Indeed, I've seen a lot on both sides looking for a fight - and I've posted as such for a long time. Worth repeating: each side has a language, lingo & banter which defines how they think about the opposition ... and which the opposition cannot comprehend as applicable, relevant, or even parse. Catchy phrases (of dubious accuracy, or even lexical meaning) spread rapidly, people revel in the demonization of their opponents, and reasonable discussion is rejected in favor of shouting matches. There is no sense of engaging others in debate, just a self-reinforcing desire to portray differing views as evil ... with the eventual conclusion that this evil must, of course, be physically eradicated.
Yes, it's happening on both sides. When, at the end of the carnage, someone asks "Why?", remind them that the answer was "because of largely trivial differences."
Is this comment not itself a subtle form of "demonization of ... opponents, and reasonable discussion ... rejected?"
Ignorance is no defense for the unjust application of force under the color of authority. Those who presume to invalidate natural law should suffer the consequences of what they inflict to enforce that presumption.