Reykjavík Grapevine - 16.06.2017, Blaðsíða 10

On the first Saturday of June, Icelanders
participated in the annual Color Run,
a normally harmless,
family-friendly fun run
that passes by without
incident every year.
This year, however, the
event was marred by
the presence of dozens
of men armed with pis-
tols, casting a shadow of
fear, insecurity and the
threat of violence over
everyone, and sparking
a torrent of social me-
dia posts expressing shock and grief. The
perpetrators were the Icelandic police.
The Icelandic police normally don’t
carry guns; that’s the purview of the
special forces, who are called in for es-
pecially dangerous situations—not
normally how you would describe a
corporate-funded mini-marathon held
on a Saturday morning. But the police
have for a long time wanted guns, and
have requested permission to not only
carry them on their persons, but to also
have more powerful guns. This was es-
pecially evident two years ago when it
came to light that the Icelandic police
had clandestinely ordered a cache of MP5
submachine guns from Norway. News of
the purchase not only sparked protest in
the general public; criminologists and
even supervisors within the Icelandic
police force itself objected to the premise
of their being any need for the weapons.
Guns solve nothing
Björgvin Björgvinsson, the former Chief
of the Sexual Assault Division for the
Reykjavík Metropolitan Police, contend-
ed in 2015 that it would be “pointless” to
more heavily arm the average police offi-
cer, contrary to the wishes of the National
Commissioner of the Icelandic police. In-
stead, he argued that the Viking Squad—
Iceland’s version of the
SWAT—needs to be bet-
ter trained to deal with
high-level threats. Helgi
Gunnlaugsson, who is
also a professor of soci-
ology at the University
of Iceland, told report-
ers in 2013 that it is pa-
tience, not guns, that
is amongst the ways to
help prevent violence
from breaking out.
So why were special forces police at
the Color Run, of all places, if law en-
forcement experts within this country
don’t even think regular officers should
be carrying them in criminal contexts?
Terrorism, of course
Prime Minister Bjarni Benediktsson,
who also chairs Iceland’s new “Security
Council,” told reporters that sending
special forces to “large public gatherings”
was a part of the government’s new strat-
egy to prevent terrorist attacks in Ice-
land, citing two recent attacks in Britain.
However, it bears pointing out that,
according to the Icelandic police’s own
2017 assessment on the likelihood of a
terrorist attack in this country—where
no terrorist attack has ever occurred,
unless you count Sea Shepherd sinking
two whaling boats in 1986, is about as
unlikely as it gets. Their clumsily worded
opinion is that “it is in general not pos-
sible to rule out the possibility of a terror-
ist attack,” which can be said about pretty
much anywhere in the world. In fact, the
“threat level” of a terrorist attack in Ice-
land has not changed at all over the years.
So if the Prime Minister is citing Manches-
ter, what exactly were we doing after Nice?
Guns don’t actually
make us safer
Bjarni also said that if anything, people
should feel more secure seeing armed
police standing around at a public gath-
ering. Bjarni would probably do well to
read what science has to say about that.
In 1967, University of Wisconsin psy-
chology professor Leonard Berkowitz
conducted a groundbreaking study on
what he called “the weapons effect.” This
study, which has been replicated numer-
ous times, found that in fact, the pres-
ence of guns can actually increase the
likelihood that violence will break out—
people who carry guns, even law enforce-
ment officials, are prone to find reasons
to use them, and unarmed individuals
actually respond more aggressively to-
wards people carrying guns, not less.
It would appear as though the Icelan-
dic police are themselves aware of the
weapons effect. Journalist Sölvi Tryg-
gvason, in response to the Color Run
news, recalled that when he interviewed
a supervisor within the Icelandic police
force on the subject of cops and guns
three years ago, this supervisor told
him, "If regular officers in Iceland start
carrying guns, it's only a matter of time
before we see a gunfight in Reykjavík.”
And how about the next
protest?
Journalist and Socialist Party of Ice-
land founder Gunnar Smári Egilsson
raised a more chilling question, rhetori-
cally asking on Facebook, “If the police
carry guns at Color Run, what are they
going to bring to the next protest?” A
protest demonstration certainly falls
under the category of a “public gather-
ing.” Combine this with the weapons
effect, and it very likely is only a matter
of time before a civilian ends up shot by
a police officer at a protest demonstra-
tion in Iceland—a country normally
known for entirely peaceful protests.
Iceland stands at a crossroads when it
comes to its relationship with weapons.
When sociologists, psychologists, and
even members of the Icelandic police
force themselves all agree that guns won’t
make us safer—and will very likely put us
in greater danger of violence—then who
exactly is the Prime Minister fooling with
his talk of public safety? Not, it would
appear, the Icelandic public, anyway.
Words:
Paul Fontaine
Photo:
Courtesy of
Warner Brothers
Share this
gpv.is/cop10
“Höft.” It is a word guaranteed to
send chills down the spine of any
Icelander of a certain age. Not
easily translatable, it has to do
with currency controls and import
restrictions. Icelandic society
is unintelligible without it—it’s
why Icelanders treat the arrival
of Costco as the second coming.
Even the banking boom was a be-
lated response to höft, although
like the introduction of heroin in
response to morphine addiction,
the cure proved worse than the
disease.
But where did “höft” come
from? First sightings occurred
here during the “kreppa,” the
great depression of the 1930s.
The idea was that Icelanders not
import more than they exported,
so all foreign purchases and
currency use were placed under
strict controls. Postwar prosper-
ity, surprisingly, led to even more
“höft.” Foreign currency was still
in short supply and rationing was
more severe than during the war.
Someone who could get you prod-
ucts from abroad was worth their
weight in gold. Soviet-style queues
formed outside stores which had
gotten new deliveries. Restric-
tions were only partially lifted in
the 60s, but the legacy remained
and was replaced by market mo-
nopolies. Getting the sole right to
import a certain product guaran-
teed riches.
There has always been more
demand than supply of foreign
products in Iceland, allowing
salesmen to more or less name
their price. The markup on grocer-
ies here is three times that in Eu-
rope. Capitalism without competi-
tion can easily turn into extortion,
which is why even the leftists are
celebrating Costco. VG
10 The Reykjavík Grapevine
Issue 10 — 2017
OPINION
BLAST FROM THE PAST
“If regular officers
in Iceland start
carrying guns, it's
only a matter of
time before we
see a gunfight in
Reykjavík”
Armed Police
At Color Run
Icelanders confused and horrified;
PM shrugs it off

Why Is Every-
thing So Damn
Expensive Here?
A local police officer at Color Run, yesterday
Queue outside the shoestore in Bankastræti
5, 1935. Ironically, the adress now houses
nightclub B5, where queues like this form
every weekend night around 1 AM.
ArtisAn BAkery
& Coffee House
Open everyday 6.30 - 21.00
Laugavegur 36 · 101 reykjavik