I think you're just latching on to insurrection because it has fewer negative connotations which is basically linguistic pathos. I find this type of meaningless rhetoric to be counter productive.
You are incorrect. The difference between a riot and an insurrection is that, for an insurrection, I'm perfectly happy bringing in the National Guard and shooting the assholes.
A rebellion can be either violent resistance or open resistance. For violent resistance: bring in the national guard. For merely open resistance: put them on national television, and hear what they have to say. Occupy Wall Street was an open resistance rebellion; Rosa Parks was open resistance rebellion; Mahatma Gandhi was open resistance rebellion. The Serbian events which ousted Slobodan Miloevi was open resistance rebellion. Birmingham, Alabama and Selma, Alabama during the U.S. Civil rights movement was open resistance rebellion.
If it's just a riot, you handle it with local policing.
A thing is what a thing is indifferent to whatever you call it. I can call something great a pile of shit or I can call a pile of shit something great... it is still going to be itself.
But involuntary manslaughter, manslaughter, third degree murder, second degree murder, and first degree murder are all murder, aren't they?
So it shouldn't matter what we call it: if we have the death penalty for first degree murder, we should have the same penalty for involuntary manslaughter, because "A thing is what a thing is indifferent to what you call it"... right?
Just because you can lump an event into a category does not make it the same as all of the other events you are able to lump into the same broad category.
If you find yourself putting everything into the same bucket, perhaps the problem isn't the thing, it's the fact that you have too few buckets.