Would you press a button to kill the president? Willingness to engage in political violence and its implications for terrorism sting operations

US authorities defend their use of aggressive sting operations in which informants pressure suspects to commit terrorism offences, arguing that anyone who can be persuaded by informants to commit such crimes must be dangerous. Yet if willingness to engage in political violence under certain conditions is widespread in the general population, this would undermine the government’s arguments. We therefore conducted an experiment on political violence using questions inspired by sting operations. A sample of US participants (n = 792) responded to scenarios featuring plots with various ideological motivations. Among these participants, 56.7% would not turn in at least one arson or assassination plotter, and 18.6% would loan money to at least one plotter. Moreover, 17% said they would press a button to kill then-President Trump, and 6% endorsed violent revolution. These findings suggest that a substantial proportion of Americans would be willing to support political violence under the right circumstances. Realistically, the vast majority of such individuals will never engage in political violence, yet they are potentially vulnerable to being manipulated by informants in sting operations. To avoid targeting those who would be unlikely to act on their own, counterterrorism sting operations should be limited to suspects with specific, pre-existing plans for violence.