Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How the Norwegians Reacted to Terrorism

schneier.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 144 posts

Re: How the Norwegians Reacted to Terrorism

#91

Post by learc83 »

sophacles wrote: post #89
learc83 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but rather implementing some rational gun laws. Changing laws that could negatively impact millions of people because of the statistically extremely small amount of people killed in mass shootings is just the kind of overreaction the article is talking about. If you want to debate gun laws you have to weigh the rights of gun owners with the rights of people killed every year. Our policies shouldn't be based on stati…

Even the Obama administration has said it is against calling for more gun regulation because of this. Just saying: Despite the attack ad fueled mass hysteria about this, Obama hasn't done anything regarding US gun policy, in any direction.

I'm very aware. I was just pointing out that if anyone was likely to think more tougher gun laws were a solution, it would be a liberal president during campaign season.

He's already lost the 2nd amendment voters, from perception alone. He really needs to motivate his base and I think calling for tougher gun laws might help him there.

I disagree with him on most issues, but the fact that he seems not to be interested in using this for political gain deserves recognition.

Re: How the Norwegians Reacted to Terrorism

#92

Post by learc83 »

jacobr wrote: post #82
sheraz wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. (and of course you were downvoted here). People love to hold Scandanavia up as an example as how the rest of the world "could be." However, I think that is such a naive point of view, and one that needs changing. Their populations are too small and lack diversity to make a realistic comparison to the USA or even their larger European neighbors. I usually like Mr. Schriener's work, but this post is a little of…

The "lack of diversity" in Scandinavia comes up now and then even on HN, but: In 2010, there were 1.33 million foreign-born residents in Sweden, corresponding to 14.3% of the total population. Of these, 859 000 (9.2%) were born outside the EU and 477 000 (5.1%) were born in another EU Member State. This does not include second or third generation immigrants, nor minorities with a longer presence. http://en.wikipedia.…

In the US our foreign born population is roughly similar about 13% foreign born in 2009. However the percent of foreign born people in the US has historically been very high.

Wikipedia points immigration to Norway has risen very recently because of it's membership in the European Economic Area. It is entirely possible that united states has issues caused by continued high levels of immigration that Scandinavia has not had time to experience.

Since our foreign born populations are similar, adjusting for that shows that when native born Scandinavians and Americans are considered, Scandinavia is much more ethnically/racially homogenous than the United States.

Furthermore Scandinavia doesn't have a recent history of institutionalized oppression of a very sizable racial minority. There is still a generation of people alive here who actually lived under forced segregation, and more generations who were raised by them.

I'm sure if America was composed only of people who's ancestors came here voluntarily, and who weren't kept as second class citizens for decades, we wouldn't have many of the problems we do.

Re: How the Norwegians Reacted to Terrorism

#93

Post by learc83 »

epo wrote: post #87
Holeinthewall wrote: post #83

Maybe I fail to understand this, but we are comparing a country(USA) who (for whatever reason) is specifically targeted by terrorists on a whole different level than Norway. We are comparing an apple to a boiled egg : putting them in a microwave & trying to commend apple for not exploding ! Forget legislative or leadership moronism at times, but blasting US for reacting in a way for something no other country has eve…

"something no other country has ever faced"? For God's sake, catch up on world news or at least spare yourself embarrassment by not making such witless pronouncements.

If he's talking about the scale of a single incident then he is correct.

The death toll from the 9/11 attacks far exceeded any other single terrorist attack.

Re: How the Norwegians Reacted to Terrorism

#94

Post by mseebach »

nfg wrote: post #17
maayank wrote: post #10

a. It was domestic terrorism. Compare it to American reaction to domestic terrorism before 9/11 and we may start to have some actual merit in the comparison. There was no "War on terror" on the same scale after the Oklahoma City bombing (1995). b. There's a very different social reaction to domestic terrorism ("there's something rotten in us, we can fix this from the inside") and terrorism from the outside ("we're be…

What about the London tube/bus suicide bombings: those were domestic terrorism and elicited a distinctly different response than we're seeing in Norway now. Or is it only domestic terrorism when the perpetrators are white one wonders!

Domestic with respect to the motive and perspective of the perpetrators. 9/11 and 7/7 had elaborate international and geopolitical motivations, from the perspective of foreign victims of respectively US and British foreign policy.

Re: How the Norwegians Reacted to Terrorism

#95

Post by aggronn »

tallanvor wrote: post #45
JackFr wrote: post #3

While I understand the point being made, Breivig apparently acted alone, and his actions were most similar to Timothy McVeigh. The proper comparison would be to compare changes in policy following Oklahoma City Federal Building bombing. After the bombing of Khobar Towers, the bombing of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the first World Trade Center bombing, the bombing of the USS Cole, and finally the acts of 9…

Breivik used violence in an attempt to cause political change (to try and force the government to stop promoting multiculturalism). That clearly fits within the definition of terrorism. You are correct in saying that McVeigh's actions may not fit that definition, as he claimed that his motive was revenge for the government's actions on Waco and Ruby Ridge, rather than trying to force political change, but terrorism a…

Its not clear to me how your last comment is related to the rest of your post.

Re: How the Norwegians Reacted to Terrorism

#97

Post by jbjorge »

Compared to the Oklahoma bombing and the recent theater shooting, Norway probably didn't act all that different, but from reading the source, this is one of the comments that captured the essence of why/how Norway stands out:

"[]...What we Norwegians are afraid of is actually the situation you have in the US and UK either with Police or prosecutors with way too much power or CCTV cameras everywhere etc. We have been a peaceful society based on trust to each other for a long time, and intend to let that continue. I can only quote FDR: "The Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself". Stoltenberg actually had to come with that statement. As doing the "US style fixit" would have backfired on him politically. Popular demand is different here, and that is the true power of Norway."

Re: How the Norwegians Reacted to Terrorism

#98

Post by ktizo »

3amOpsGuy wrote: post #51
seabee wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've been yelling at the sheeple long enough to know it's ineffective. What I want to know is what would it take to wake them?

See that's where i worry about myself. My immediate thought is, how do i get myself on that gravy train :-)

Buy stocks in weapons, private military, makers of silly hats and A&E hospitals.

Re: How the Norwegians Reacted to Terrorism

#99

Post by philwelch »

mtgx wrote: post #69
mootothemax wrote: post #4

I do find it rather worrying that people around the world seem absolutely fine with all the various initiatives introduced, all in the name of preventing terrorism. I've had friends consider me crazy for complaining - way after the time, I hasten to add - that I'd had a small deodorant can taken off me in airport security, which I'd then had to purchase in the duty free shop. My wife's now tired of me complaining - a…

Was that guy in Norway part of a known terrorist group or something? Why isn't he a "madman" like the one in Aurora, US last week? I do find terrifying what's happening in UK lately, seemingly all of the sudden from those of us not living there, like that new law proposal to monitor everyone's private communications. Not too long ago that kind of proposal would've been seen as insane. Now it seems a lot of politician…

It's because of that nebulous "they". The "they" who said terrorists hate us for our freedom was George W. Bush, the erstwhile President. He has been out of office for three years now.

Re: How the Norwegians Reacted to Terrorism

#100

Post by lars512 »

learc83 wrote: post #90
sgoranson wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Offhand, do you know of any material that delves deeper into that taboo topic? Sociologically I find it really interesting but like you said, it's not a popular subject.

You can check the DOJ for statistics, but I've found it incredibly hard to find any unbiased analysis. I was interested in the topic after I saw a DOJ chart that listed crime by race. I had to research myself to find anything really useful, and by research I just mean taking data from DOJ statistics. The thing is, it's like we live in 2 separate countries, if you're white or asian, America is almost as safe as other…

To be clear, this is after controlling for income? It's not just about poverty?
Post reply on HN