Yes, there are.
The difference is that those voices on the "Right" are generally anonymous and confined to internet forum posts and backwater blogs. The Left, however, is proud to trot out their name brand bombthrowers like Moore in the MSM and encourage them to fling sparks at the powderkeg.
As with Harpers Ferry and Sarajevo 1914, these people have absolutely no idea of the depth of bloodshed they're in for once it starts and what freedom (should it still exist) will look like once it stops. These people have no clue of the horror that is neighbor killing neighbor. They think the depredations of Men At War are limited to "those people" on the other side of the planet.
What they advocate has no other logical end outside of acre upon acre of corpses.
Quite.
Modern war is an abstraction to the population now. Those who want it expect it either harmless or amusing a la the cinematic experience. Vietnam introduced the concept of war as TV entertainment, minimizing human cost to the general population.
Those living who knew war are passing. WWII was the last war with pervasive effect on the nation, at minimum via shortages and war-focused industry.
The US “Civil War” was the most bloody, yet still was tempered (*cough*) by the clarity of geographic division. The Mason-Dixon line pretty much clarified who was on which side who wasn’t.
The US Revolutionary War was similar insofar as “us” and “them” was pretty clear. The dividing line was several thousand miles wide (aka “the pond”).
My point, boosting yours: we have never seen anything akin to true civil war, a la Sarajevo, where both sides are thoroughly mixed together, neighbor v. neighbor, where _anyone_ could be an opposing combatant. In a twist, methinks this is why the fight hasn’t broken out yet: nobody knows who to “go after”, nor has an imperative to.