Comments by "Luredreier" (@Luredreier) on "What we know about the Norway bow-and-arrow attack so far? | DW News" video.

@rogueinvestor2375 Well, that policy still has saved more lives then has been lost by it. Sweden has armed police and roughly 2x the population of us here in Norway. There they've had 3-6 deaths caused by the police every year for the last few years. This rampage is one of just 3 terrorist attacks with deaths we've had in Norway since the early eighties... If terrorism was a daily occurance then yes, arming our police would have made sense. But as it is arming them would cause more deaths then it would have avoided, and it would have motivated people to carry weapons themselves in response, and possibly also to commit acts of terrorism themselves. Currently our police is trained in deescalation, ethics, human rights, psychology etc. And they're quite frankly doing a better job then the police in most other nations where the police is armed. Especially compared to nations like the US... If you want others to treat you as a human you need to treat them as one. Doing so works in the vast majority of situation. Yes, there are exceptions, but they're so rare that they just don't justify using other approaches as the default.
3
@Masaru_kun Maybe, he claimed he was a convert who had converted to Islam. Of course he can claim *anything*, that doesn't necessarily make his claims true... What is known is that the intelligence services where aware of him previously and concerned about him. They had received a tip about him several years ago. They evaluated it as unlikely that he'd commit a religiously or politically motivated crime. But was worried that there was a moderate risk of him committing acts of violence caused by his mental health state that was bad already at the time. They reported him to the health authorities. But there was never enough evidence to apprehend him at any point, neither evidence of actual crimes being committed or about to be committed nor of legal justification to detain him as a danger to society.
3
@jgmdewilde8078 Islam had as far as we know little to nothing to do with this attack. He had a Danish mother and Norwegian father but had been struggling with mental problems for a long, long time. There was a restraining order against him banning him from seeing his own parents. He wasn't social at all, distancing himself from others. And those who knew him described him as a young man in a lot of pain. The intelligence services was aware of him but considered it unlikely that he'd commit a politically or religiously motivated crime, however they where worried about the risk of his mental health deteriorating to the point of those causing him to turn violent, as indeed happened. They alerted the local police who talked with him, and the local police alerted the health care system. But with our current laws there was no way of actually apprehending him in any way, he hadn't actually committed any *crime*, and he didn't quite qualify for the non-consensual treatment. This could just as well have been one of your relatives going crazy as anyone else. And it could have been any religion.
2
@owindustry Thank you. It's just sad that people are struggling like that without getting treatment. We need to improve our mental health care in Norway. Too often physical health care is prioritized at the cost of mental health care.
2
Well, in this attack there was 5 dead and 3 injured. Of the 3 injured 1 has been discharged today. I don't know about the state of the remaining two. But yes, I agree, a bow attack is really unnerving.
2
Nah, look up the number of homocides pr 100 000 people of the US and Norway. Or deaths caused by the police for that matter... In both cases there's hardly a comparison, Norway is just way, way, way safer. But there's room for improvement of our health care system when it comes to support for people with mental health issues.
1
@kairos116 Everything so far points towards this being a attack motivated by mental health issues rather then political or religious ideology... The intelligence services where aware of him and considered it unlikely that he'd commit a politically or religiously motivated crime, but worried about his mental health state (already bad at the time) deteriorating and him turning towards violence for that reason, they also reported him to the health authorities.
1
@dmann4683 Why do you say that? Honestly I'm kind of surprised that it was just 5 dead and 3 wounded given the weapon and terrain in question. And there's clearly arrows that didn't hit their mark as seen in pictures of arrows stuck in walls and doors, and that has hit windows etc.
1
@dmann4683 Well, this is Norway, not the US. Our media isn't all owned by a single owner, and there's transparency about media ownership here enshrined in our laws. Our political climate isn't as extremely polarized as the US political climate, and being a fairly small nation with a okey relationship with both Russia and China as well as the US we're generally spared major outside interference in our society. It's mainly the EU that's pushing us around (since we're not a member and they consider us within their sphere of influence).
1
Possibly. He was known to have mental health issues. If that and his ownership of a bow had been combined in our systems then perhaps this could have been avoided. He'd probably still find some way of injuring others. But without a bow fewer people might have died. There's already regulation in place on who may buy a bow and arrow and when and where it may be used. But it's not as tightly regulated as firearms. This experience might make us reevaluate that decision. But the biggest take away is probably that we need to strengthen the mental health side of our health care system and possibly the laws supporting it.
1
@stevenmike1878 Perhaps, last time we had something like this happen the guy used a bomb to attack the government, and then shot unarmed youths and kids in a political youth camp... The death toll from that was way, way higher.
1
Ja.
1
While weapons are common in Norway they're mainly hunting weapons. You're allowed to own weapons if you want, but you can't carry one just anywhere without a reason. And no one wants or thinks of a weapon as something needed for defense.
1