Weapons purchased completely legally.
This is not about gun control.
10 years since the Utoya massacre in Norway
21–30 of 138 posts
Re: 10 years since the Utoya massacre in Norway
#22Warning: There are some fairly graphic photos in here.
I can't help but think that if the actual impact of gun violence (and violence in general) was shown in the media, we'd have a lot less of it to deal with...
How so?
Edit: Why downvote? I'm asking for details on the mechanism that would lead to this reduction.
Re: 10 years since the Utoya massacre in Norway
#23Ten years on, and it's chilling to consider how much more widespread Brevik's ideology has become worldwide. Ethnonationalism has elbowed its way to a seat at the table, demanding "toleration" for itself that it would never reciprocate for pluralism.
It's the paradox of tolerance in action. Tolerate intolerant ideals and there will be a sudden jerk to intolerance.
Re: 10 years since the Utoya massacre in Norway
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
“APPROX. 18:30: The son of Trond Berntsen (the security guard and police officer who was among the first to be killed) is standing in the sea on the southern tip when he comes face to face with Breivik. The terrorist shoots and kills five people in front of him. ‘Don’t shoot me!', the boy shouts, doing all he can to demonstrate to the gunman how small he is. Breivik does not shoot the ten year-old. According to the t…
Not sure I see the "mental gymnastics" here. Isn't it a usually accepted thing that young children have no clue? It makes "sense" (at least in the scope of Breivik's craziness) to consider that these kids were "victims" brought there by their parents or something. Maybe I misunderstood what you meant by "mental gymnastics". I think this expression usually applies when 2 contradicting /paradoxical statements are made…
Historically 14 year olds were considered adults, though young. Look at the very many rites of manhood for an context - they used to mean something. Although not aligned with the contemporary definitions of child/adult, it’s not far fetched that a radical right-wing extremist would look to the past for his definitions, and thus see a difference between a 10 year old and a 14 year old.
Re: 10 years since the Utoya massacre in Norway
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure I see the "mental gymnastics" here. Isn't it a usually accepted thing that young children have no clue? It makes "sense" (at least in the scope of Breivik's craziness) to consider that these kids were "victims" brought there by their parents or something. Maybe I misunderstood what you meant by "mental gymnastics". I think this expression usually applies when 2 contradicting /paradoxical statements are made…
Might be that he killed 33 children that day.
I'm obviously not defending him, but those were 16-18 year olds who were already party members.
My point is: it's easy to find flaws in the reasoning of extremists, and use that to show how "crazy" and "illogical" and "insane" they are, and thereby distance ourselves (mentally) far from them. What we need to do however is face the much more scary truth that even the people who commit atrocities are for the most part reasonable and (somewhat) intelligent people, with some sort of roots in "normal" society, who for some reason just get one idea in their head very strongly (and act on it), and this can happen to many (I won't say "all", but I would say "most") people.
This sort of cases is not about isolated loners that we cannot possibly understand; freaks of nature who are not like the rest of us "normal" people. They can show up anywhere for reasons and through processes we just don't quite understand. But we have to not delude ourselves and see them as an "out group" - radicalization can happen to many people you would bump into in your street, every day.
Re: 10 years since the Utoya massacre in Norway
#26Ten years on, and it's chilling to consider how much more widespread Brevik's ideology has become worldwide. Ethnonationalism has elbowed its way to a seat at the table, demanding "toleration" for itself that it would never reciprocate for pluralism.
It's the paradox of tolerance in action. Tolerate intolerant ideals and there will be a sudden jerk to intolerance.
The paradox disappears when you treat tolerance as a peace treaty rather than a universal moral obligation.
Re: 10 years since the Utoya massacre in Norway
#27Anyone know what Norway will do when Breivik's 21 year prison sentence [0] is up in 10-12 years? Difficult to imagine him being released back into society.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Anders_Behring_Breivi...
Re: 10 years since the Utoya massacre in Norway
#28Ten years on, and it's chilling to consider how much more widespread Brevik's ideology has become worldwide. Ethnonationalism has elbowed its way to a seat at the table, demanding "toleration" for itself that it would never reciprocate for pluralism.
A recent study concluded that Breivik’s influence on right wing terrorism is close to none. But yes, the 22 july attacks is certainly a critical chapter in the overall rise of nationalist movements in the last decade.
Link to study: https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/binaries/content/assets/cu...
Re: 10 years since the Utoya massacre in Norway
#29The headline of the English translation is "The Terror Attacks That Changed Norway". Did anything actually change?
In the US, we're accustomed to mass killings not changing anything, and I'm curious if Utoya was different.
Re: 10 years since the Utoya massacre in Norway
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure I see the "mental gymnastics" here. Isn't it a usually accepted thing that young children have no clue? It makes "sense" (at least in the scope of Breivik's craziness) to consider that these kids were "victims" brought there by their parents or something. Maybe I misunderstood what you meant by "mental gymnastics". I think this expression usually applies when 2 contradicting /paradoxical statements are made…
He was attacking a youth camp and shot many young teens(I didn’t read every slide but one example I saw was a 14 YO girl hit four times) so I don’t see a difference. I guess I’m just shocked at seeing a weird attempt at “ethics” from someone who would do something like that.
In the ethics of evil, one can see that even evil acts are done for some false sense of ‘good’ by the doer.