Comments by "Luredreier" (@Luredreier) on "BBC News"
channel.
-
11
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
Сомневаюсь, что это кого-то убеждает...
Он определенно все еще представляет угрозу для общества.
И он останется за решеткой, пока это можно доказать.
Или, другими словами, вероятно, на всю оставшуюся жизнь.
Тем не менее, если он действительно изменится, у него все еще будут права в нашей системе, и он будет освобожден.
Кстати, если гугл переводчик ошибся, извините.
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
@matthummel8306 Yet we have both lower recidivism rates and lower overall overall crime pr capita then most other countries out there.
Our crime rate is lower then all but 11 countries in the world.
There's hardly anywhere that's safer.
I mean, sure, perhaps Iceland...
If you don't mind living on top of a vulcanic hot spot...
And they have pretty much the same approach anyway...
And that's down from quite a high crime rate and recidivism in the eighties by the way...
Back when we did have the old school justice system of countries like the US or UK...
That said, our system isn't perfect.
There has been cases of people being released from either jail or psychiatric hospital who have then commited murder.
But at the same time, because we have our system that actually tries to help people the bar is also lower for seeking help, either for the person in question or for their next of kin.
In the US for instance, if you suspect that a relative might be mentally ill, on drugs or have commited a crime and you care about them, then the treshold for actually reporting that to the authorities is pretty high as the consequences for the individual in question is pretty high.
Here it's not nearly as severe to be reported to the authorities as they genuinely are trying to help.
And our prison system and psychiatric hospitals are essentially extensions of our welfare system, that is already using many of the same techniques, except in a jail people don't have the freedom to actually comit a crime, so they might as well make use of the services made available.
It's essentially a time out, a removal from society while people are getting ready to deal with society again.
That said, there are individuals who end up sitting in jail or mental hospital for the rest of their lives...
But by having laws that defaults to never giving up on people we avoid what we call "justismord" ("justice murder", I think it's something like "misscarriage of justice" in English).
We have more people who actually contribute to society.
We have more people consenting to getting help.
We have more people reported in by next of kin etc.
And we have less crimes overall.
Less victims.
And we're a better society because of it.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@User-hx2jg Okey.
So let's say that Norway for whatever reason turned into a authoritarian state.
Heck, for examples sake, lets say that all of Europe fell into chaos and authoritarianism.
With the current demographics that's not a completely inconcievable idea.
And lets say that Africa actually overcame its issues and became as democratic as we currently are.
Lets say that say Nigeria (except a perfectly democratic version of Nigeria with no corruption) lead a African Union mission with some other nations into Norway to reinstate democracy here.
I'm not going to lie.
It would hurt losing friends, perhaps even family.
It would be painful to experience all that hardship.
And I most likely would have mixed feelings about those soldiers fighting here without knowing the local culture.
But I still think it would fundamentally be the right thing to do if democracy actually had fallen here.
I'd still expect anyone responsible for avoidable civilian deaths to be held accountable though.
There needs to be proper rules of engagement.
I'm not going to downplay what's going on in any of the nations you're mentioning.
People are being hurt and scared for life.
And the west is absolutely not doing enough to actually help people and ensure that people get a better life instead of harming them.
And yes, there's people in the west making some truly unbelivably stupid choices.
And who are quite frankly cowardly, choosing to use indirect forms of combat instead of endangering western lives despite the risk of that leading to increased civilian casualities.
There's no excuse for that.
And the way the west pulled out of Afganistan leaving the local population high and dry?
It's inexcusable.
We had and still have a responsibility there.
And the US worrying about China and wanting to redeploy troops eastwards in Asia does not justify just packing up and leaving like they just did.
As for the terrorist attacks in the west.
Honestly while I think the choice of targets is fucked up we've kind of brought it on ourselves in some cases.
And things like Al Qaidas attack on Pentagon, that was actually a justified target in my book.
If they had dropped off the civilians on the plane in some way, say with parachutes then I don't really see that much that's ethically worse then US actions there as such.
The US goverment had done things that caused a lot of harm for Afgan civilians in the past, helping the Pakistani intelligence organizations with training and equipping various factions in Afganistan in order to fight the USSR, without taking responsibility for the civil war in the aftermath.
Intentionally targetting civilians, is unacceptable.
Even if you're feeling hurt.
No matter how much pain they may have caused that pain isn't lessened by intentionally trying to hurt them back that much.
Besides it doesn't work.
Germany and Britain tried to target civilians with their bombing raids on eachothers cities.
And all it caused was renewed resolve in the war.
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mpalmer7800 No, that's where Norway differs from say the US.
In Norway you don't lose any rights regardless of what you have or have not done.
You are not your actions.
Someone cheating on their husband.
Tough luck, it sucks, but that doesn't make them "evil".
Someone robs a store?
Awfull life choice, but doesn't make someone evil.
Sold drugs? Ditto...
We don't know what's going on inside another persons mind.
And it's not our place to judge.
Brevik made some truly awfull life choices that hurt a lot of people, including friends of mine.
And quite frankly he's insane.
As long as he genuinely poses a danger to society he will remain behind the bars.
But the moment he actually is reformed he will be released.
I don't belive in the concept of evil at all.
Nor will I ever do so.
He needs help to see the errors of his ways.
Also, I assume you're American?
Or at the very least that you're religious?
That seems to be true in most other countries...
Well, if you're christian, isn't it gods job to judge people, not *ours*?
Jesus said that the first stone should be thrown be he who is without sin.
And I don't know about you.
But I've yet to meet anyone who hasn't sinned in some way, screwed up royaly.
No, removing his rights isn't for us to do.
He's simply being held till we can be sure that releasing him is genuinely safe.
At the momen that's clearly not the case.
1