undefined | Better HN

0 pointsneither_color4y ago0 comments

He was attacking a youth camp and shot many young teens(I didn’t read every slide but one example I saw was a 14 YO girl hit four times) so I don’t see a difference. I guess I’m just shocked at seeing a weird attempt at “ethics” from someone who would do something like that.

0 comments

magicalhippo4y ago

What he did was horrible and evil, but it was also extremely calculated and carefully planned. He knew full well what he did.

For example, he researched which drugs he could take that would make it easier for him to shoot the kids[1].

He was not insane. He wasn't on a wild rampage. He had a specific goal in mind: to destroy the future of the labour party.

[1]: https://www.aftenposten.no/norge/i/QJRjP/behring-breivik-var...

meowface4y ago

Breivik likely saw himself as a very ethical and virtuous individuals. His reasoning there doesn't surprise me.

He and some other mass killers may even feel as though they have a stronger personal code of ethics than most people. Their ethical philosophies and stances are just unfathomably twisted and corrupted, not unlike how cancer cells behave as if they're functioning rightfully.

mensetmanusman4y ago

In the ethics of evil, one can see that even evil acts are done for some false sense of ‘good’ by the doer.

GoblinSlayer4y ago

He believes it's wrong to kill children, not teens. The age of 12 is approximately when people go from childhood to adolescence.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse