You nicely illustrate just how collectivists and statists always end up resorting to violence. They are basically incapable of not resorting to violence because they simply have no rational arguments otherwise. What better argument than just running around and beating and murdering people?
I don't know what a "statist" is (someone who abhors change?), but I get the gist of your argument: since the state is built on a violence monopoly, a larger state should necessitate more violence.
However, that argument is purely a play on words. Every data points available to us through most history shows the inverse relation, a stronger state generally gives a less violent society.