You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
It's a bit boring and predictable seeing the press pull out the old bad culture makes bad people thing, it's lazy. The bloke's an obvious right wing extremist nutjob, why not concentrate on his political motivations rather than making computer games even slightly relevant to the whole shaboodle. We've been here before with computer games, video nasties and bad fiction. That cool stuff is no excuse!
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/04/19/breivik-testifies-about-gaming-press-ignores-the-facts/
http://boingboing.net/2012/04/20/how-the-press-is-distorting-th.html
The bloke's an obvious right wing extremist nutjob
You sure about that ?
well I'm not sure about anything ever Ernie, but he certainly sounds like one from what I've read. But using computer games as an excuse or reasoning, or even good practice for what he did is just weak and the press use it cos it makes good reading. It's daft.
A Nutjob he is not...
He was cool, calm and calculated, in his own words he knew what he was doing was wrong, but he switched off his emotions and carried on.
That's Pure Evil in my book... A step far beyond a political nutjob!
he's very articulate and conniving and intelligent I'll grant you that but that doesn't mean you can't be a "nutjob". I'd say someone that guns down that many people is a "nutjob" ie not "normal" as society describes it.. Yeah he should be and is being tried as sane. and the norwegians are being pretty amazing about it. still, WTF it got to do with computer games?
That's Pure Evil in my book... A step far beyond a political nutjob!
Nutjob. To consider that a viable route to being heard essentially proves he's unhinged in my book!
Insane
Adjective:
In a state of mind that prevents normal perception, behavior, or social interaction
Sound like a nutter to me. He has an air of Bond Villain about him, but a nutter none-the-less.
More to the point - if you wanted to practice gunning down loads of innocent people, there are better options out there; GTA, anyone?
Why is it that if a Muslim extremist commits a murderous act, he's an Islamic terrorist, but if a Christian extremist commits a murderous act it's the video games' fault? Thank Odin's beard that he doesn't like heavy metal...
I don't have any doubt that violence in video games and movies can contribute to the desensitisation of a violent psycho.
In fact you would have to have spent far much time playing games in your mothers basement to actually believe that any points made about gaming in the press or the trial are anything but a side note. To jump on the minor points made displays a complete detachment from reality.
[url= http://ia700307.us.archive.org/4/items/Sonic_jihad/Sonic_Jihad12.wmv ]Battlefield 2 hilarity with the press/government[/url] I remember when this surfaced in the news and we were all laughing about it. Although in a sense some of us involved in the Project Reality modification had some concerns who they'd turn the spotlight on next.
Why is it that if a Muslim extremist commits a murderous act, he's an Islamic terrorist, but if a Christian extremist commits a murderous act it's the video games' fault? Thank Odin's beard that he doesn't like heavy metal...
Good point, although I don't think his actions were in any way religiously motivated, but entirely political.
Because he acted alone he's regarded as a criminal. If he was acting as part of a group, he's be a "terrorist". Interestingly, the wiki page below shows a picture with the caption "Oslo, Norway immediately after the 2011 terrorist attack in Norway perpetrated by Anders Behring Breivik."
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism ]Terrorism is not a well-defined term - wiki[/url]
I don't think his actions were in any way religiously motivated
I thought he himself said religion was a motivating factor - surely he should know ?
Did he? Blimey! Did not know that. Nutter!
he's very articulate and conniving and intelligent I'll grant you that but that doesn't mean you can't be a "nutjob". I'd say someone that guns down that many people is a "nutjob" ie not "normal" as society describes it..
I (and I would suggest many other) people take the word "nutjob" to mean mentally ill, or in other words, insane... This man is very definitely sane. He knew what he was doing, and willingly did it anyway!
He is no nutjob... He is very definitely one of the most evil men still alive today. To even hint at calling him a nutjob, or in other words insane, is to totally undermine just how evil this man is and pass his actions off as those of a madman!
Sorry, I feel quite strongly about this... All too easy for the defence to argue insanity these days in all too many situations, because by rights, the defendants actions are those of an insane person, only if they know what they're doing and willingly do it anyway, then they are not insane but actually plain Evil!
You sound rattled buzz-lightyear, is because as a Christian you can't cope with the thought that Breivik was in anyway motivated by his belief in "Christian culture" ?
Breivik specifically claimed that Europe was under threat from Islam, and that he considers himself to be 100% Christian. I think we can safely say that his actions were in some way religiously motivated.
Otherwise I'm baffled in figuring out how anyone can say "I don't think his actions were in any way religiously motivated" - unless they haven't being paying any attention. Even I knew that, and I have little interest in his rantings.
Did he? Blimey! Did not know that. Nutter!
I know ernesto can go on a bit, but calling him a nutter is a bit strong... 😛
mboy
I (and I would suggest many other) people take the word "nutjob" to mean mentally ill, or in other words, insane... This man is very definitely sane. He knew what he was doing, and willingly did it anyway!He is no nutjob... He is very definitely one of the most evil men still alive today. To even hint at calling him a nutjob, or in other words insane, is to totally undermine just how evil this man is and pass his actions off as those of a madman!
I know what you're saying. He's a cold calculated and intelligent killer. An evil man if ever there was one. That being said, mass murder, even if it is cold and calculated is an insane thing to do.
I'm not a psychiatrist (no duh), so would be wooly on the definitions but he must have a very severe mental disorder of some description to be capable of what he did, but not necessarily something which diminishes his responsibility.
He must be psychotic, or a sociopath or something. As for the press reporting on him playing video games, how pathetic and predictable. It wasn't the hundreds of hours of practice at the shooting range, it wasn't the stockpile of weapons, it wasn't his isolation from society....it was online gaming that made him do it.
mboy - MemberI (and I would suggest many other) people take the word "nutjob" to mean mentally ill, or in other words, insane... This man is very definitely sane. He knew what he was doing, and willingly did it anyway!
True, but doing something insane in a cold and collected way is still insane.
spending many hours on whatever computer game he was playing may have conditioned him; blowing up cars, sniping passers by à la GTA.
i spent a week playing GTA each evening. my dreams were just a continuation of the game i'd been playing. i'd go out the next day and spot possible sniper hideouts.
the bloke is nuts. but his nuts isn't pushing a pram around with a dead cat in it, his is an evil nuts. hitler nuts. french nuts.
That being said, mass murder, even if it is cold and calculated is an insane thing to do.
He had rationalised it in his head. You may, by your own system of beliefs and rationale, see it as "insane". In your mind, the only person that could actively kill dozens of people in cold blood is someone who has taken leave of their senses, and has become "Insane".
He is not insane because he had not taken leave of his senses. His system of beliefs is vastly different to yours (and mine). He believed it was a necessary act in order to help achieve what he believed to be a greater good. In his mind, he had rationalised his actions, he had consciously decided to kill dozens of people in cold blood. He had not taken leave of his senses, his belief system hadn't changed, he just switched off his emotions and carried on with the plan that he had been willing to carry out for some time, killing discriminately to achieve recognition for his cause.
Someone who is insane acts out of character and does something that they often later regret. Breivik did neither.
but he must have a very severe mental disorder of some description to be capable of what he did
Again you're judging him by your own system of beliefs. I don't think there is any mental disorder whatsoever present (and I hope there isn't, the Evil ****er should burn in hell!). It was merely his own belief system that has led him to do what he has done. He is outwardly racist, and believes in ethnic cleansing, which reminds me somewhat of a certain German Dictator in the first half of the 20th century, Mr. Adolf Hitler. Again, Hitler wasn't insane, he was an Evil man with a very distorted belief system, but he wasn't insane. He justified his actions to himself (and others) to achieve what he wanted. Breivik is just the same, but on a smaller scale. Cold, calculated, Evil. But most DEFINITELY not insane or in possession of a mental disorder.
He must be psychotic, or a sociopath or something. As for the press reporting on him playing video games, how pathetic and predictable. It wasn't the hundreds of hours of practice at the shooting range, it wasn't the stockpile of weapons, it wasn't his isolation from society....it was online gaming that made him do it.
Whilst I agree on the ridiculous nature of the press suggesting it had anything to do with online gaming (hey, I've killed thousands of people for fun online over the years!), he is not psychotic or a sociopath. If he was either, it would suggest he got a kick out of killing people, in which case he would have probably killed more indiscriminately. He didn't set out to get a kick from it, in fact he talked about having to switch his emotions off because he knew that killing a load of innocent people was morally wrong, he did it because of his beliefs. He believes in ethnic cleansing, being whiter than white etc. No Muslims in Christian countries etc. etc.
And I hope he gets tried as the sane man he is, with no social or mental health problems to speak of. Because otherwise, all society is doing is creating excuses for why this evil man behaved in this way!
Sorry to go on about this, again, I feel soooooo strongly about this, that I think people with a good moral upbringing and a sound belief system (like yourself) get confused between insanity and a difference in beliefs. And all too often, the evil ****ers get away with lenient sentences because morally upstanding people are too shocked to think that someone could actually do the things they've done, in a sane state of mind with no mental health problems. These people exist! They have different beliefs to you and I, and if they exercise their beliefs like this they should not be judged with leniency!
alpin
spending many hours on whatever computer game he was playing may have conditioned him; blowing up cars, sniping passers by à la GTA.
Bollocks.
alpini spent a week playing GTA each evening. my dreams were just a continuation of the game i'd been playing. i'd go out the next day and spot possible sniper hideouts.
And yet you somehow restrained yourself and he didn't. Maybe you just didn't play enough.
mboyHe had rationalised it in his head. You may, by your own system of beliefs and rationale, see it as "insane". In your mind, the only person that could actively kill dozens of people in cold blood is someone who has taken leave of their senses, and has become "Insane".
He is not insane because he had not taken leave of his senses. His system of beliefs is vastly different to yours (and mine). He believed it was a necessary act in order to help achieve what he believed to be a greater good. In his mind, he had rationalised his actions, he had consciously decided to kill dozens of people in cold blood. He had not taken leave of his senses, his belief system hadn't changed, he just switched off his emotions and carried on with the plan that he had been willing to carry out for some time, killing discriminately to achieve recognition for his cause.
I'm not sure I agree with you. I belive he should be held responsible for his actions, I believe he was aware what he was doing was wrong. But as for your take on it, I don't think he could develop such a radical belief system, and buy into it so totally, and carry out such brutality with a totally sane, normal mind.
the bloke is nuts. but his nuts isn't pushing a pram around with a dead cat in it, his is an evil nuts. hitler nuts.
Hitler wasn't nuts though...
Breviek isn't nuts.
They both have/had a horrific system of beliefs that are/were in no way acceptable with the rest of society, yet chose the right to exercise those beliefs in spite of the consequences.
True, but doing something insane in a cold and collected way is still insane.
To him, it was not insane. He had rationalised it, as though he knew what he was doing was morally wrong (and he even admitted to having to switch off his emotions to carry out the killings), he believed it was for a greater good according to his belief system.
Just for balance, where do you stand on the September 11th Terrorists? Insane or not? I see no difference yet again, there was no insanity there, they believed so strongly in what they were fighting for and against, to them it was totally sane to do what they did in bringing down those planes.
who brought down the planes?
"You sound rattled buzz-lightyear"
I am. But because I've been in hospital all day.
I had picked up that he was against multi cultural ism but not that he killed for Jesus. I blame bite sized news.
You can still make rational (to his mind) decisions based on the delusional beliefs of a schizophrenic mind.
He's anxious to prove he's sane as his pride can't take being lumped in with lunatics. As such, his words should be taken lightly.
I had picked up that he was against multi cultural ism but not that he killed for Jesus. I blame bite sized news.
You said [i]"I don't think his actions were in any way religiously motivated"[/i].
You didn't say anything about [i]"I don't think he killed for Jesus"[/i]
If that's what you meant to say, then I blame an inability to express yourself. And possibly a day in hospital.
Breivik actions were in some way religiously motivated. To suggest otherwise is to conveniently ignore the inconvenient facts.
mboy - MemberHitler wasn't nuts though...
Breviek isn't nuts.
To him, it was not insane. He had rationalised it, as though he knew what he was doing was morally wrong (and he even admitted to having to switch off his emotions to carry out the killings), he believed it was for a greater good according to his belief system.
Just for balance, where do you stand on the September 11th Terrorists? Insane or not? I see no difference yet again, there was no insanity there, they believed so strongly in what they were fighting for and against, to them it was totally sane to do what they did in bringing down those planes.
It would seem to be a very fine line. Brevik kills 77 people to make a politco religous statement due to the conditioning he was subjected to and the warped rationale he was subjected to.
Brevik kills 77 people because he has come to the conclusion that non christians are souless demons who deserve to die - clearly insane.
depends what way you want to spin it. I believe Hitler was insane, and the 911 hijakers. Just not unaccountable for their actions. Anyway, it will be up to the judge to apply the law under the countries definition and either way he probably won't get out.....probably top himself or killed by fellow inmates.
If that's what you meant to say, then I blame an inability to express yourself. And possibly a day in hospital.
I blame your parents. 😉
It would seem to be a very fine line.
Indeed it is. There is some deep rooted anger there, without a doubt. The guy might not be barking, but I'm pretty sure there are people in the field all over the world with labels ready to attach to him. And whilst it might not fit your own criteria for a nutjob, it will fit someone elses. It's just different definitions of the same word. I think it's safe to assume that the guy has 'issues'.