For those who are trying to paint either side as the only perpetrators of political violence, can we stop for a minute and just accept the fact that it is both.

Oct 8, 2020 - Gretchen Whitmer Kidnapping Plot
Jan 6, 2021 - Trump Supporters storm the Capitol
Oct 28, 2022 — San Francisco, California — Attack on Paul Pelosi
July 13, 2024 — Butler, Pennsylvania — Shooting at Donald Trump campaign rally
Sept 15, 2024 — West Palm Beach, Florida — Attempted assassination at Trump golf course
April 13, 2025 — Harrisburg, Pennsylvania — Arson attack at Governor Josh Shapiro’s official residence
June 14, 2025 — Minnesota (Brooklyn Park & Champlin) — Shootings of state legislators and spouses
Sept 10, 2025 — Orem / Utah Valley University, Utah — Assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk

To point the finger at one particular side is foolish. If anyone wants to defend any of these incidents, please unveil yourself as a hyprocite.

Miss me with that "both sides are equally bad" shit.

Trump Called for a Crackdown on the ‘Radical Left.’ But Right-Wing Extremists Are Responsible for More Political Violence — TIME

Your post really shows how much the political violence in the US is ramping up. If this continues with that trend and pace then brace for an incoming civil war, because the situation is pretty much the same as it was in Spain almost exactly 100 years ago (the civil directory started in December 1925).

Here's one thing I remarked, though: Left-wing political violence in the US is often much more planned and direct, while right-wing violence is often more wanton and random. As a result left-wing violence tends to get more reported on, no matter who's El Presidente of the US.

My point isn't really meant to be both sides are equally bad, as I don't believe that in the slightest. It's more meant to be that if you only paint one set of actions bad, or if you only condemn the actions against 'your side' you're a hypocrite.

Many who detest the Charlie Kirk Assassination often cheer or defend the assault on Paul Pelosi, the attack on the capitol, the planned kidnapping of Governor Whitmer and set a double standard. I didn't quote the person I was aiming the statement at as I didn't want to outright dismiss their discontent about what did happen, I merely wanted to point out that either all acts of violence are deplorable or none are.

It looks like your list contains seven cases of Republican-associated culprits while only the most recent one would be categorized as Other as of now due to the culprit being apolitical and his motive being very personal, heavily focused on Kirk's hatred for gay and trans people. At first I thought you are being sarcastic because of this breakdown.

I don't think there's anything wrong with anyone speaking the truth that the facts show that political violence is more prevalent on the right side of the political spectrum. Of course, the facts also show that political violence can come from the left side.

I agree with your point that pointing the finger at one particular side is foolish; it's for this reason that the reaction of the Trump administration is so deplorable, because they intend to use Kirk's death as an excuse to strip American people of their rights. Granted, at least Pam Bondi had to backpedal already. The finger-pointing is also the reason why the dedicated thread about Kirk's death got locked, especially because at that time nothing about the killer was known yet.

In response to what Shaunodon is claiming, Nazi's were not on the left. 

https://youtu.be/8m3plbOSOxA?si=_aIAg7DCnFcSQLiw

But that's not what you said. You said that we shouldn't try "to paint either side as the more politically violent side". The right-wing is objectively the more politically violent side. That's not me trying to paint anything, that's just the data. By trying to appear balanced when the actual reality is not balanced, you're just catering to the right-wing. The right-wing is multiple times more politically violent than the left-wing, and instead of saying that "both sides are politically violent", the right-wing should be moving away from the inflammatory, genocidal, supremacist, paranoid, conspiratorial rhetoric that drives these acts of violence. But, of course, that doesn't give them any political capital. And it feels too late for that, anyway.

My two cents.

I was shocked to read the news that he was shot, I was also mixed sad and dissapointed.

While people joked about him making those clips with naive students we also have to be serious and say he was one of the few who still went into debates, from TV shows, To jubilee, To Oxford and so on.  Those debates were entertaining atleast and while I disagreed with some parts I could also see him making some points that needs to be debated.  

It feels like debates will die down now even more and will be more namecallling.

Lastly, all those people saying  'this is not what USA stands for'  Yes it is,  shootings has become the norm even the President had 2 assassination attempts in what time frame a yearish?

I fucked up my wording in my original post and if you reply again saying that's not what I said in my original post I'm not going to respond because I am telling you that I FUCKED UP. I've even edited the post to what I meant. What I was really trying to say is that if you only detest poltical violence against one group you aren't against political violence, you're against attacks against your own side. I absolutely agree that the right wing should be less inflammatory, that they are demonstrablly more violent. However that history of violence doesn't hide the fact that acts of political violence occur against both sides, and you either detest all polticial violence or none.