Norwegian massmurderer played world of warcraft..Follow

As a side note, if this turns into a survey I will get very angry.

I'm so sick of surveys. Seriously, if you are doing a WoW based survey you should be immediately kicked out of your masters program

I believe that's what they did.

Our penal system is a lot more... forgiving than in the rest of the world.

The problem with the death penalty being that if new evidence comes up and it proves that the guy was innocent, or at least not as guilty as thought, it's kinda hard to dig him up and reinstate him in society.

Sometimes. 39 people in the US have been wrongfully executed, though.

And that's not counting the big dude from The Green Mile.

Edit: Before this turns into a US political debate, let me just say that I'm not opposed of the death penalty. In a case like this one where the suspect is caught red-handed and admits to killing close to a hundred people, I'm all for sending his *** directly to a fiery pit post-haste.

Edited, Jul 24th 2011 3:08pm by Mazra

No it should be plenty of time, but it's really not. The justice system is quick to judge but slow to get its gears moving.

Lets break down the consequences according to his beliefs and habits...

1. Being a Conservative the natural consequence should be the Death Penalty for his actions.

which leads to

2. Being a Christian we know his actions demonstrate he's going to burn in hell after 1.

and because

3. Being a WoW player he can expect being repeatedly 1 and 2'd. He'll be repeatedly killed and gutted of bodily organs as proof of of completion of the daily quest that will be released in the next major content patch "Norwegian Nut Nab".


Sounds about right to me.

Edited, Jul 24th 2011 6:16pm by ekaterinodar

Mr. Norwegian bomber dude is a Christian in the same way Osama Bin Laden was a Muslim. Both are a pretty poor representations of their respective religions at best.


Edited, Jul 24th 2011 3:41pm by someproteinguy

Which still doesn't matter, since I never once said anything about a religious organization. I only ever mentioned his beliefs, specifically.




If we suppose he does have that disorder, he's still sane. Nothing about what he has done suggests he is incapable of reason. The entire thing--a planned attack, the fact that he approached his victims strategically throughout it, etc.--all suggest otherwise. And why would suicide have been a rational end to this whole ordeal? I don't understand the line of reasoning there at all.

And the fact that he doesn't feel remorse (if that is the case) still doesn't suggest that he's insane in an objective sense.

If you are going to make a relativist claim about what mental illness is and isn't, there's literally no reason to ever label a criminal as being anything other than mentally fit. All crimes are such because they go against the general will of the people. You, in committing a crime, go against that general will. And it's impossible for you to take an action you don't believe is right--it simply makes no sense. Thus, any criminal holds beliefs contrary to the general will. If someone is mentally ill because they deviate from society's ideas, then anyone who commits a crime would be.

That makes no sense.

Soldiers (or warriors, etc.) kill many, many people in their line of duty. Less now than historically, but still. Some felt remorse for what they did, sure. But most people lived in a culture that sanctioned those killings to a point where they felt completely justified in doing so. They weren't mentally ill, it's just that those murders didn't go against their belief set.

If there is something about this guy's brain where he is literally unable to process information properly, or there is some kind of horrible chemical imbalance which produces uncontrollable rage, etc. then he can be considered mentally ill. If he's only acting on a belief set fundamentally different than ours, then that's all. He should be subject to normal criminal procedure. If these actions weren't the result of a conscious choice on his part, then he should be considered mentally ill and appropriate measures should be taken.

I don't see anything to suggest he's ill in any real sense.

And this guy barely seems to fit the profile for the disorder you mentioned. He's always been publicly extremist, and as far as I know has never been considered particularly charming or persuasive. He doesn't seem to have a criminal history beyond this event (or at least, the NYTimes isn't reporting it). Actually, the only problem here is that he isn't showing guilt or remorse at what he's done. But the fact that he isn't feeling it now doesn't mean he is incapable of feeling it.

Just because you and I find these events atrocious, doesn't mean that anyone who is human has to. He might be incapable of feeling remorse, that's true. But that possibility doesn't mean it's what is at play here.

His message wasn't so much "We need people to understand and fix this" as it was "We need to start a f*cking revolution, so go kill the enablers."

Pretty much the exact story behind the French Revolution, actually.

* Troll comment of the day*
"Oh you all know he was just getting sick of wiping due to the kids in wow..."

I know too soon.


But here is the thing.... would this rate as the biggest single person killing spree of all time? If so this is history in the making. I think someone should just save the tax payer dollars and put a bullet in his head and leave him there to die or live the rest of his life mentally retarded and homeless. Or just put a bullet in his head and send him a drift... personally his rants mirrored that of Uni-bomber. Just replace his muslims with the word blacks and you got the uni-bomber all over again.

to be honest.... the man had a good life.. he had no reason to do what he did other then his own twisted look on life. I mean we all have had days where we want the world to know how we feel and days we want to lead a long trail of destruction but the MAJORITY of us have the ability and humanity to not take out our inner rage on others...

Norway has no Death Penalty or life sentence. 21 years is the longest sentence they can give.

No one said he did it because he knew the worst punishment he could get would be 21 years in jail. I also don't think the death penalty is a notable deterrent in preventing crime. Some crimes and some criminals are so heinous as to be beyond rehabilitation. Warehousing these criminals until they die of old age at 80 or 90 means society is paying for their behavior.

US incarceration statistics are somewhat overstated, in that up to half of the prisoners at the local level are awaiting trial. Of course, the largest single segment of the prison population is due to our moronic drug laws. You'd think a major industrialized power that actually put a prohibition on alcohol into their CONSTITUTION, only to repeal it 14 years later, would understand that the War on Drugs is an exercise in futility. But, hey, reading a history book, Google-ing prohibition, or watching any of the dozens of movies about how the mafia (and a couple well-known political families) really got started selling bootleg alcohol is hard.

As horrible as the crime was, I'm not a huge fan of a law that's passed in August affecting what someone did in July. That has 'slippery slope' written all over it.