> Attempting to trigger terror attacks on purpose should be prosecuted, that's it. The same way the driver carrying terrorists can be prosecuted without forbidd

> Attempting to trigger terror attacks on purpose should be prosecuted, that's it. The same way the driver carrying terrorists can be prosecuted without forbidding anybody else to drive. Was Charlie Hebdo "attempting to trigger terror attacks"? Was Kurt Westergaard trying to incite his own death? How about Salman Rushdie? If you're just going to say "doing something which pisses off terrorists is illegal" then I hope you're prepared to convert, because that's what it would take. > For now the legislators targeted one specific way, but if they diversify their methods the law will adapt and generalize. That's the problem right there, it's a genuinely short walk to anti-blasphemy laws.