Apologies for veering away from the topic of the thread and back to other issues raised

There have in fact been separate courts here for different religious groups for hundreds of years,none of which prevent this country being seen as a liberal democracy.

Anglicans have various ecclesiastical courts.They may be limited nowadays in what they cover but nevertheless they are single religion-based courts.

The Jewish community have for a long time had "Beth Dins" which (provided both parties agree) determine matters such as conversion,property disputes and divorce and questions of religious doctrine.

The British, in significant parts of the British Empire, had a judicial system which included religious courts,including muslim-based ones.

Within the UK,there has been more than one legal system since the beginning (Scotland on the one hand/England & Wales on the other)with significant differences within them,including in determining matters of criminal law.

So,rather than being the antithesis of democracy,the UK democracy has survived perfectly OK in an environment where all do not live all the time under one precise set of laws/rules and there has long been a "mix and match".

Arguably,our adherence to the European Convention on Human Rights and the introduction of the Human Rights Act have been a step towards strengthening the existence of greater legal equivalence across the UK.

Apologies for veering off thread topic and hopefully now back to the terrible murders in the US.

Yes, I lived in the States for almost a decade. Agree, in some ways (in their individual ferocity) US nut jobs do rival Middle Eastern loons but the comparison is still tenuous. For one thing, they're not nearly as coherently organised -- they're not acting under a single banner. For another, the actions (Roof being a case in point) are random rather than co-ordinated. Gang culture is pervasive and destructive but unrelated,; it's more to do with drugs and crime than political posturing.

With regard to Muslims who "refuse" to be integrated into British society, agree but only up to a point. Why would you want to integrate yourself into a society that's spent the better part of half a century acting prejudicially towards you? Although that in no way excuses violence, we've made a rod for our own back.s For years, we treated immigrants like second-class citizens and now we're surprised to find they've had enough and are fighting back. Is there a shortage of mirrors these days?

People will stop listening to separatists when they experience something that attracts them in the other direction. We won't solve the problem with anti-terrorist laws (although that may reduce the actual violence.) In the long-term, we'll change it by changing the very nature of society and creating something that everybody feels an equal part of.

Gotta say - I was almightily impressed with them. Turning something so awfully negative into a positive. Great philosophy to have God or no God. Some think they a bit bonkers to have done it. I disagree. Also, it highlighted how wrong the killer was/is not only in his actions but also in his words. These were obviously good people. Not the demons he was trying to portray them us. A very sad but epic fail.

A lesson to all wannabe rabble-rousing hate mongers. Hitler made himself look a total ass and so will you.

Edited by Kermit8 (22 Jun 2015 9.17am)

It is a very wide definition, a lot of riots would qualify. But in this case I guess he was motivated by racist/political ideas, so perhaps terrorism. Having said that, he is probably nuts as well.

They probably call expressing an opinion free speech, because that is what it is. I suppose you appreciate why cartoonist are killed and the likes of Rushdie have to go into hiding for exercising free speech. Why shouldn't people be free to 'disrespect' Islam - Jerry Springer, the Opera was free to disrespect Christianity.