I am especially shocked at the large numbers of young people calling the killer a “hero.” An Emerson College poll released on Dec. 18 showed that 41% of young people ages 18-29 say that Thompson’s murder was “acceptable” or “somewhat acceptable.” Shortly after the killing, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro said, “The suspect here is a coward, not a hero. In America, we do not kill people in cold blood to resolve policy differences or express a viewpoint.”

While much remains to be learned about the alleged killer Mangione, his written manifesto suggests that he has a strong anti-corporate bias. This view is consistent with the framing of society by many in Gen Z, of which Mangione is a part, that life is a battle between oppressors and the oppressed. We saw that emerge after the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel by Hamas, with many Gen Zers framing Israel as the oppressor and the Palestinians as the oppressed. For them, giant corporations are the enemy that is harming them by only looking out for their profits, not their customers.

These views are in sharp contrast to older generations, from millennials to baby boomers, who tend to view corporations as serving society and creating value for all their stakeholders. Nevertheless, many older Americans feel deeply aggrieved by the health-care insurance industry and its denial of approximately 30% of their claims. Among the many comments supporting Mangione I received on my LinkedIn site was this one: “He (Thompson) and his company have killed more people than Ted Bundy. I don’t condone violence, but I’m not the least bit sad.” What does this say about our society today?

This event is a wake-up call for CEOs who are recognizing—much to their dismay—that they too could become a target for angry or disenfranchised people with grievances of their own. CEOs are wondering, what if there are more people like Mangione who believe that violence is okay, or are copycats? Does this take us back to the Wild West of the 1800s?

Their internal security teams are peppering security firms with requests to beef up their company’s security. As they do so, here are some questions to be answered as they contemplate these issues:

1. Most companies already have security at their offices. Do they want to extend it to and from their parking areas?
2. Do CEOs want security personnel outside their homes? What will the impact be on their children and their guests?
3. Do they want security personnel to accompany them to their kids’ sporting events and their social events?
4. Will they continue to fly commercial on flights, or will they or their boards insist that they fly on company planes exclusively? What about overseas flights?
5. With new high-tech devices like killer drones becoming possible, will companies have the technology to detect and defend against them?
6. On overseas trips will they provide protection in all countries, or just those countries deemed as high security risks?
7. How much security protection should companies provide their board members? Just during board meetings or in transit and at their hotels?
8. Noting that Thompson was head of UnitedHealthcare’s insurance business, not its corporate CEO, for how many of their executives should they provide security?
9. How much are companies prepared to spend on security? Will they get pushback from their shareholders for big increases in the future?

In discussions with CEOs, I have found that most are uncomfortable with having visible security around them, especially at their homes, sporting events, visits to friends, and on vacation. They find it intrusive and even eerie, as they desire to move around as they like, without being followed or having security close by. Rather than being delivered to hotels and meetings in armored vehicles and ushered in through separate, secure entrances, they prefer to engage with people informally.

In Thompson’s case, UnitedHealthcare would have needed security not just at his hotel or at the Hilton event, but closely attached to him as he made the short walk to the Hilton. Would security personnel even have observed Mangione hiding behind a car with a gun and acted in time to save Thompson’s life?

Here is my reality: In today’s society, there is no such thing as 100% safety. No matter how careful we are, any one of us could become the victim of a crazed or evil person. At the same time, we yearn to lead normal lives and move about freely and comfortably. It is prudent to take standard precautions in leading our lives and be alert to the situation around us. While practical security systems are definitely required, we should not overreact to this singular incident in ways that keep us and our families from living normal lives. If we do, people with evil intent have already won.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.