Those who 'abjure' violence can do so only because others are committing violence on their behalf.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
All violence consists in some people forcing others, under threat of suffering or death, to do what they do not want to do.
Much violence is based on the illusion that life is a property to be defended and not to be shared.
Violent statements and threats cannot provide a solution to the problem. They can only exacerbate feeling and make a clash of forces inevitable.
I think the self-burning itself on practice of non-violence. These people, you see, they easily use bomb explosive, more casualty people. But they didn't do that. Only sacrifice their own life. So this also is part of practice of non-violence.
Man has an innate capacity for violence, but can only justify it in the name of justice.
I don't really know how strong someone is if they're compelled to a life of violence. Is that strong? No. That's damaged.
Violence is not a constitutionally protected right. Damaging property is not a constitutionally protected right; inciting violence is not a constitutionally protected right.
My people have been sucked into the violence because some feel they have to retaliate, and some feel they have to protect themselves.
Legitimate use of violence can only be that which is required in self-defense.
We all agreed that violence begets violence, and you can't solve issues with more violence.