SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Guardian is reporting that...
Two gunmen have been killed and a security guard injured during what appeared to be an attack on a contest for cartoon depictions of the prophet Muhammad in a Dallas suburb.
The gunmen drove up to the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland shortly before 7pm on Sunday where the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) were hosting the exhibition and contest.
According to city authorities an unarmed guard at the event was shot at before the men were engaged and killed by police.
Further...
A bomb squad was called in after reports of a possible incendiary device at the scene of the incident. Police said a "bomb container trailer" had also been deployed in which to place any suspect device.
A police spokesman said two males had been killed and their bodies were still lying outside their car hours later.
"Because of the situation of what was going on today and the history of what we've been told has happened at other events like this, we are considering their car (is) possibly containing a bomb," Officer Joe Harn, a spokesman for the Garland Police Department, said.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday May 04 2015, @10:44AM
That would be because you're an idiot. Freedom of speech means nothing unless it means the freedom to say that which someone else does not want to hear.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jimshatt on Monday May 04 2015, @12:25PM
I really really wish people wouldn't get offended so easily, though.
(Score: 2) by tibman on Monday May 04 2015, @02:04PM
You are saying that motives matter? Why hold any contest then? Contests are completely frivolous and their reason for existence is practically circular. We want to know who can do $X the best. Why? Because some people are better at frivolous things than others.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 04 2015, @02:18PM
> Why hold any contest then? Contests are completely frivolous and their reason for existence is practically circular.
This contest had one primary goal - be shitty to muslims.
Just because it was dressed up as a contest doesn't make that the primary goal.
Just like requiring some people to count the number of jelly beans in a jar [nbcnews.com] in order to register to vote was not about making sure only accurate bean counters could vote.
(Score: 2) by tibman on Monday May 04 2015, @06:29PM
I'm arguing that it is slippery slope. Someone could argue that a shooting contest is just practicing murder or something. There are zero "necessary" reasons to hold any contest.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 04 2015, @06:44PM
> I'm arguing that it is slippery slope.
What do you mean by "it?"
Are you seriously arguing that judging people by their intentions is wrong?
Because we do it all the time. It is the difference between murder and manslaughter for one.
(Score: 2) by tibman on Monday May 04 2015, @08:10PM
Okay then, let's play. Can you have a legit "best drawing of Mohammed contest"? Would someone still be offended? Someone is ALWAYS offended, no matter what you do. By giving authority to judge intent to one party that party will literally decide if you are allowed to have a contest about anything. If they decide your art is too risque then there will simply never be an organized event about it. Good luck ever seeing anything actually interesting. That is what freedom is about. You can have a best bondage picture contest. You can have naked mud wrestling. You can have flag burnings. If you don't like it, stay away from it. As long as your rights aren't trampled by another's freedom, then it's fair game.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 04 2015, @08:18PM
> Can you have a legit "best drawing of Mohammed contest"?
Can you have a best use of the word nigger by white guys contest?
> Someone is ALWAYS offended, no matter what you do.
That is a cop-out. Context matters.
> You can have a best bondage picture contest. You can have naked mud wrestling. You can have flag burnings
In all of those cases it is reasonable to believe that some of the people participating are doing so because they genuinely care about the topic, even flag burners do it because they are protesting their own government, not using it as a pretext to attack "the other."
(Score: 2) by tibman on Monday May 04 2015, @08:55PM
I usually hear "attack on family values" as an excuse to censor. Context matters, i agree. But that only changes the degree of how many are offended. Nude art offends some people, should it be banned? Even in private but open to the public settings? It's a slippery slope, like i said earlier. As soon as you start classifying what is allowed and what isn't, people's freedoms start becoming restricted. The easiest place to draw the line is where your freedom ends and mine begins. So yes, that allows people to publicly do and say completely socially unacceptable things. But that is their freedom. Just like yours is to protest them, denounce them, ignore them, or whatever you prefer.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 04 2015, @09:08PM
> an excuse to censor.
This thread is about what is necessary, not what is censored.
This contest was nothing more than a pretext to demean people who had done nothing to the 'exhibitors.' We aren't talking about censoring, we are talking about condemning them.
(Score: 2) by tibman on Monday May 04 2015, @09:28PM
Condemn all you want as long as you acknowledge that citizens can hold demeaning contests if they wish to. Condemning them is great!
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 04 2015, @04:51PM
> I really really wish people wouldn't get offended so easily, though.
When the intent is to be offensive, they offenders can't really complain when they succeed.
If you meant to say you wish people wouldn't go on murder sprees because they've been offended. Sure, I will agree with that.
With the caveat that 99.999+% of offended people don't do that. We've got somewhere on the order of 3 to 7 million muslims in the US and only 2 of them got offended enough to try to kill people for drawing pictures of Mo. So it is not really a representative sample.