Have you read this New York Times piece about the arming of Congress?

In Congress, violence was often deployed strategically. Representatives and senators who were willing to back up their words with their weapons had an advantage, particularly in the debate over slavery. Generally speaking, Northerners were least likely to be armed, and thus most likely to back down. Congressional bullies pressed their advantage, using threats and violence to steer debate, silence opposition and influence votes.

In 1842, Representative Thomas Arnold of Tennessee, a member of the Whig Party, learned the hard way that these bullies meant business. After he reprimanded a pro-slavery member of his own party, two Southern Democrats stalked toward him, at least one of whom was armed with a bowie knife — a 6- to 12-inch blade often worn strapped to the back. Calling Arnold a “damned coward,” his angry colleagues threatened to cut his throat “from ear to ear.” But Arnold wasn’t a man to back down. Ten years earlier, he had subdued an armed assassin on the Capitol steps.



Lots more at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/12/opinion/12freeman.html?src=me&ref=general

On May 22, 1856, Preston Brooks beat Senator Charles Sumner with his Gutta-percha wood walking cane in the Senate chamber. The cause was a speech Sumner had made three days earlier, in which he had singled out a relative of Brooks, Senator Andrew Butler. Butler was not in attendance when the speech was read, but Sumner compared Butler with Don Quixote for embracing slavery, and mocked Butler for a physical handicap. Senator Stephen Douglas of Illinois, who was also a subject of criticism during the speech, suggested to a colleague while Sumner was orating that "this damn fool is going to get himself shot by some other damn fool.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_Brooks#Sumner_assault

horrified me.

This is one of them.

The growing and grotesque disparity of income, privatization of schools, and deregulation of *everything* are some others.