Take a stand on political violence

[Landon Caeli]

Timeline of America's political violence dating back to 2011​

From here: MSN

If you think that ALL political violence is wrong, whichever side of the political fence you are, then just say so. Don't pick and choose. Don't comment on individual examples. Don't rate them or excuse them. Don't blame any one person or group. Just say that it's wrong. Please let's all get on the same page.

Jan. 8, 2011-- 6 killed, 13 others including then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords wounded in Tucson shooting​

Six people were killed and 13 others wounded, including then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, during a constituent meeting outside a grocery store in Tucson, Arizona. Giffords, a Democrat, was shot in the head at point-blank range, critically injuring her, before the shooter unleashed a spray of bullets. Giffords survived the shooting.

June 14, 2017 -- Rep. Steve Scalise shot during congressional baseball game practice​

Four people were shot -- including then-House majority whip and Louisiana Republican Rep. Steve Scalise -- when a gunman opened fire on Republicans practicing for a congressional baseball game at Eugene Simpson Stadium Park in Alexandria, Virginia.

Oct. 8, 2020 -- 13 men arrested for plotting to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer​

Thirteen members of a militia group were arrested and charged for planning to storm the Michigan statehouse, kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and start a civil war.

Jan. 6, 2021 -- January 6 attack on the US Capitol, pipe bombs at RNC and DNC​

A mob of pro-Trump protestors stormed the U.S. Capitol as lawmakers met to ratify the results of the 2020 election on Jan. 6, 2021.

Feb. 14, 2022 -- Kentucky mayoral candidate targeted in attempted shooting​

While running for office, Louisville Mayor Craig Greenberg was the target of an attempted shooting at his campaign headquarters. No one was injured in the incident.

Oct. 28, 2022 -- Paul Pelosi attacked with hammer in his home​

Former Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's husband, Paul Pelosi, was attacked with a hammer in their San Francisco home. David DePape was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole in a state trial over the attack. He had broken into the Pelosi home seeking to hold the then-speaker hostage.

Dec. 4, 2023 to Jan. 3, 2024 -- New Mexico state legislature candidate orchestrates shootings, murder for hire​

A New Mexico man who ran for the state legislature as a Republican and lost his bid is serving an 80 year prison sentence for allegedly orchestrating attacks at the homes of four Democratic lawmakers. No one was injured in his attempts.

June 13, 2024 -- 1st attempted assassination of Donald Trump​

Then-Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump was shot in the ear during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, after a gunman opened fire from the roof of a nearby building.

Sept. 15, 2024 -- 2nd attempted assassination of Donald Trump​

Trump faced a second assassination attempt at the Trump International Gold Club in West Palm Beach, Florida. Prosecutors said suspect Ryan Wesley Routh allegedly put together a plan, including purchasing a military-grade weapon, researching Trump's movements and using a dozen burner phones in an alleged attempt to kill Trump based on political grievances.

Oct. 6, 2024 -- Kamala Harris campaign office in Arizona shot at 3 times in a month​

An office shared by then-Vice President Kamala Harris' presidential campaign and the Democratic Party in Tempe, Arizona, was damaged by gunfire three times in less than a month, according to police.

Dec. 4, 2024 -- Murder of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson​

UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson died after being shot multiple times at point-blank range by a gunman outside a Manhattan hotel, according to police. The shooter appeared to have been lying in wait at the hotel where he shot Thompson, authorities said.

April 13, 2025 -- Arson at Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro's residence​

A mechanic who has expressed disdain for Democrats on social media was arrested for starting a fire at Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro's residence.

May 21, 2025 -- Killing of two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington, D.C.​

Two Israeli embassy staffers were shot and killed while exiting an event at the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, D.C.

June 1, 2025 -- 13 people injured in Colorado firebombing attack, 1 later dies​

A man threw Molotov cocktails during a pro-Israel demonstration in Boulder, Colorado, injuring 13, authorities said. One person later died of their injuries.

June 14, 2025
-- Minnesota lawmaker shootings​

A masked gunman disguised as a police officer shot and killed Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark in their home, Gov. Tim Walz said.

Aug. 8, 2025 -- Shooting at CDC headquarters​

A police officer was killed when a gunman opened fire near the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) headquarters and the Emory University campus in Atlanta, authorities said. Suspect Patrick Joseph White had blamed the COVID-19 vaccine for making him sick and depressed, according to law enforcement. He had increasingly focused on the vaccine as a source of his grievances, they noted. He was found dead after the shooting, officials said.

Sept. 10, 2025 -- Shooting of Charlie Kirk​

Charlie Kirk, the founder of the conservative youth activist organization Turning Point USA, was fatally shot during an event at Utah Valley University on Wednesday. President Donald Trump confirmed Kirk’s death on social media.

Not everyone in America believes political violence is wrong anymore, Bradskii. In fact, it is gradually becoming normalized, as murderer Luigi Mangione supporters are celebrating in the streets only days after the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

Today:
<Edit> video link deleted, because stupid potty mouthed girl.

 

[durangodawood]

We should condemn select acts of violence that help reinforce our pre existing political commitments.

The rest dont count because of..... reasons.

 

[durangodawood]

Not everyone in America believes political violence is wrong anymore, Bradskii. In fact, it is gradually becoming normalized, as murderer Luigi Mangione supporters are celebrating in the streets only days after the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

Today:
<Edit> video link deleted, because stupid potty mouthed girl.

So what about "not everyone"?

Theres always some jerks who celebrate it after that fact, or encourage it before the fact. Don't think your "side" is off the hook, whichever side you're on.

 

[Bradskii]

Not everyone in America believes political violence is wrong anymore, Bradskii.

I'm not asking everyone in America. I'm only asking those in the forum who happen to click on this thread. It would be great if everyone who did click on it just made a simple statement such as 'Yes, I agree. All political violence is to be condemned'.

You can do that now.

 

[rjs330]

Not sure whether a side is more prone to violence but the right has demonstrably been .more violent over the last 15 years or so when it comes to political violence.

Nope, the left has been more politically violent over the last 15 years. It has picked up over the last 5.

On another thread I posted a large number of leftist political violence. I didn't even post it all, just a few. I could go through them all, but dont feel like it. But since 2020 the political violence has gotten more and more leftist. A minimum of 188 events since 2016. It doeant include the riots of 2020 or the violence against ICE, the burning of Telsa dealerships and cars etc.

 

[Stopped_lurking]

Nope, the left has been more politically violent over the last 15 years. It has picked up over the last 5.

On another thread I posted a large number of leftist political violence. I didn't even post it all, just a few. I could go through them all, but dont feel like it. But since 2020 the political violence has gotten more and more leftist. A minimum of 188 events since 2016. It doeant include the riots of 2020 or the violence against ICE, the burning of Telsa dealerships and cars etc.

Do you have any references for that? This study seems to indicate that left-wing ideology is associated with less risk of comitting a violent act ( https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2122593119 ), they looked at a total of 1563 ideologically motivated acts whereof 566 were comitted in the 2010s. I realise that it probably is hard to collect data in the US about these things, depending on if it is local, state or federal jurisdiction, so it is always interesting to see other sources. Also the PNAS study probably misses the most of the last 5 years.

 

[Jerry N.]

Yes, I agree. All political violence is to be condemned.

 

[Nithavela]

No, I don't think that all political violence is to be condemned. When a regime is tyranical and no avenue of non-violent resistance has any prospect of changing things, militant resistance is an imperative. The american revolutionary war and the assassinations and sabotages during the occupation of france by nazi germany are examples of political violence we celebrate today, while in the past, we in the west celebrated other perpetrators of political violence who have since fallen out of favour because they dared to not only attack "our" enemies, but also ourselves, like the Mujaheddin of Afghanistan. And what is war if not the highest organised form of political violence?

We today are more than happy to sit on our high moral horse and want to condemn all violence, just like we desire to see ourselves as being strictly against the suffering of children, but much like we happily wear sweat shop clothing while doing so, we enjoy the liberties and independence brought about by political violence perpetrated for our benefit.

 

[Jerry N.]

No, I don't think that all political violence is to be condemned. When a regime is tyranical and no avenue of non-violent resistance has any prospect of changing things, militant resistance is an imperative. The american revolutionary war and the assassinations and sabotages during the occupation of france by nazi germany are examples of political violence we celebrate today, while in the past, we in the west celebrated other perpetrators of political violence who have since fallen out of favour because they dared to not only attack "our" enemies, but also ourselves, like the Mujaheddin of Afghanistan. And what is war if not the highest organised form of political violence?

We today are more than happy to sit on our high moral horse and want to condemn all violence, just like we desire to see ourselves as being strictly against the suffering of children, but much like we happily wear sweat shop clothing while doing so, we enjoy the liberties and independence brought about by political violence perpetrated for our benefit.

Historically, slow non-violent change should have longer and more stable results. However, the list of non-violent revolutions on the Internet is a bit dubious. Here are two I agree with:

“1850-1867 -- Hungarian nationalists, led by Francis Deak, engaged in nonviolent resistance to Austrian rule, eventually regaining self-governance for Hungary as part of an Austro-Hungarian federation.”

“1920s-1947 -- The Indian independence movement led by Mohandas Gandhi is one of the best known examples of nonviolent struggle.”

I would also include the fall of Communism in Central and Eastern Europe, but some might not agree for good reasons.

30 Examples of Successful Non Violent Action, by BK Community | DailyGood

In Michael Nagler's latest book, he explains how to use the practice of nonviolence for the sake of progress and challenging injustice. It is literally...

www.dailygood.org

 

[Nithavela]

Historically, slow non-violent change should have longer and more stable results. However, the list of non-violent revolutions on the Internet is a bit dubious. Here are two I agree with:

“1850-1867 -- Hungarian nationalists, led by Francis Deak, engaged in nonviolent resistance to Austrian rule, eventually regaining self-governance for Hungary as part of an Austro-Hungarian federation.”

“1920s-1947 -- The Indian independence movement led by Mohandas Gandhi is one of the best known examples of nonviolent struggle.”

I would also include the fall of Communism in Central and Eastern Europe, but some might not agree for good reasons.

30 Examples of Successful Non Violent Action, by BK Community | DailyGood

In Michael Nagler's latest book, he explains how to use the practice of nonviolence for the sake of progress and challenging injustice. It is literally...

www.dailygood.org

I think that "non-violent revolution" is a bit of a misnomer, since in those revolutions, there is plenty of perpetrated violence. It just happens to be only applied in one direction. Besides, many non-violent revolutions are violently supressed, like the democratic movement of China that was destroyed in the Tian'anmen Massacre. Do you believe that the chinese democrats should have just allowed themselves to be killed for longer and would have eventually succeeded in that manner? More recently, the Belarussian dictator Lukashenko shamelessly faked a reelection and beat down a peaceful protest movement, remaining firmly in power while his prominent opponents were imprisoned, killed or forced into exile.

Besides, I don't know if non-violent change really has such a great track record when it comes to longer and more stable results. Both India und Hungary currently aren't doing so well when it comes to political liberty. Most former central or eastern europe nations that resulted from the fall of communism are authocraties and vassals of Russia.

 

[Tuur]

Exactly right. I've seen the full footage and when you see something like that that you know isn't cgi or set up for a scene in a film then it is very confronting indeed.

Get people who think that a few deaths are the price that you must pay to protect the 2nd ammendment to watch it. Then ask them if a 5 year old kid getting shot the same way is a reasonable price.

It's been about 200 years now, but there was an instance where a school master looked out the window and saw an approaching war party. He dismissed his students and, to give them time to escape, went out and met the war party. He got his throat slit for his trouble. Killed him right there on the school grounds.

Did it matter that they didn't use firearms?

It's not the weapon, it's the intent. Thinking that eliminating firearms eliminates ill will is wishful thinking. Thinking that it prevents ill will from being carried out is terribly mistaken.

The discussion of graphic videos has me thinking that modern life is a little sheltered. In kindergarten I knew I girl who lost her foot due to a rattlesnake bite. I'd see my father hurt badly enough several times to go to the emergency room. Have sliced the palm of one hand open on broken glass, and split open a finger when a bottle broke in my hand. Have applied pressure to a wound with a towel to attempt to stop another student from bleeding while as the teacher drove him to a doctor. We knew a man who accidentally got cut up working under a huge rotary mower (the kind you hook to the back of tractors). There are gorier instances than that, one in particular I won't relate that many here would find disturbing. And yes, knew some who died from gunshots, mostly from shotguns at close range. One, someone I thought a lot of, accidentally did so by carrying his shotgun while trying to climb a fence instead of setting it to one side, climbing the fence, and picking it back up.

The gory "convincer" films were for those who had never seen such and didn't realize what could happen. If I'd thought about it then, would have realized that not growing up on a farm and not hunting didn't give the same experiences, and that's why such films were shown to those who didn't have a clue what could happen.

 

[Bradskii]

Thinking that eliminating firearms eliminates ill will is wishful thinking.

The it's lucky that I'm not proposing that.

 

[Jerry N.]

I think that "non-violent revolution" is a bit of a misnomer, since in those revolutions, there is plenty of perpetrated violence. It just happens to be only applied in one direction. Besides, many non-violent revolutions are violently supressed, like the democratic movement of China that was destroyed in the Tian'anmen Massacre. Do you believe that the chinese democrats should have just allowed themselves to be killed for longer and would have eventually succeeded in that manner? More recently, the Belarussian dictator Lukashenko shamelessly faked a reelection and beat down a peaceful protest movement, remaining firmly in power while his prominent opponents were imprisoned, killed or forced into exile.

Besides, I don't know if non-violent change really has such a great track record when it comes to longer and more stable results. Both India und Hungary currently aren't doing so well when it comes to political liberty. Most former central or eastern europe nations that resulted from the fall of communism are authocraties and vassals of Russia.

I think you are missing the point. Violence on the side that wants change often leads to dictatorships that are far worse than you are seeing in democracies.

Orban in Hungary will not survive the next election. The Chinese government is not doing well, because the people are quietly revolting. I strongly disagree with the statement, “Most former central or eastern Europe nations that resulted from the fall of communism are authocraties (sic) and vassals of Russia.” I live in Poland, which is in Central Europe, and we are not vassals of Russia. This is also true for Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Republic of Estonia, Republic of Latvia, Republic of Lithuania, Romania, Republic of Serbia, Slovak Republic, Republic of Slovenia, and Republic of North Macedonia, and a few others. It took more than ten years for Poland to reorganize after the fall of the Soviet Union, and it was a peaceful transition. A violent revolution doesn’t give time for society to adjust and reorganize, so the government tends to use a heavy hand, and bad people take advantage.
I would like to add that Europe ends with the Ural Mountains, so that includes Ukraine. They are bravely fighting and dying not to be “vassals of Russia.”

 

[Nithavela]

I think you are missing the point. Violence on the side that wants change often leads to dictatorships that are far worse than you are seeing in democracies.

I am not convinced that there is a correlation. Many countries have a history of violent change and are democracies. And often, the choice isn't between a non-violent revolution and a violent revolution, but between a violent revolution or continued oppression.

Orban in Hungary will not survive the next election.

That's a pretty bold prediction.

The Chinese government is not doing well, because the people are quietly revolting. I strongly disagree with the statement, “Most former central or eastern Europe nations that resulted from the fall of communism are authocraties (sic) and vassals of Russia.” I live in Poland, which is in Central Europe, and we are not vassals of Russia.
This is also true for Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Republic of Estonia, Republic of Latvia, Republic of Lithuania, Romania, Republic of Serbia, Slovak Republic, Republic of Slovenia, and Republic of North Macedonia, and a few others. It took more than ten years for Poland to reorganize after the fall of the Soviet Union, and it was a peaceful transition. A violent revolution doesn’t give time for society to adjust and reorganize, so the government tends to use a heavy hand, and bad people take advantage.
I would like to add that Europe ends with the Ural Mountains, so that includes Ukraine. They are bravely fighting and dying not to be “vassals of Russia.”

Most of the countries you listed aren't doing so hot on the whole "freedom" business. For example, Poland lost a lot if it's civil liberties under the PIS government and even the current government can't really restore it since the electorate chose to vote Nawrocki into office, who vowed to basically stonewall all attempts by the current government to liberalize the press, justice system and so on.

Explore the Map

Freedom House - Explore the map of global freedom and internet freedom around the world.

freedomhouse.org

That said, I apologise for the statement. It was too much of a blanket statement, and I was in a bit of a rush and thought you also included former sowjet republics in asia in your statement.

 

[Jerry N.]

I am not convinced that there is a correlation. Many countries have a history of violent change and are democracies. And often, the choice isn't between a non-violent revolution and a violent revolution, but between a violent revolution or continued oppression.

That's a pretty bold prediction.

Most of the countries you listed aren't doing so hot on the whole "freedom" business. For example, Poland lost a lot if it's civil liberties under the PIS government and even the current government can't really restore it since the electorate chose to vote Nawrocki into office, who vowed to basically stonewall all attempts by the current government to liberalize the press, justice system and so on.

Explore the Map

Freedom House - Explore the map of global freedom and internet freedom around the world.

freedomhouse.org

View attachment 370162

That said, I apologise for the statement. It was too much of a blanket statement, and I was in a bit of a rush and thought you also included former sowjet republics in asia in your statement.

I accept your apology. I won’t debate you about PIS, even though I disagree. You see, I am not unbiased. President Nawrocki is a distant relative.

 

[Landon Caeli]

I'm not asking everyone in America. I'm only asking those in the forum who happen to click on this thread. It would be great if everyone who did click on it just made a simple statement such as 'Yes, I agree. All political violence is to be condemned'.

You can do that now.

Of course, I agree. All political violence is to be condemned.

 

[rambot]

Nope, the left has been more politically violent over the last 15 years. It has picked up over the last 5.

On another thread I posted a large number of leftist political violence. I didn't even post it all, just a few. I could go through them all, but dont feel like it. But since 2020 the political violence has gotten more and more leftist. A minimum of 188 events since 2016. It doeant include the riots of 2020 or the violence against ICE, the burning of Telsa dealerships and cars etc.

I'm not saying there is no violence on the left.

But the right has done more killing.

 

[Landon Caeli]

No, I don't think that all political violence is to be condemned. When a regime is tyranical and no avenue of non-violent resistance has any prospect of changing things, militant resistance is an imperative. The american revolutionary war and the assassinations and sabotages during the occupation of france by nazi germany are examples of political violence we celebrate today, while in the past, we in the west celebrated other perpetrators of political violence who have since fallen out of favour because they dared to not only attack "our" enemies, but also ourselves, like the Mujaheddin of Afghanistan. And what is war if not the highest organised form of political violence?

We today are more than happy to sit on our high moral horse and want to condemn all violence, just like we desire to see ourselves as being strictly against the suffering of children, but much like we happily wear sweat shop clothing while doing so, we enjoy the liberties and independence brought about by political violence perpetrated for our benefit.

We have to remember, that in violent conflict, one of two parties crosses a line... Then you have a offender / defender situation. Words do not cross the line - and that is the root of the problem today - people thinking that words have crossed a line.

Remember this! Understand that how we apply our laws has an effect on the values people hold, in regards to how they interpret what crosses the line or not.

...Thinking Charlie Kirk deserved death because of words should be anathema in any free, civilized society.

 

[Nithavela]

We have to remember, that in violent conflict, one of two parties crosses a line... Then you have a offender / defender situation. Words do not cross the line - and that is the root of the problem today - people thinking that words have crossed a line.

Remember this! Understand that how we apply our laws has an effect on the values people hold on interpreting what crosses the line or not.

...People thinking Charlie Kirk deserved death because of words should be anathema in any free society.

People are really good at justifying to themselves that they were attacked first and are only defending themselves. Some even fabricate an attack to justify themselves to the world at large.

 

[Landon Caeli]

I'm not saying there is no violence on the left.

But the right has done more killing.

Telling stories again? Nobody believes that. But more importantly, this sentiment that you're arguing for, goes against the spirit of the OP.