In January 7th, 2015. Charlie Hebdo a political cartoon comic artist was in Paris when an attack occurred to their office doorstep. The reason of the attack was from a political cartoon comic offending Islamic followers. The attack took place inside Charlie Hebdo’s office. However citizens, news reports and many articles, have had the talk about weather it was right of this political cartoon comic should’ve been publish. The main idea here was weather the political cartoon was hate speech or freedom of speech. There have been good sources to prove both, that it was hate speech or freedom of speech.
However, killing certain people for protecting a belief isn’t right. If you making some cartoon comic that offended people from a group to kill people, then it is safe to say that the comic went to far. If freedom of speech can go as far as a certain group gets upset then people start dying or getting injured, then freedom of speech has to be limited. It is good to have all sorts of ideas from the people giving their thoughts. However if freedom of speech gets to the point to people dying, then it would be ideal for freedom of speech to have a limit. Peoples lives matter much more than getting a point shown or an idea out there to the public. I believe freedom of speech should have a limit mainly for the reasons of peoples safty. The definition between hate speech and freedom of speech is very close, and putting a limit to freedom of speech could be safe, than not having a limit to freedom of speech, and then people get upset and others injured.