Cartoon Shooting in Denmark

But who gets to define what is a clear abuse of free speech? What one person may see as a clear abuse another may see as perfectly acceptable.

And no one is saying the cartoons were good, just that they deserve to be protected by the government in the interest of maintaining free speech. The point people like myself are trying to make is that the cartoonists did not commit any crime and thus should not be required to stop what they are doing. The only criminals, the only people who did anything wrong, are the ones who couldn't manage their anger properly and decided to take violent action because their religious sensibilities were offended.

Yes to both notes there. But obviously those who attacked- and often killed- the cartoonists are either dead or to be punished very heavily- as they should.
Which is why i mentioned 'realistic' (level) of fines, to at least accept that trying to troll in such a way is not the sponsored intent of the media.
Else we get locked to all sorts of debates about 'after which point is something hateful/incitement etc', which obviously have so such set answer. And when societal issues have no set answer, the dark class rises, aka lawyers.
 
There is no difference between Europe and the rest of the world in that regard. You can find plenty of these attacks in America, Asia or whereever else you want to look, without the police being able to get to the attackers right away. That is the nature of these attacks. Hit and runs are not something you can easily defend against.

If you have the right contacts and enough money, you can probably get the weapons on the black market. Europe isn't some sort of Utopia where weapons don't exist, it's just a place where you have to spend a whole lot more effort to get your hands at some than for example in the USA. That is the entire point of regulations, make sure that criminals need to spend a lot of effort to get weapons, and more importantly, limit the number of weapons generally, so people who snap for some reason don't have the ability to act on it, but can cool down again before they do anything stupid.

Oh? I thought Europe was a more developed part of the world with stricter gun control such that this stuff doesn't happen in such close succession. Was I wrong?

Can you also show me where this type of attacks has happened in Asia in recent times? Show me examples and chances are I'll show you under-developed countries with various degrees of lawlessness.
 
I think that some degree of anti-religious bashing laws (with fines as punishment, not jail time) can make sense, so as to fend against very deliberate trolling or nastiness against religious people. Eg not be against mocking something religious in drawing, but fining people for wilfully likening religious followers to bestiality-lovers (as has happened in Netherlands in the past, with one murdered comedian/ non cartoonist), paedophiles or characteristically terrorists.
Obviously no sane person would agree with murder in retaliation. But regulating with fines could do the trick of not allowing more openly nasty/trolling cartoons, which might be good in the long run.
Yea limiting speech to kowtow to religious nutters would be great in the long run.
 
Yea limiting speech to kowtow to religious nutters would be great in the long run.

Well... there are already similar fine-imposing (or worse) laws against 'inflammatory language' against other groups, eg homosexual.
I think that in extreme cases such laws are needed. It doesn't even have to do with minority status either (muslims are minority there anyway).
Obviously i am not one to advocate kneejerk 'you offended me so i'll call the cops to kick your a$$' and the like.
 
There are still vast fields between 'right to not be offended' and 'right to not have incitement of people to stereotype or hate you'. While i am agnostic i am indeed of the view that some sort of (realistic) fine should be lawful in cases of very clear abuse of free-speech with the intent and/or actual ability to cause more issues than solve anything.
This already exists, and it's called "incitation to hatred". Criticism, even gross or "offensive", isn't covered by it.
If someone made a serious call to kill/burn all Muslims, though, it would be then punished by law.
Is there a good reason why it's difficult to stop attacks like these in Europe? Where do these nutcases get the weapons? Why can't the police get there in time to stop them before they escape, or why can't the police stop them effectively?
They aren't any more difficult to stop in Europe. I guess it's just they stand out more, what with the gun murders being about five to twenty times less than in the USA.
 
I've read in several news outlets that the capital (which I live in) is in "a state of emergency".

It's surprisingly peaceful to be in a state of emergency.

Really, the furor and outrage filling my Facebook feed over this shooting is more telling of how safe we are than how unsafe we are. Denmark is a warring nation. We have slaughtered more than enough people to deserve a little kick in the shins.

My biggest problem with this is that the far right wing (native and/or migrant, doesn't matter) is the only party able to properly capitalize rhethorically on the Danish zeitgeist. And it upsets me much more than Islam ever can.
 
My biggest problem with this is that the far right wing (native and/or migrant, doesn't matter) is the only party able to properly capitalize rhethorically on the Danish zeitgeist. And it upsets me much more than Islam ever can.
Ive always said the response to terrorism always scares me a lot more than terrorism itself.
 
I've read in several news outlets that the capital (which I live in) is in "a state of emergency".



It's surprisingly peaceful to be in a state of emergency.



Really, the furor and outrage filling my Facebook feed over this shooting is more telling of how safe we are than how unsafe we are. Denmark is a warring nation. We have slaughtered more than enough people to deserve a little kick in the shins.

You think that any Danish civilians who get murdered by terrorists had it coming? Really?
 
^They weren't killed due to being Danish, though. So it is not an issue of country/people vs other country/people.

Although some politicians never want to miss a chance to present it as one, so as to increase the make-belief they are protectors of the public and so on.
 
You think that any Danish civilians who get murdered by terrorists had it coming? Really?

(rambling a bit here)

No, it's of course sad that people were more or less indiscriminately killed. My connection isn't an ethical one of individual responsibility, it was more to note that Danish actions, at large, have consequences. "Deserve" was perhaps a wrong word, but killings of a lot of people is never a safety guarantee for your affliated group, be that a nation at large or a minority within that nation. (Similarly, supporting killings of a lot of people that other people do is not a safety guarantee either, there's a reason this guy went for Danish Jews.)

Of course the current dead did not deserve their death, it is a tragedy, but neither do the massive happenstance civilian casualties of Western initiative, which Denmark currently supports. There is a sort of karma by affliation present in us finally experiencing some form of domestic travesty, even if it's hilariously minor (the body count is 2, for crying out loud, compare to any Western war in the Middle East, or, say, Breivik). This is not fair karma, it's just the way things are. And life in Denmark is extremely comfortable, after this minor incident people are extremely agitated, and the newspapers freak out, but people still live comfortably, nothing has changed.

And the political winds in Denmark are unpragmatic and sometimes stupid about these issues. For example, if you don't like Islam, by condemning its practitioners to cellar-based mosques rather than have it build proper institutions, you are actively disenfranchising a growing segment of population, hiding the culture and its communications from the public and allowing it to grow reciprocal hatred towards your institutions in the underground. The numerous Danes that despise and try to prevent the construction of proper mosques endanger all of us. And the often proposed solution, simply to send people away because of race or religious affliation, is not a very humanist solution.

No, the dead as individuals did not deserve to die. Individual responsibility in national affairs is too complicated for me to decide on. But Danes live luxurious lives and rarely realize that they are at war. They may get hurt. They may perhaps choose to do something about that.

Yes, as a polity, hopefully Denmark will realize that this is perhaps a retaliation in face of some recent decisions, both internally and externally. But I don't expect us to adapt properly. Rather, the Danish People's Party and its assortment of racists will grow stronger. Same with the radical Muslim underground.

That people freak out so much over such a small incident, even if it's sad, just leaves a bad taste in my mouth when those same people go on day by day, indifferently passive, as Denmark as a polity soils the Earth with blood and racism - both internally and externally. Perhaps people now, finally, realize that they are really able to die, and that the threat doesn't go away just because the Soviet threat imploded. For there is a difference between Danish foreign policy before and after the Russian decline. During the Korean war, we sent a hospital ship. Now, when we have no nearby threats, kissing US' butt seems danger free. I hope part of the reaction is to properly figure out what to do with our Muslim population rather than dehumanization, but I don't expect this to happen, and I think we will suffer more because of it.
 
Also, to note, the Danish response to the incident has largely been an appeal to Danishness at large (such as posting Danish flags in your Facebook feed, while praising our openmindedness and humanism, or sharing feel-good statements by Muslims, etc, etc); if you want to appeal to your affliation and your polity, and live and breathe by the virtues of it, I'd argue you do share some responsibility of that polity's darker deeds, whether they be internal or external. And I get that there are nuances to how much you can actually influence the polity's deeds, but most of the noise is that of laziness, where the large swath of Danes appealing to Good Nationalism are upset for say a month, then go back to their pig-eating, beer-drinking, passive and indifferent ways.
 
the intention of those cartoons is to offend.
Any idiotic religion that will get offended enough by a cartoon to murder people should encourage suicide of all of it's members (no bombing, just kill yourselves).

Really disgusting. Of all the injustice going on in the world & these insane buffoons are going to get mad over a cartoon depiction of a make believe character... Tragic.
 
The Prophet wasn't a make-believe character. And the Danish cartoonist portrayed him as a dog. A reviled animal in Islam. Kind of a double whammy.

Not that it makes any difference. I still agree with you. (Apart from the suicide business.)

I do wonder, though, how easy it might turn out to be to offend practically anyone to the point of becoming murderous if only it were seriously tried.

It might turn out to be surprisingly easy. All you need do is find the sacred cow, and slay it.
 
Maybe even a psychosis triggered by marijuana? Skunk, Islam, and social deprivation, could be a potent mix.
 
And no one is saying the cartoons were good, just that they deserve to be protected by the government in the interest of maintaining free speech.
The right to free speech includes the freedom from the government infringing/suppressing your free speech, but it ends there. Free speech does not mean the government has to defend you from the consequences of your speech at the hands of the people you offend/anger by it.

The government is responsible for punishing them for their unlawful acts (if any) against you though...

I have already stated that I firmly believe my right to free speech trumps your right to not be offended. This is also a point I refuse to negotiate or compromise on.
Isn't boycotting/protesting/punishing (in a lawful manner) those who offend you part of free speech? So you have the right to offend sure, but then those who are offended are going to respond and you should anticipate that right?

Also (putting legality aside) if you go around badmouthing people's mothers/fathers/sisters/wives/sports teams, etc, someone is going to take a swing at you eventually. Sure you had the right to ruffle their feathers, but you also have to accept the consequences of your actions.

Heroically defending the sacred right of free speech isn't very heroic if there are no consequences.
 
The Prophet wasn't a make-believe character. And the Danish cartoonist portrayed him as a dog. A reviled animal in Islam. Kind of a double whammy.

Not that it makes any difference. I still agree with you. (Apart from the suicide business.)
Ah, I just assumed it was another Allah depiction.

How could anyone not love dogs? That makes me even less sympathetic towards Islam. Imagine the uproar had they depicted Mo boning his 9-year old wife instead? They'd probably blow up a whole country.

I do wonder, though, how easy it might turn out to be to offend practically anyone to the point of becoming murderous if only it were seriously tried.
I'm been egged on pretty hard in life & I've never even started a fight (at least not from being verbally provoked alone, or with cartoons), let alone killed anyone.

It might turn out to be surprisingly easy. All you need do is find the sacred cow, and slay it.
Only if the person is an oversensitive little biatch. A wise man doesn't have sacred cows & he's only pities the fool who tries to get him riled up.

Injustice is different. I might slay someone who was trying to harm my kid for instance (or even trying to seriously injure me) but words & images? Come on, people should be taught at 3-years old to toughen up over this type of stuff. If you can't handle a little dogging (pun intended) you need to be protected from society & yourself in a mental hospital.
 
Come on, people should be taught at 3-years old to toughen up over this type of stuff. If you can't handle a little dogging (pun intended) you need to be protected from society & yourself in a mental hospital.
I dunno, the anti-bullying outcry is pretty strong nowadays... When I was growing up it was just considered part of growing up... learning to deal with adversity/ridicule/shame/enemies etc...

But now we lead children to believe that no one is allowed to mock them or say mean/insulting things to them. Then we are surprised and outraged when people overreact to being insulted/offended. Seems like we want to have it both ways...
 
They aren't any more difficult to stop in Europe. I guess it's just they stand out more, what with the gun murders being about five to twenty times less than in the USA.

Nowhere did I attempt to compare the situation to anywhere else in the world in my original post. I'm quite fascinated by the automatic defensiveness so far, though, and I couldn't resist playing along with it.

I was asking genuine questions. Indeed, seeing that guns are, to my knowledge, far less common in Europe than in the USA, I'd think that lone crazies are going to have a hard time getting their hands on them. Is there some kind of organisation behind these incidents?
 
I was asking genuine questions. Indeed, seeing that guns are, to my knowledge, far less common in Europe than in the USA, I'd think that lone crazies are going to have a hard time getting their hands on them. Is there some kind of organisation behind these incidents?
Not necessarily. Guns are harder to get and are not considered as a "normal" item to have by a normal person, but it doesn't mean it's impossible to put your hands on them if you really try.
Black market and smuggling exist and the "serious" criminals (Mafia and the like) probably make extensive use of them.
 
Top Bottom