We're in a topic about tear gas being used to attack protestors. You yourself opened up this thread by saying that tear gas isn't the right answer, so it doesn't seem like you're denying this activity is happening. The only remaining angle I see is that you're claiming that the bulk of protestors who have been attacked were doing something illegal to prompt it? That is a tall claim, but I am of course open to evidence.

Because to me, it looks like you're merely doing whataboutism to the latest spectacle your media bubble is showing you. That you add "If that was actually happening, I would be opposed to it" is most concerning as it indicates how far your cognitive dissonance is able to be stretched.