The Norway Massacre - Essay Sample

Introduction

Terrorism is a major catastrophe which delivers a massive blow to the affected country regarding the civilian casualties and damage to the infrastructures (Thio, Taylor, & Schwartz, n.d). The Norway attack was conducted by a lone terrorist by the name of Anders Behring Breivik and was directed towards the government and the general population. His first strike was within the Regjeringskvartalet, an area that hosts the government offices using a car bomb made from fertiliser and fuel oil. The second attack occurred two hours later at a remote island of Utoya, where a youth camp had been going on. At the end of the massacre, the terrorist had managed to kill 77 people and injuring at least 110.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Some of the direct costs associated with the massacre include the loss of life, treatment of the injured, destruction of government buildings and infrastructures, and cost of psychological help (Buesa, Valino, Heijs, Baumert, & Gomez, 2007). On the other hand, some of the intangible expenses that arose from this attack included loss in tourism due to the fear of new attacks, loss in foreign direct investment, weakening of the Norwegian currency on the stock market and deterioration of international trade due to insecurity and uncertainty (Frey, Luechinger, & Stutzer, 2007). In spite of that, some of the system costs which were brought about by the heinous acts include the cost of upgrading the security system to curb future threats related to terrorism and the cost of reconstructing the damaged facilities to modern and high tech standard that would withstand similar attacks.

Nonetheless, despite the various theories and strategies which have been suggested to measure the actual financial losses which were incurred as a result of the massacre, I believe it is hard to quantify the figure accurately because the effect of the attack was prolonged and extensive (Thio, Taylor, & Schwartz, n.d). However, based on the direct, system and the indirect costs that have been highlighted, one can calculate a rough estimate of the financial losses due to the attack. To obtain the assessment, one would have to add up the total cost of direct cost, the indirect costs and the system cost.

Conclusion

In conclusion, based on the reactivity definition of deviance, the perpetrator of the 2011 Norway attacks departed from the usual social behaviour (Thio, Taylor, & Schwartz, n.d). Breivik was reacting to what he called as the "the government's inability to stop the extremist Muslims from taking over." However, his acts of cowardice did bring not only financial losses but also massive loss of life.

References

Buesa, M., Valino, A., Heijs, J., Baumert, T., & Gomez, J. G. (2007). The Economic Cost of March 11: Measuring the Direct Economic Cost of the Terrorist Attack on March 11, 2004 in Madrid. Terrorism and Political Violence, 19(4), 489-509. doi:10.1080/09546550701590677

Frey, B. S., Luechinger, S., & Stutzer, A. (2007). CALCULATING TRAGEDY: ASSESSING THE COSTS OF TERRORISM. Journal of Economic Surveys, 21(1), 1-24. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6419.2007.00505.x

Thio, A., Taylor, J. D., & Schwartz, M. D. (n.d.). Deviant Behavior (12th ed.). Books a la Carte: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.