It was justified civil disobediance and nothing more
This is interestingly where I often split from many when discussing the American Revolution.
Now I am fully on the side of those like Franklin, Adams, Washington, and others. All of whom considered themselves loyal Englishmen and fought hard to try and reach some sort of compromise.
However, I am also largely against his cousin, Samuel Adams and most of his "Sons of Liberty" who did indeed use violence to try and achieve their goals.
I have no issue with "Civil Disobedience", so long as it is just that, Civil.
I have an issue with those that want to cause harm as part of their disobedience. And that is harm to people or property.
"Civil Disobedience" when it is civil and does not harm is not "Terrorism". Dr. King and his marches were about as civil as one could get, there the terrorism was used against them. And yes, I do indeed call what was done to the marchers in places like Selma and Montgomery "Terrorism", because that is exactly what it is. And if a group wants to have a peaceful march, I do not care who they are I support them and their right to have their march. Be they the KKK, the League of Women Voters, ANTIFA, or the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Everybody in this nation has a guaranteed right to protest, so long as it is civil and peaceful. But the moment any groups starts to harm property or others, they have immediately lost all of my support and I think they should be put down.