You're dodging the central issue: that it was the miners' act of trespass that, in itself, constituted the "initiation of violence" in this case.

But once they do, retaliation is fair game as well.

Sorry, but there's a very clear moral gradient at play here. It seems like you're trying to suggest there's at least some rough equivalence between the actions of the two parties. But if so, then I just don't buy that argument, at all.