Youre still supporting an electorate of people that want to use violence to solve societies problems, so yes, you're pointing the gun because youre an advocate of the violence.
And there we have what? You're describing a breach of contract, and you want to point a gun at someone and obligate them to a dysfunctional association. It also reads like you want one person the freedom of association but not the other. How consistent of you.
Well me and 51% of the population that are pointing the gun. We are also, because we know the mob is dangerous, passing rules so that the same 51% can't pass certain other rules and delegating power to different bodies and setting a higher bar to change these rules / making it more complicated.
I am not describing a breach of contract, I am describing limits on what can be contracted to in the first place. Dysfunctional relationships are a fact of life, I don't see how throwing out a carte blanche under the guise of voluntary association, that simplistically ignores power imbalances and blackmail, will improve the situation.
Its a simple social self defense mechanism to not allow various actors with highly diverging amounts of power to enage in any set of arrangements without a arbitrar who represents the common good.
Now I think there is something to ideas like NAP, free markets, etc. to say that role should be limited but I am perfectly comfortable with saying that the majority has gotten together and set some ground rules to protect us all. I.e. you can't use debtors prison to get people to "voluntarily"' sell themselves into slavery,
ages of consent can be established, for just a couple of examples.
Did I say happy holidays btw?
