They never explained why words cannot ever be considered violence. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence , "...

They never explained why words cannot ever be considered violence. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence , "...some definitions are somewhat broader, such as the World Health Organization's definition, as "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened[2] or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation." Words used to intimidate someone by threatening violence ("give me your money or I will beat you up") or resulting in maldevelopment (a childhood along the lines of "you are a horrible kid and I wish I had never given birth to you") could easily fit into those examples of verbal violence. > Only slightly more than a third of Americans (37%) think citizens should have the right to use profanity when speaking to elected officials. That needs to be plotted over time. I think that belief used to be far higher, with actual laws to enforce it. Also, the use of profanity can be regulated and is not absolute. I would not suggest that a defendant in a courtroom use profanity to demean an elected judge. > 87% said American citizens definitely or probably should have the right to speak freely during a public comment session, and only 8% said they definitely or probably should not. Public comments, like at a school board meeting, are also not absolute rights. Someone cannot use that as a forum to call for violence - that is not a protected free speech right. There's also the ambiguity of what "speak freely" means in the question. Does it apply only to the government officials who run the meeting (who are bound by First Amendment concerns) or does it also mean being free from social consequences by others in the community (where freedom of association is also a First Amendment right)? > 48% said American citizens definitely or probably should have the right to take a ballot selfie, and 34% said they definitely or probably should not. Which is why the ballot box has multiple ballots - even if you take a picture, as part of a vote selling campaign, for example, they need more than a selfie to be sure you haven't faked the selfie while actually casting another ballot.