No, I don’t think this is a lack of understanding, although I did notice upon reading my post that there is one point I missed and that was ‘consistently’. On a personal level, I agree for the most part that we should not consistently do those things. I see it very similar to you in the end. Violence is not a good thing, but sometimes necessary.
That said, sometimes I think people put too much emphasis on physical pain and torture. There are worse things than maiming people and skinning them alive and the like. Psychological torture can be far worse. Words can do more harm than a blow to the head. In the case of physical torture (something I find disgusting) it rarely lasts more than a day or two before the person dies and the pain is no more. But in the case of psychological torture, that can cause life-long torture in the mind of the individual. Some words can hurt for a life-time. Usually a physical strike is only temporary… That isn’t to say either is right, but if a physical strike could save someone from a psychological strike, it may be worth it.
Honestly, no one besides God has the correct answer on this topic. Each much be convinced in their own mind. This isn’t something I would personally fret about it. That said, I have a lot of respect for people who can live up to the ideal of Richard Murray. But my respect doesn’t necessarily mean I think they are totally correct on the matter.
There were some men who were conscientious objectors in WWII. They were able to contribute to the war in other ways. I respect that. Without their contribution, we would not have known much about starvation and rehabilitation for those who are malnourished. They did a respectable thing. We learned a great deal about human physiology from that Minnesota Starvation experiment.