Loudmouth,
It may yet turn out that the producer's sole aim was to incite the ensuing trouble. Just give him to a mob of fanatics & let them deal with him rather than causing problems on a global basis. he could not possibly have been so ignorant as to not foresee the reaction. He is just as bad as those he supposedly insulted. What about the internet provider who permitted that movie to be broadcast ? Just as much an idiot. One can not argue freedom of speech with an idiot. If one does then one's no better.

Individual,

Can't let you get away with this one: >>"Just give him to a mob of fanatics & let them deal with him..."<<

The writer/director/producer may have been ill-advised (or an 'idiot', as you suggest), and the internet distributor likewise, but he/they have done a service in bringing some things to a head. It is certainly to be abhorred that people have been killed and injured and property etc damaged/destroyed, but the reality is that the types of reaction chosen (Yes, chosen) by these mobs is what is at fault, and it is indeed necessary for all, on both sides, to realise the significance of such potential reactions to any possibilities for future world peace and harmonious relations.

Who was it said: "I may not agree with what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it." (Or similar.)

Freedom of speech is a fundamental tenet of free and democratic societies, and the airing of differences in an atmosphere of tolerance and respect, in the interest of genuine understanding, is healthy and even essential to promoting the advancement of civilisation and civil/political relations. What we don't need is irresponsible and fanatical hotheads who throw all reason to the wind in fits of rage at the least questioning of their version of truth or reality, no matter how staunchly held.

Do we see physicists coming to blows over Theories of Everything, or critics of AGW theories taking to the streets in furious frenzy, or even Creationists attacking universities for expounding 'evolution theory'? No. How would it be if differences in the political arena were settled by the fielding of 'champions' in the prize ring or on the battle field? War, physical conflict and mental strangulation of all kinds are to be abhorred, and their root causes exposed for the evil they really are - if our civilisation is to rise above the dog-eat-dog mentality and immaturity so evident in so many quarters the world today.

Time for the lion to lay down with the lamb, and all swords beaten into ploughshares, to never re-emerge.

Saltpetre,
You are perfectly right. The dilemma is how to deal with those who want to be difficult & those who are difficult because they're simply blotto.
That's why I'm so much in favour of social guidelines. I'm probably one of the worst for having to abide by guidelines but there simply is no other option. If there is I'd like to know about it yesterday.
Freedom of speech or expression opens more cans of worms than it closes. You can not deal with idiots by affording them equal rights. People who can not get through the day without causing some grief forfeit their equal rights.
Put the protesters & the film maker on an uninhabited island & leave them there for good. Let the laws of nature take their course. The time has come to put a stop to this nonsense, put a stop to the do-gooders, put a stop to religion in public places.
We know that our Laws do not protects us. On the contrary by abiding the law you're actually breaking it in many instances. I say work on creating practical common sense.

Individual,

There is one major stumbling block to humanity moving forwards to become a type-2 civilisation - fanaticism/extremism, from whatever cause, be it religious, capitalist, greed or insanity. True progress necessitates the whole of humanity moving forwards, not just a gated Western or selective portion, so a way must be found. You cannot simply lock away all the 'looney-tunes', for whilst ever the causes for extremist views prevail there will continue to be an endless supply of such extremely bigoted individuals and groups. One must treat the disease(s), rather than focusing on the symptoms.

We in the affluent world may not have a direct responsibility to 'save' all of humanity from itself, and in the absence of the West's addiction to middle-eastern oil we might be tempted to just walk away and let all hell break loose. However, this is lifeboat Earth, and it is in everyone's interest for differences and disagreements to be amicably resolved, and disparities between peoples ameliorated. The days of physical and intellectual conquest should be put away, relegated to history, and never revisited. How, is a big ask, but without the effort we can only continue to have a second-class world.

Affluence has its obligations, and not just for bears or tigers, elephants, rhinos and the Tassie Devil.

This greatest of all challenges may only be achieved with the velvet glove and the olive branch, and for all liberated and emancipated individuals this has to be our most pressing responsibility, else we are not Humanity but only a scattering of backward, bigoted tribes.

Dedication to the realisation of a peaceful and productive globe must be the prime objective and directive, and, as with resolving world population and expansionist issues, education and improved quality of life for all is the key. Time for all the world's religious leaders to get their heads together and resolve their differences, for benefit of all their respective congregations and all of humanity.

True progress necessitates the whole of humanity moving forwards, not just a gated Western or selective portion, so a way must be found.
Saltpetre,
Yes, but that way is the way you object to. As the whole of humanity, in fact the majority of humanity, does not have the experience/background to have sufficient foresight it has to be done step by step so that those who can't yet see will gradually get the idea & hopefully join in.
Lack of vision is on par with lack of common sense, therein lies the problem. It is up to a handful of benevolent leaders to dictate sense & good will. It can't be done democratically because democracy does not take into account the variations of humanity. The only true equal rights/equal opportunity is when the playing field is not on the same level. Those who aspire to the higher level can go there on their own account & those who are quite happy on the lower levels must not be forced to go to higher levels if they do not so desire.
We have an obligation to show people other ways & options but we have no right to force them. Just as nobody has a right to force themselves onto others for help & then expect the involuntary hosts to change their ways or lower their standards. The more enlightened have a duty to enlighten others for the common good.