Group 1 - A recent poll indicates that approximately 63% of American adults believe that the intense manner in which political discussions are conducted contributes significantly to political violence [1] - About 71% of respondents agree with the statement that "American society has broken apart" [1] - The survey, conducted by Reuters and Ipsos, involved 1,037 participants and had a margin of error of 3 percentage points [1] Group 2 - 66% of respondents express concern that individuals in their community may face violent attacks due to their political beliefs [2] - Research indicates that there have been around 150 politically motivated attacks in the U.S. in the first half of this year, nearly double the number from the same period last year [2] - 79% of those surveyed believe that tolerance for differing opinions among Americans has decreased over the past 20 years [2] Group 3 - The assassination of conservative figure Charlie Kirk has drawn significantly more media attention compared to the stabbing of two Democratic lawmakers, with 68% of respondents reporting they have seen or heard a lot about Kirk's case, while only 26% were aware of the lawmakers' incident [2]

Core Viewpoint - The protests in Los Angeles exhibit significant differences from previous civil unrest, particularly in the divergence between federal and local law enforcement agencies in both narrative and execution [1][2]. Group 1: Differences in Narrative - Historically, during events like the 1992 Los Angeles riots and the 2020 protests following George Floyd's death, federal and local agencies presented a unified front, emphasizing "restoring order" and "condemning violence." In contrast, the current protests have seen open confrontation between these entities, with federal statements framing the unrest within a broader national security or ideological conflict, while local leaders focus on community dissatisfaction with federal immigration actions and the need for restraint and communication [1][2]. Group 2: Differences in Execution - In past incidents, federal law enforcement typically coordinated closely with local command structures. For example, during the 2020 protests, federal police and soldiers collaborated with local forces in information sharing and on-site management. However, due to conflicting leadership opinions in the current situation, the Los Angeles Police Department has repeatedly stated it will not participate in actions by immigration enforcement, prioritizing "maintaining public order" and "protecting property." Additionally, the state government has sued the federal government over troop deployment, further reducing the likelihood of joint operations between the two law enforcement bodies [2]. Group 3: Political Implications - The public disputes between federal and local governments reflect direct results of partisan conflicts, with decisions being made more from a political perspective rather than focusing on public safety. This could lead to two severe scenarios arising from the ongoing tensions [2].