Breivik is case example A as to why a death penalty is needed. His heinous eradication of 93 innocents has few parallels in modern history. Sadly the sick, twisted psychopathic personality is being equated with 'right wing extremism', which means nothing but is a media-political pejorative used to shut down debate. Breivik was hostile to both Islam and the multi-cult cult. Both objections have much merit. But erasing innocent lives does not. Breivik is no more a 'right wing extremist' than Stalin. A 'right wing extremist' would be by simple definition, an anarcho-libertarian someone who does not want any government, rules, laws or public restrictions on private actions. Breivik was certainly someone who hated his government, but he was probably not an anarcho-libertarian, but a demented mental midget who thought that murdering the governing party and its children would 'cleanse' Norwegian politics. There is nothing 'right wing' about such unfettered barbarity.
Anarcho-libertarianism is not what the Euro-media-political elite mean when they reference 'Christian right-wing extremism'. In their definition any White male who perpetrates an act of barbarism is automatically a 'right winger'. As if Castro who is ostensibly Catholic, is a right-wing religious extremist – he did murder 10.000 people after all. Or Herr Hitler, the Marxist National Socialist whose cult destroyed the individual and all freedoms [a hallmark of classic socialism], and whose war killed some 70 millions. Hitler and totalitarians are extreme leftists merging socialist dogma with military and police power. There is nothing 'right wing' about any of the Nazi programs of course. Hitler is no more a right-wing extremist, then a sick freak like Breivik whose ideas have nothing whatsoever to do with classical conservatism.
The derivative of the Oslo butchery is that the Euro elite and its media-political knaves will shout down legitimate debate on immigration, Moslems in Europe, the welfare state and the failure of the multi-cult social model. It would be even worse if Breivik had specifically targeted Moslems, who in his manifesto he calls wild animals. If Moslems had been the targets of his psychopathy the march to make any criticism of Islam against the law would have received a huge boost.
Moslems total some 75.000 in Oslo or about 10% of the population. They receive over 40% of welfare payments and commit over 80% of the rapes in the city. A lack of integration, high divorce rates, language difficulties, low employment rates – all these and more mark out the Moslem community in Norway. Then there are the terror threats by Moslem cells, the threats towards Oslo Jews made by Moslems, and the continual demands for 'uniqueness' within the Norwegian body politic routinely made my Moslems. These are problems and need to be addressed. It remains to be seen if post-Brevik these debates will be allowed to occur.
Good source on Moslem issues in Norway and the EU here.