I agree to a certain point. I think the film should have been shown to a select crowd. Say those in educational, security, mental illness and related fields. Those who might have a professional interest in preventing such a crime. I dont agree with those who say everyone should be armed, because I dont think a bunch of amatuers with handguns should be shooting the place up to protect themselves. I hope you arent implying that a bunch of amatuer psychologists (bolded section above) who might themselves be the bullies, will be on the lookout for these deranged individuals. I assume I am misreading that bit as I have always had the utmost respect for you as a poster.
While you yourself might have had a reason to try to understand that sick pathetic mans viewpoint I doubt that the majority of the viewers wanted to or even needed to. I further assume you have a genuine interest in individuals like this and want to ensure nothing like this ever happens again.
The further grief as small as it might be that was brought to the families of the victims by this abhorrent money grubbing tactic rubs me raw though. The media stepped over the line this time and they know it. This was proved by the fact they yanked it quickly, while of course in the Columbine stuff they waited a year at least. Question is...will they have yanked it quickly enough before it influenced another psycho?
My take and no assault on you intended Kelly.