I'm just using the definition that seems to be the first one listed in many English dictionaries.
"Violence is the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against a person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence?redirect=no
Your last two definitions don't fit unless you've a priori decided any government action is abuse - which is the wrong way to define things. Your first definition is so belaboured and tortuous that it sounds like libertarians have been at it.
And it's interesting to note that none of your definitions allow for natural phenomenon to be violent, yet we quite naturally talk about things like violent storms in English.
"Violence is the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against a person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence?redirect=no
"Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing" http://www.answers.com/topic/violence
"exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse" http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/violence