Depicting Muhammed is obviously forbidden by islamic law, but if you're not a muslim should you obey that law anyway?
No, all you could expect is some consideration for other people. Drawing Muhammed with a bomb in place of a turban couldn't be seen as anything other than a statement that religion drives people to killing, and ironically some voices has been raised that al-Qaida should bomb Denmark; thus making that statement true (for those particular "voices").

Sadly this "incident" has made cases stronger in both camps, the anti-islamic forces that do exist in Denmark got fuel on their fire. Dansk Folkeparti, a right wing populist party, have been riding this thing like a surfboard, and the burning of Danish flags in places all over the world speaks for itself.

Can one blame the artists behind these drawings? Well, I don't know what kind of picture I would have made, but the ones I've seen from the article are unnecessarily negative. I made an illustration for Amnesty in may 2005 about abortion rights. I used symbols for the west, middle east, christianity and the written law as a backdrop, with three young women in front of it. The consensus is, obviously, that religion is oppressing women in matters concerning their own body. What's important here is that the women shouldn't be victimized, but rather show a unified front. Unify is the keyword, not alienate.