Question

Hello,
Many of those who reject partnership with members of Otzma Yehudit, such as Rabbi Yaakov Medan and others, base this on the picture of Goldstein hanging on the wall in Ben-Gvir’s home. [Ben-Gvir’s claim that the picture is in honor of Goldstein’s work as a doctor who saved Jews does not sound convincing to them.]
Recently, Michael Ben Ari, on his Twitter account, raised the claim: what is the difference between Goldstein’s act and the acts of Meir Har-Zion, who, in revenge for the murder of his sister Shoshana by Bedouins, murdered innocent Bedouins? Or David Raziel, who as commander of the Irgun knowingly and deliberately harmed many innocent people, such as blowing up an Arab bus with its passengers on Jaffa Road, or planting a mine in the Arab market in the Old City. Of course, the accepted attitude today toward Goldstein is that he was a despicable murderer, whereas Raziel and Har-Zion are seen as heroes of Israel.
Of course, Goldstein too acted within a historical context, and did not simply get up and murder Arabs for no reason. In that period of terrorism, Arabs murdered dozens of Jews (whom Goldstein treated, and at times even pronounced dead), while the left-wing government continued with the peace agreements and did not act to eradicate the terror.
There is a claim that when there is a state and a government, an individual cannot take acts of revenge into his own hands. However: a. Meir Har-Zion, unlike Raziel, acted after the state was established. b. If revenge is an illegitimate act, what difference does it make whether it is done by an individual or by a government?
My questions are: a. What is the difference, if any, between Goldstein, Har-Zion, and Raziel?
b. What place is there for revenge, or for deterrent action through harming innocent people (and these should be distinguished from one another), for an individual and for the public?