Violence can never be the answer

Except in true emergencies.. And Except for all those previous times when it was the only answer to all things… and additionally for some conditional circumstances in which the potential for violence is also the answer ahead of the question being asked.. and if it happens during civil justice, get over it, that's what democracy looks like..

But otherwise, or at least in this case.. a few drops of blood resulting from a massive disagreement throughout the nation justify an all out condemnation of 50% of the population just because of symbolically what side the blood would presumably have been spilled for and by.. regardless of verifying that. In fact violence is so wrong in this case, that it may indeed justify further violence.