|
analog - a twisted and demolished car has the same impact. Looking at something that weighs nearly (or over, depending on the model) two tons and seeing it utterly destroyed. A splash of blood on the pavement. Someone mentioned an arm. Showing a mutilated body seems exreme and nnecessary and even if you feel the need, why give names, dates and locations? That just seems to be asking for something like this to happen. As it said that she didn't know it was her dad until she heard the date and nature of the accident one would assume the body itself was unrecognizable. Why give a name then? What about a kid who's too timid to speak up? What about a kid who doesn't realize the severity of what he or she will be looking at until it's up on the screen? We're dealing with a generation that's been indoctrinated to hollywood style deaths. A kid may figure that he or she will see their family member with a bit of blood at the corner of their mouth and assume they can handle it.
The whole thing was poorly executed and that little girl is the one who has to pay for it.
And some kids are going to drink and drive no matter what you show them. Arguing that this is the better way to do it because it may prevent a few more cases seems illogical to me. Does one or two less cases justify traumatizing the rest of the kids? I'm not sure it does.
__________________
I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept
I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept
I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head
I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said
- Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame
|