No, countless studies over the years have show that harsher penalties have never, not in a single instance (even in extrem cases like Germanys last month in WW2) have let to any reduction in crime.

There is this nice little anecdote that the biggest single day report of pickpockting in London was during the execution of a thief.

Harsher penalites only appease the darker side of us. I personally consider them a sign of weakness. There is a reason the victim isn't the jury. I can't deny a father or husband is urge for vengance, but that is the reason we have impartial courts.

In your case the person is obviously criminally insane. Which is actually worse than a conviction. The average time a murderer serves in prison is 19 years in Germany. The criminally insane are usually in it for life. And that even goes for weaker crimes.

In this case, the assailant apparently wants to be locked away for life. But, this is a special case, granted.

If I be poor, without job, etc etc. I will go to Norway and kill somebody. I mean it.

They just send you back, right?

Edit: And please stab someone older than 18 yr girl. Some drug dealer, politician or if you must, some realy old lady.

If your first reaction to anything threatening is of the violent nature (harsh penalties are in this category), then congratulations, you live in a radicalized society. Instead of trying to understand and try to fix the root of the problem, you will inevitably just muck about with the symptoms. There is no "right" way of doing it, since eliminating crime is impossible (not "almost" impossible, but directly impossible), but you can force that statistic down if you have the right conditions.

They don't send people back because according to Norwegian Supreme Court most prisons in other countries do not meet the minimum humanitarian standards. ;)

Th rehabilitation system in Norway works perfectly, because they live in a near perfect society. You got lots of money from oil, so your citizens will never be as poor to commit most violent crimes to go to jail.

I don't think it would work in Poland, for example. In a way of "you killed five people with an axe? Ok, so now chop some wood to practise your axing skills" :P

We would have plenty of people commiting crimes to get free access to good food, tv, education, etc.

Hell, a lot of homeless comit crimes during winter just to go to jail and not to freeze to death outside. At least here.

I believe that Norwegian system wouldn't work in most places in the world.

I've heard (a rumor) that in Norway or Sweden, if you buy too much alcohol, you should expect visit from govt. employees checking if you're not alcoholic by any chance.

I think there is some truth to that because I read an article releated to Polish imiigrants and how one guy who lived in Norway had family over and went out and bought a bit of alcohol. Next thing he knew, he had someone at his door asking if there was a problem.

Keep in mind that, AFAIK, in Norway liquor stores close at around 8 PM.

I lived in Sweden a little over 20 years ago, and certainly then you could only buy alcohol from official government-run alcohol shops, and you had to produce your identity card - so I could well believe that consumption is/was monitored.

does not compute...

what does that mean?

I think Fred_DM means that a Michael Moore documentary isn't one at all because there is a lot of bias in his films. In a documentary you're supposed to just show things as they are without adding your own bias in the mix. Just my own 2 cents on this matter.

Whoops. I also have to admit that I only watched the video muted. Bad habit of mine :)