I gave a reason why they failed to get wider sympathy outside of the echo chamber and gave an alternative tactic to fight the govt. I mentioned right in my statement I was not commenting on how correct their cause is or is not. It is up to you to now tell me why they failed in getting support from the public outside the echo chamber (which you are in with them). Remember preaching to the choir makes zero converts.
So, you can’t answer the question? The point was not how successful they were or could have been. The point was that you labelled them (by saying they should have chosen non-violent protest) violent. They were not. Might they have suffered a loss of support because they were armed? Maybe. Personally, I have doubts about whether they picked the right fight, the right time or the right place. Showing up legally bearing weapons doesn’t bother me. It was an important message of willingness to pay a high price for their cause, not unlike the Minutemen.