If you had a study showing that in over 300 carpentry projects hammers were used twice as often as screwdrivers, would that convince you to hammer in a screw?

If you had a study showing that in over 300 carpentry projects hammers were used twice as often as screwdrivers, would that convince you to hammer in a screw? My point is that violence may not be a good fit for every situation, but that doesn't mean it never is. Gandhi was an effective non-violent protester, against the British in Africa when backed by large numbers. How effective would Gandhi have been protesting against the Nazis? I don't know anything about Belarus, so I don't know anything about what is or isn't justified, it just seems wrong to me to suggest that violence is categorically less effective. Political violence is a tool and like any other has moments where it should and shouldn't be used.