Again that wouldn't have worked. As someone who's been down the rabbit hole of ultra conservatism of the 1990s I speak from my own experience but I believe it's one that gets into the basic structure of all extremist views.

1. Extremists are already convinced of their position. To them it's their mission to convince you one way or another (often by dishonest means).

2. Extremists use the notion of free speech to broaden their access to an audience even if that audience is not receptive (no attention like negative attention). Especially since it convinces them of their position if the audience is overtly hostile to their views.

3. Extremists rarely, if ever, analyze their beliefs. Those that do inevitably cease to persist in those beliefs or at very least moderate them significantly.

So the only person that could have ever convinced Rodgers to not murder is Rodgers. Extremism is basically a crude coping mechanism that inevitably harms the person who holds it (but as a consequence it harms everyone else around them). In fact, I'd say that an extremist has a similar set of maladaptive traits as a heroin or meth addict. The difference being they're not biologically addicted to their beliefs, they're merely addicted to the feeling of specialness and their outsider status.