Me thinks, certain Doctors and Marines do not understand the non -INITIATION of Aggression principle.
Coercion is when there is an "or else" given to somebody to make them do something they wouldn't ordinarily do. The person being coerced is the victim, the person doing the coercion is the aggressor. The assumption is that one person "started it", and another is minding their own business.
Now to answer the Doctor...What about murder? If a person murders, THAT person, did what? They initiated aggression. it is perfectly okay to use DEFENSIVE aggression against a person that "starts it". Even little kids know this...geez.
Also the "government" is not there primarily to defend the helpless. They are there to benefit themselves and their cronies. The government business model relies upon coercion. Even Super daddy George Washington admitted that much and we know he wouldn't lie, because he chopped down a cherry tree and 'fessed up to it.
But Richard Alan Davis didnt sign anything making him subject to laws against child murder and lollie rape, so theres "No Controlling Legal Authority" and his activities didnt harm YOU or ME directly so even if we see him in mid-rape we cant initiate force against him, 'cause then we would be imposing our morality on his special snowflakieness.
the OR ELSE is essential to deterr those malefactors who would do us harm. even in a lonely fronteir cabin, the threat was always there, even with no cops in sight, "Dont Even Think About Stealing My Horse,
OR ELSE!" you do not defend yourself your property and your family from evildoers with firmly worded lectures on "Non-Initiation Of Force" you do it with a pistol, a rifle a shotgun, a tomahawk, a woodcutters axe, a spear, a bow, a rock or your fists.
the threat is always there, if you try to rob me i will kick your ass, stab you in the neck, or shoot you dead depending on the disposition of my gun and knife. for those who do NOT have the ability to defend themselves there are cops. for disputes not involving the need for immediate violence there are the courts.
blaming the entire existence of governments and their duty to protect the helpless from the harmful because our current government is failing it's ideals, and the theoreticians (yourself included) who demand perfection or dissolution are declaring our constitution a failed experiment is just pointless. our government reaches too far into places where they do not belong, and fail to perform the simple shit they SHOULD do (like securing the borders) but this does not invalidate the constitution, nor does it prove that the entiree american system must be dissolved, and then "something else" be created in it's place.
we can either FIX OUR SYSTEM by demanding they adhere to the constitution and founding principles, or we can stfu and move to cuba france or canada.
