charlie hebdo attacks

I don't doubt many people would have found the Charlie Hebdo cartoons extremely offensive, and I'm not here to tell you that's wrong, but the insinuation that insulting/offending people may have invited this horrific tragedy on any level is tantamount in my eyes to the old age adage that a rape victim "asked for it" by wearing a short skirt. It's victim blaming at its very worst, and especially against people who fought in many ways for the rights of those who attacked them. So long as offence remains within the bounds of what is legally acceptable, then it is just that - acceptable - whether you personally like it or not.
Let's be clear: I agree there is no justification whatsoever for gunning down journalists or cartoonists. I disagree with your seeming view that the right to offend comes with no corresponding responsibility; and I do not believe that a right to offend automatically translates into a duty to offend.
The attacks should not reduce France to a condition of fear. France and the rest of the "free world" should not consider this horrific crime as an act of war. This would be giving in to exactly what these hooded men and extremist groups want.
For those over the years who say they support freedom of expression but with opt outs, or who have argued that freedom of expression doesn't extend to articles, photographs or cartoons which offend them, it should be made clear that freedom of expression gives everyone the chance to debate opinions, and that right is vital.
It is quite clear that you do not care about the loss of life and suffering that you have caused. It is quite clear that you have no regard to the friends and family of your victims or to the people of France.