be extended. I'm not Norwegian, so that's just my understanding based on what other posters here have written. I don't think it has much to do with being liberal, and really can't be compared to the American legal system.

That is what I was saying 21 years is a joke. 21 years for 1 killing is still way too lienent.

What did you shoot on the back nine?

i took a boggy...and got 78...had the big iron on my hip...

Do not judge the americans to harshly. They are just frightened by everything.

Unless - of course - one of the parents decides that maybe killing a lot of kids is a way to make the rest of you feel their pain.

I'm just amazed how this is NEVER brought up in US media. I've read countless articles on US websites and they never ever mention this. Comments are always about how he will get out after 21 years. It's misinformation and again, I'm dumbfounded by how obviously they chose to ignore this important piece of Norwegian sentencing law.

Now you have a picture of our manipulated press, sensationalism at any price to raise the violence level in Americans. Works every time. We're under the, "My guns will do my talking for me" reasoning. A shame.

Glad to hear that Suz. I hope he never gets out. For everyone's sake.

I also commend your people for your stand. And the progressive way you are dealing with crime. And especially this horrible crime.

You have my sincere condolences for all the pain this must have caused your country and its people.

Let the parents of these poor kids who were killed for no reason, decide if they would like this piece of @!$%# killed or jailed!

Thanks for posting Suzpz. In the US we don't have laws requiring accurate reporting which I think is more common in Europe. So our media tends to devolve into "entertainment" where red meat is thrown to the masses. So in the US if you want to get the news you have to read multiple sources each day compare them and then run them up against international sources. In the US large sections of the population are taught to live in fear of any possible threat. Immigrants and minorities want to take your jobs and your rights away, Muslims all want to destroy us and enforce Sharia law on us, if everyone has health coverage then the government will set up death panels, by wanting equal rights gays will turn your children gay the list goes on and on.

I realize its probably hard to understand but a large swath of our population is truly terrified by all of the above and our media helps to keep it going.

If we can just get him and about 3000 of his friends and put them on the Mexican border.................ahhhhh, I know it is only wishful thinking, but I can dream can't I?

nolliabed: You're a sick person and I feel sorry for you.

The sad part for us is: We have plenty of people in America that want to do the same thing. These right-wingers call for the killing of "Libs" and Muslims or anyone else they disagree with. I see their comments here everyday.

IN reading about the shooter in Norway,I feel he should get the max no matter which way the courts decide.

He is definitely a very sick,sick individual. Just can not imagine the trauma the surviving youths feel and also

the parents of the youths that were killed. 21 years is definatly not long enough for such a horrific crime.

Americans have become very vengeful people. I see them constantly posting about executing everyone for any crime committed. Recently I saw more than a few promoting the death penalty for computer hacking. It's sad. What's even more sad is that it just doesn't work. If harsh punishments were the best deterrent for crime, the middle east and America would have a crime rate near zero while Norway would have a crime rate through the roof. Instead, it's the opposite.

Smeado:

Exactly what is the point in letting this thing who murdered 77 people stay alive? Do you think he can be rehabilitated? If your answer is no, then why should he be kept alive? Killing him would not and should not be meant as a deterrent, it would eliminate the chance for him to ever kill again, and I would bet, offer some type of satisfaction to the victims family.

HPJ: How is he going to kill anyone while in prison?

My point - Maybe we get to take the moral high-ground and show that killing people isn't a valid solution to a problem. A human life should never be taken unless absolutely necessary. Being expensive doesn't qualify as being absolutely necessary... and is a inhumane and cruel stance to take. Why not kill retarded people because they'll never contribute to society? Or kill people with severe health problems that don't allow them to work?

Maybe you fear that he'll be influential to others that share his beliefs when alive. And killing him will stop his message. Worked well for Jesus didn't it?

Smeado:

First, he may have an opportunity to kill in prison, but I'm talking about if and when he gets out. It's not life in prison without the possibility of parole, it is 21 years and then up for parole. If not paroled then, it comes up every 5 years. Time heals a lot of wounds and fades memories of how horrible this was. At some point they will let him out and if that happens, there is every reason to believe he would kill again-especially since he has said so.

As for your point, I never stated or implied any of that ridiculous rant you went on. How did you read all of that into what I said? This is very simple, KILL HIM NOW!!! He murdered 77 people. Do not give him a chance to do it again. I truly believe you would feel differently if it was one of your loved ones, but of course, you will deny that. You can deny all you want, but if it actually happened to one of your loved ones, I believe you would and should want this person killed. If then you still felt this way, all I would feel for you is shame!

You'd feel sorry for me because I decided to take the moral high ground? Wow. I feel sorry for you. You're so full of hate and a need for vengeance. Unfortunately, your attitude is becoming the predominant one in this sick country. We could all learn a lesson from the Norwegians (as well as most of the civilized Westernized countries in the world) and the success they've had with their criminal justice system.

I feel sorry for your loved ones! It must be real assuring for them to know that you would not defend them if someone was trying to hurt or kill them. You can't possibly say you would defend them, because what if you did try to defend them and you killed their attacker? I guess that would mean you didn't take the moral high ground right? Going to spend eternity in hell now? And if you would defend them, then you are nothing more than a hypocrite, a self absorbed idiot that walks around thinking you have a higher moral standard than everyone else. Get over yourself.

And this is why American lawyers have a bad reputation.