Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Still Waters

Norway's mass killer Breivik declared sane

48 posts in this topic

Not sure if there even is a definition of evil, but I've always seen evil as the complete lack of empathy. Not once has he shown any regret for what he did, he was laughing and cheering as he gunned down defenseless children, so I disagree, I'm pretty sure he's evil, as a person who cares about other people would never be able to do such a thing.

Empathy would require people have the same moral/ethical viewpoint to empathise with each other. Find another person with Breivik's moral/ethical pov, and you will find they empathise.

I agree we have created this concept of "evil". This is because the majority of people have the same, or a very similar, moral/ethical prespective and by the definition of that concept we label those, like Breivik, who do not share this common perspective, as evil. All this suggests is that "evil" is a subjective pov.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Empathy would require people have the same moral/ethical viewpoint to empathise with each other. Find another person with Breivik's moral/ethical pov, and you will find they empathise.

I agree we have created this concept of "evil". This is because the majority of people have the same, or a very similar, moral/ethical prespective and by the definition of that concept we label those, like Breivik, who do not share this common perspective, as evil. All this suggests is that "evil" is a subjective pov.

I think Breivik is correct.

Allowing people to emmigrate into your country while allowing them to keep their religion and cultural values leads to conflict. The reason is some of them will always be fundies and will try to force their religion and cultural values onto their new nation. I think there are problems coming for Europe in the decades ahead.

However I also fit Breivik into one of those fundy groups. He thinks he too has the right to force his values onto others through violance and acts of terrorism.

That fool may well have set nationalist politics in Norway back 50 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Empathy would require people have the same moral/ethical viewpoint to empathise with each other.

Not true. No matter how much I dislike someone, the very idea of hurting them makes me feel the pain as if I was hurting myself. Obviously some people have more empathy than others, but you don't have to agree with someone's views to empathise with them.

I think Breivik is correct.

Allowing people to emmigrate into your country while allowing them to keep their religion and cultural values leads to conflict. The reason is some of them will always be fundies and will try to force their religion and cultural values onto their new nation. I think there are problems coming for Europe in the decades ahead.

However I also fit Breivik into one of those fundy groups. He thinks he too has the right to force his values onto others through violance and acts of terrorism.

That fool may well have set nationalist politics in Norway back 50 years.

Well said.

Edited by Chronii

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not true. No matter how much I dislike someone, the very idea of hurting them makes me feel the pain as if I was hurting myself. Obviously some people have more empathy than others, but you don't have to agree with someone's views to empathise with them.

My emphasis.

That is a description of sympathy, not empathy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breivik isn't insane.

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

Not delusional, but definitely not sane.

He, who went hunting lesser beings, is actually severely damaged and, according to his morality, therefore the one that is lesser.

Interesting detail is that he had more than one plastic surgery, so he actually does feel inferior.

In short: typicall right-winger issues. Run over by their own fantasies since mid 1940s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Not delusional, but definitely not sane.

He, who went hunting lesser beings, is actually severely damaged and, according to his morality, therefore the one that is lesser.

Interesting detail is that he had more than one plastic surgery, so he actually does feel inferior.

In short: typicall right-winger issues. Run over by their own fantasies since mid 1940s.

The psychiatric view of psychopathy is that it is a neurological disorder, but that it is not an insanity. That might seem contradictory, but it is not when you consider that to be insane, a person must be judged to be irrational and/or cognitively impaired such that their actions are not based on a generally accepted view of reality.

Breivik is rational, not cognitively impaired and his actions were fully reasoned by him within the same generally accepted view of reality that most of us share.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The psychiatric view of psychopathy is that it is a neurological disorder, but that it is not an insanity. That might seem contradictory, but it is not when you consider that to be insane, a person must be judged to be irrational and/or cognitively impaired such that their actions are not based on a generally accepted view of reality.

Breivik is rational, not cognitively impaired and his actions were fully reasoned by him within the same generally accepted view of reality that most of us share.

Which is what makes him evil, regardless your definition. And in most States in the US he would probably be found insane. In those that shared your view he most likely would be executed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The psychiatric view of psychopathy is that it is a neurological disorder, but that it is not an insanity. That might seem contradictory, but it is not when you consider that to be insane, a person must be judged to be irrational and/or cognitively impaired such that their actions are not based on a generally accepted view of reality.

Breivik is rational, not cognitively impaired and his actions were fully reasoned by him within the same generally accepted view of reality that most of us share.

Partial amen to that, since severe psychopathy can land people in institutions, where they are drugged into less aggressive and destructive mood. There’s the common psychopath, found anywhere, mostly lives and dies unnoticed, and severely screwed up psycho like Breivik.

He knows what are the limits he’s expected never to cross, but he can’t control himself. Sane? No.

Partial amen also because you can’t say that the guy who spent so much time grooming the ideal homoerotic/narcissist version of himself is exactly rational and aware of reality as we perceive it. It’s one thing to play a Crusader on line or in bedroom and something completely else to actually buy weapons and turn an island full of kids into shooting range.

He chose unarmed, underage, unprepared targets to play war and domination on them. Maybe he believes it was a battle in the racial war, but realistically, he projected the image of his enemy onto the target. And he chose kids because that way he was sure he’ll “win” that "battle".

Or his mind was stuck somewhere in puberty, so he’s unaware his opponents should be grownups. Guy used cheat codes in real life. Again, that’s not very mentally healthy.

But don’t get me wrong. Just because I’m convinced his mind is the showcase of how a human mind shouldn’t work, doesn’t mean I think he shouldn’t be put on trial like countless other psychopaths before him.

Being screwed up in the head can’t mean you have a permit to go around destroying actual people and suffer no consequences. Because you're screwed up. Everyone is, in one or another way. But not everyone is that evil.

Do I know what evil actually is? Can I explain it? No.

Blah blah.

I’m annoying myself already.

Damn b****** wanted attention and I’m giving him the attention. ****.

At least I hope he started to realise what he has done. No, not from his victims' point, he's unable of that, I hope he's not happy with his image created by media and I hope it will get worse. This post is my modest contribution to the real Breivik exposed. Pathetically immature, cowardly egomaniac. Would not touch with 10 foot pole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume he will get either a very, very lengthy prison sentence (maybe even life) or they might execute him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume he will get either a very, very lengthy prison sentence (maybe even life) or they might execute him.

They are much too enlightened in Norway to take an eye for an eye. And I think the maximum sentence was less than life. So he gets a trial to stand and spew his hate. And then can do so again when he gets out, or sooner if the Norwegians are willing to observe his rights to free speech :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are much too enlightened in Norway to take an eye for an eye. And I think the maximum sentence was less than life. So he gets a trial to stand and spew his hate. And then can do so again when he gets out, or sooner if the Norwegians are willing to observe his rights to free speech :wacko:

Did you ever get around to reading Garbage Man's link he replied to you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are planning to switch the cameras off whenever he says something which might influence the Norweigen population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you ever get around to reading Garbage Man's link he replied to you?

I did not until now. Thanks for reminding me. This system seems altogether sensible and will serve this exact situation well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Of course, it's not all as cut and dry as "Norway's mass killer Breivik declared sane."

That's because on Sky News earlier today, which was showing the trial live, a reporter said that it is actually disputed whether or not Breivik is sane. Despite the second evaluation which declared him sane, contradicting the first evaluation, there are still many psychiatrists who believe that he is actually insane.

If he is insane then he will not be criminally responsible for his actions and instead of going to prison will instead receive psychiatric care.

Edited by TheLastLazyGun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, it's not all as cut and dry as "Norway's mass killer Breivik declared sane."

That's because on Sky News earlier today, which was showing the trial live, a reporter said that it is actually disputed whether or not Breivik is sane. Despite the second evaluation which declared him sane, contradicting the first evaluation, there are still many psychiatrists who believe that he is actually insane.

If he is insane then he will not be criminally responsible for his actions and instead of going to prison will instead receive psychiatric care.

I noticed one of two instances where I think he was being a little psycho.

I believe his defence team will be presenting evidence that the Knights Templar still exist which will be interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed one of two instances where I think he was being a little psycho.

I believe his defence team will be presenting evidence that the Knights Templar still exist which will be interesting.

People who think they have recreated that order definitely exist, several not convincing and those even less convincing successors, at least one suing Vatican for assets ( :lol: ) but with all my wild and often perverted imagination I can’t see how that can possibly justify execution of unarmed kids.

Off topic:

Speaking of Templars, Vatican should sue for unauthorized use of Templar name, especially since they (The Catholic Church, that is) officially dropped the accusation of blasphemy and few other things, declaring the Knights innocent. It took only 7 centuries.

Half on-topic:

Rival more-less self-proclaimed Templars should sue Breivik too, for ruining the reputation of the name.

Back on topic:

I saw some crap about “self-defence” being mentioned, but couldn’t be bothered to read it, it’s just too retarded to try to extend self-defence on shooting kids like clay pigeons.

Breivik keeps repeating he wants to use the trial for popularization of his ideas, I still think he’s psychopath in the first place who wants to use the trial for popularization of his own insecure self-adorning egocentric shallow ass, either way the defence doesn’t really matter to him, as long as he’s on the front pages.

May the almighty media lose interest in him and publish only modest updates in weird news sections, titled “Self-proclaimed Templar claims self-defence”. If it wasn’t so damn tragic, it would be hilarious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breivik keeps repeating he wants to use the trial for popularization of his ideas, I still think he’s psychopath in the first place who wants to use the trial for popularization of his own insecure self-adorning egocentric shallow ass, either way the defence doesn’t really matter to him, as long as he’s on the front pages.

From what I understand, legal defence in Norway acts on the instruction of the defendant, not the other way 'round (as it is in the US, for example.) So, his legal team's hands are tied to trying to present his case for self-defence - rather than use legal 'tricks' to get him off the hook. In some ways, the Norwegian system is better in that the defendant has to make their case from their own perspective of why they did what they did, and so is more 'honest' in that regard.

But I agree that Breivik's intention is to use the trial as a platform for espousing his ideology. I expect it will only end up showing us how pathetic a human being he really is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I understand, legal defence in Norway acts on the instruction of the defendant, not the other way 'round (as it is in the US, for example.) So, his legal team's hands are tied to trying to present his case for self-defence - rather than use legal 'tricks' to get him off the hook. In some ways, the Norwegian system is better in that the defendant has to make their case from their own perspective of why they did what they did, and so is more 'honest' in that regard.

But I agree that Breivik's intention is to use the trial as a platform for espousing his ideology. I expect it will only end up showing us how pathetic a human being he really is.

And I agree it is more honest, at least that’s how it looks like to me, complete legal ignoramus. An outsider, such as me, perceives US justice system mostly through anecdotes about burglars who sued house owners for too small windows and won, or people guilty as hell that got away on technicalities, which is probably not how it usually works, but still, the mere possibility of lawyering your way out of serious charges or being lawyered in while being truly not guilty should scare any sane person.

Justice should be about what actually happened, not whose lawyer can twist it better. And unicorns should be real, I know, I know...

I also know what that Breivik’s defence will look like. He will claim that those kids were aggressors or invaders or something, endangering his way of life and physical existence of his race, and according to his morality it was his right and duty to exterminate them. Which brings us back to his plastic surgeries and wearing blue contact lenses to hide his – eh – brown eyes. He wasn’t pretty and pure enough for his own criteria, so if he – god forfend – commits suicide one day, that will be self-defence too, according to him.

Idiot.

And he would write manifestos...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this guy is 'insane' in any sense. Maybe 'misguided' is a more proper term. He is rational and seems to be of above average intelligence to me. I doubt we'll ever know the full story, but as far as his moral values/guidelines are concerned, some answers definitely lie with his manifesto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

'I did it for Norway': Mass killer Breivik boasts of committing 'most spectacular attack on Europe since World War II' and tells court he would do it all again

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2130881/Anders-Behring-Breivik-trial-Norway-killer-boasts-spectacular-attack-Europe-WWII.html

Anders Behring Breivik calls for acquittal or death penalty

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17752189

Edited by Still Waters
Additional source link added

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.