1. Twenty-one years is the maximum automatic sentence in Norwegian law. They don't have automatic life sentences or executions.

2. It's widely understood, or it it ought to be, that after the 21 years are up Norway will review his case and will almost certainly refuse to release him because he will still pose a danger. They will continue to do this every five years until he's dead. That means that this is basically the same sentence as life with a chance of parole, because it's highly, highly unlikely the Norwegian justice system is ever going to forgive and forget something of this magnitude. It's just crouched in different legal terminology.

3. So given all that, do you think a country should change its laws based on the actions of one person, when their current laws let them do pretty much the same thing, just in a different way?