Every country strives for justice. While that justice is defined differently depending on customs, we rely on that system to right the wrongs that occur in this world. We expect that system to act ethically, unemotionally and in the best interest of society. In day-to-day life, people are expected to show forgiveness and understanding; however, in court, people expect "an eye for an eye." Or at least Americans do. Just look at the response to the Norway bombings versus our own response to Osama Bin Laden. Anders Behring Breivik, the accused perpetrator of the Oslo bombing and shooting spree in Norway this past summer, was recently found to be legally insane and ineligible to serve time in prison. This decision came in a pretrial ruling by the psychologists assigned to the case.

Many of the victims' families were surprised and disappointed by the verdict because they feel justice will not be served by having Breivik spend time in a mental hospital instead of prison. Many Americans feel that the insanity defense is just a ploy to receive a less harsh sentence and that Breivik deserves to either rot in prison, or worse, be given a lethal injection, although Norway has banned capital punishment.

For the record, no one (with any reasonable sanity) would be upset if Breivik died. He killed 77 people and injured countless others. By all means, he probably deserves to die. But I am a human: I have emotions, I am at times irrational, and I can thirst for revenge. A proper justice system needs to be better than me, you or any one person. Where I see justice as revenge, courts need to see justice as taking the high road and setting the best example for society. Whether it be behind bars or behind hospital walls, Breivik is no longer a threat to society. He will spend the rest of his life unable to harm anyone else. Sure, that may not provide as much "closure" as knowing he is dead, but the justice system needs to send the message that sometimes justice is about learning to let go. Insanity is a particularly difficult defense to present in the United States, as both the public and the courts tend to see it as a way out instead of a legitimate reason behind a crime. Many have trouble seeing someone who set up a fake business to procure the materials to create and detonate a bomb, then impersonate a police officer to sneak into a summer camp to go on a shooting spree, as insane. That's understandable. His actions were cold, calculated and completed with a thoroughness one wouldn't expect from someone deemed "insane."

The psychologists assigned to Breivik's case have confirmed that his actions and the writings in his manifesto show clear signs of someone suffering from a deeply rooted case of paranoia along with schizophrenia and anti-social disorder. Insanity doesn't mean that Breivik could not function as a person. Instead, Breivik was a dangerous combination of intelligent and insane. Putting him on trial as a sane person may be more cathartic, but what does that say about a society at large that will overlook obvious mental illness in the pursuit of blood?

This is the same way I felt about the assassination of Osama bin Laden. When news broke over the assassination, I partook in the collective sigh of relief, followed by the feelings of morbid elation. I wasn't cheering or running in the streets, but there was an undeniable happiness to the news. As weird and inappropriate as it felt to celebrate a death, regardless of who died, I completely understood where the public jubilation was coming from.

I realized that this event split me into two parts. The primal portion of me understood that a tinge of happiness was understandable because it came from the most guttural part of my emotions. The intellectual in me felt that a killing should never be celebrated. It also felt that the entire event was a missed opportunity to show the world how just and fair a nation we can be. My preference and the preference of an entire public reacting in a primal manner should have no bearing on our legal system. Seeing bin Laden on trial isn't what would have felt best, but it is what should have happened.

Bringing this back to Norway, accepting that Breivik is insane and proceeding with the trial knowing that he will not go to prison or be killed is not only admirable, it's the right thing to do. If we care about progress as Americans, we need to be willing to let go of our primitive urges for revenge and commit ourselves to true justice, no matter how unsatisfying that may seem.