[ihasa]

More info from the FT:

"About 439,000 Norwegians are recognised by the Norwegians Register of Hunters, or about one in every 10 citizens. However, most have licences for bolt-action rifles and shotguns, with a smattering of semi-automatic weapons, and ownership of heavier weapons and handguns is usually much more restrictive. Government pre-approval and registration is necessary for all firearms.
According to his manifesto, Anders Behring Breivik already owned a Benelli Nova pump-action shotgun, but unsuccessfully travelled to Prague in the Czech Republic in August 2010 to illegally purchase and smuggle back in hollowed out car seats an AK-47 automatic rifle, and a 9mm Glock pistol.
Returning to Oslo, he says he tried to purchase weapons through legal channels, and was eventually successful in being approved to buy a €1,400 Ruger Mini 14 mini-automatic rifle in October-November, partially thanks to his membership of the Oslo Pistol Club.
However, in his diary he complained that it was a "poor man's [Armalite] AR-15".
"I envy our European American brothers as the gun laws in Europe suck ass in comparison ... On the application form I stated: 'hunting deer'. It would have been tempting to just write the truth; 'executing category A and B cultural Marxists/multiculturalist traitors' just to see their reaction," he wrote, adding a smiley face icon.
Mr Breivik was also able to acquire a €800 silencer for the Ruger, and bought 30 magazine clips from a US supplier. In November, December and January he went through 15 training sessions at the Oslo Pistol Club, and by mid-January his application to purchase a Glock 16 was approved.
"The fact that I joined the club as early as 2005 was a planned move to increase my chances for obtaining a Glock, legally," he said."

:-(

[ColdEye]

More people with the same ideals as him will likely do heinous crimes like this all over the world. A very sad turn for our humanity, that's why gun ban's are a must. "With great power comes great responsibility" says Spiderman's Uncle. And I dare anyone to say that they are mentally stable and responsible enough to be in possession of a tool that can snuff out a life in an instant.

[deadwolfbones]

The only way to defend against attacks like these, whether they be by organized groups or by individual nuts, is to stand by our values. Their goal is to destroy our society, and if we start playing by their rules we let them win.

We can't defend a free, open, and inclusive society by restricting our freedom. There is no way to fight undemocratic activities by undemocratic means. If we can't fight back by our own rules, we will lose.

Yep.

The most satisfying thing that could happen with this dude is that his case is treated in a completely unexceptional manner and he's given the appropriate sentence under Norwegian law and spends the rest of his days watching multicultural television programs in his prison cell knowing that his stupid actions didn't have any effect on the way we live.

[Parallax]

More people with the same ideals as him will likely do heinous crimes like this all over the world. A very sad turn for our humanity, that's why gun ban's are a must. "With great power comes great responsibility" says Spiderman's Uncle. And I dare anyone to say that they are mentally stable and responsible enough to be in possession of a tool that can snuff out a life in an instant.

It's already illegal to murder people, and some ignore that law. I'm curious as to what it is that makes you think the people who would murder others would ignore that law, but respect one that says they couldn't own a gun.

[magkelly]

The guy's a violent, fundamentalist nut job. His choice of weapon is irrelevant, as it always is with these people. If he couldn't get a high powered gun or enough fertilizer to make bombs he'd just find some other way to kill people. Grab an airplane and fly it through a building. Make a chemical weapon and use that in the subway maybe?

Whatever gets the job done. That's the way people like him think. Can't get one kind of weapon, they'll just find or make another. Heck, bombs can be made out of practically any household chemicals if you know what you're doing. Guns are far easier, I'm sure, but the lack of one never stopped anyone like him from killing people.

This guy wanted to kill as many people as he could, period. Likely, he would have still done that even if he had to use his bare hands and do it one at a time. He was clearly on some kind of vengeance crusade. That he actually attacked kids, that is just beyond horrible. Like McVeigh he didn't care if he hurt children.

I don't believe in a hell really, but it's people like this man that sure make me wish there was one sometimes...

[ColdEye]

It's already illegal to murder people, and some ignore that law. I'm curious as to what it is that makes you think the people who would murder others would ignore that law, but respect one that says they couldn't own a gun.

If people do not have access to guns, will it be easier to kill people? No. Guns make it easy. You don't need training to fire a gun. Just get the safety off and point and shoot. If they have no access to guns, the percentage of people who would have the guts to do shooting sprees and drive by's will surely decrease. Or am I wrong in my assumption?

[Parallax]

If people do not have access to guns, will it be easier to kill people? No. Guns make it easy. You don't need training to fire a gun. Just get the safety off and point and shoot. If they have no access to guns, the percentage of people who would have the guts to do shooting sprees and drive by's will surely decrease. Or am I wrong in my assumption?

You need even less training to make and explode a bomb, and the components are even easier to acquire now than guns are.
This may come as a shock, but murder predates gun powder.

[ColdEye]

Let's use the event in Norway as an example. How many were killed with the bomb? With the guns? A gun is discreet, it is a no-brainer to use. Say a group of people were drinking in a house, tempers flare and because the people in that place can easily own and acquire guns and are within reach, people get shot. Now if somebody in that position had a gun and a bomb what would he choose? Definitely not the bomb. I cannot comprehend how you can say that it takes even less training to use and MAKE a bomb compared to buying a gun and pointing at at somebody and pulling the trigger.

[Parallax]

I cannot comprehend how you can say that it takes even less training to use and MAKE a bomb compared to buying a gun and pointing at at somebody and pulling the trigger.

Got a sack of flour and a fan? You have one hell of a destructive device. Got some fertilizer and diesel fuel? BOOM!. Timothy McVeigh never fired a shot; neither did the Unibomber.
My point is this:
We need to control criminals, not inanimate objects. Until we make the risk/consequences outweigh the the benefits of crime, we will accomplish nothing.

[deadwolfbones]

http://kyrah.net/scratch/prableen.txt

[ColdEye]

Criminals get COURAGE to do heinous things because they have access to stuff that would make them feel invincible, i.e. Having a high caliber fire arm. And how do you use a sack of flour and a fan??? I agree that we need to control criminals, but EVERYONE has the potential to be a criminal. So control regarding the access of EVERYONE to easy to use devices of death should be controlled.

[adr1an]

We need to control criminals, not inanimate objects. Until we make the risk/consequences outweigh the the benefits of crime, we will accomplish nothing.

Prohibition anyone ? Theres a social experiment that went well... for Organized Crime...

And how do you use a sack of flour and a fan???

How do you think? Whats the most obvious thing with a thin, light pile of particles and a fan? He did forget to mention an ignition source, but technically the fan could be that as well...
Voila. You have a device. Flour is incredibly flammable.
Add something like Butter - You have a Mont Blanc Tunnel Fire.
So is sugar. Sugar mills explode around the world regularly... Sugar Dust is highly explosive... just needs static discharge to go Boom!

There is just as many 'easy ways' to kill people without guns... Arguing all of this would have been prevented if there was some gun control initiative is just ignoring reality so don't start making statements like this would have been prevented or not occured... As mentioned, murder pre dates the gun. As does mass-murder.

Ever heard of a "Raiding Party"... they didn't exactly kiss people on the forehead when they arrived..

[ColdEye]

Prohibition anyone ? Theres a social experiment that went well... for Organized Crime...



How do you think? Whats the most obvious thing with a thin, light pile of particles and a fan? Voila. You have a device. Flour is incredibly explosive. So is sugar.
Add something like Butter - You have a Mont Blanc Tunnel ..

Sorry, I am not versed with making explosives.

And by the way, what could be the negative effect of banning guns? Really? If you live in a very secluded area where you need guns for hunting, sure go ahead get a rifle. But other than that, why? That just leads to trouble.

[adr1an]

Sorry, I am not versed with making explosives.

Any Farmer can tell you the above... same way they can tell you about firtilizers... And any Sugar Refinery will share their concerns about spontaneous explosion of sugar dust and what they do to prevent it...
Its not about being versed in making explosives at all unless you suggest all Flour Mill employees, Farmers and Sugar Cane Workers are explosive experts ?

Its simple science.. its not complicated, its not involved, and its not even about going out of your way to know about it.. Its just science...

And as for negative effect: Thats not the discussion here, nor is it the point. As demonstrated, the gun didn't spend 9 years writing a manifesto and 2 years setting up front companies to legitimatise the purchase of fertilizer to make the explosive device... So I doubt not having a Gun would have changed that at all... It just means we would have seen 3 or 4 or 5 devices.... Or even worse... Something else entirely! What if he'd decided to mount a Gas attack on the downtown ? Its scientifically as complicated in crude forms as the explosive... Suddenly nut jobs everywhere decide thats a way to go for a few years... How the hell you going to defend against *that* ?

Please - feel passionate about gun control. But don't for a second think that changing some laws would prevent acts like this occuring... The only thing that would change that is preventing the MAN from acting...

[shooz]

The USA is beyond a common sense discussion on gun ownership

Beyond common sense on guns and a whole lot of other things.
6 dead at a Texas birthday party, 8 shot at a car show in Seattle and that's just the last couple days. Plus there are many more that didn't get in the press.

I wish Norway a level approach and the best of common sense in response to this horror.