Even solitary rights must be protected

There is nothing significant about the violence perpetrated by the State which makes it different from that enacted by criminals. Voting, or popularity does not diminish the nature of an action, if it is criminal. If we are being consistent, and we do not like violence, then there is no reason why we should be in favour of the violence perpetrated by the State. A Socialist, or someone who supports it, whether or not they have thought about its true nature, is supporting violence and by common deduction, is a violent person. The threats of violence used to enforce tax collection are not defensive.

If something is not paid for voluntarily, but instead from the use of force then it is violent and criminal since it is not chosen. The State (the majority) is not more important than the individual as far as ethics are concerned.

Ethics are relevant unless we are dealing with a matter of life and death when people will not be concerned as to the consequences. In no event will the number of people involved be a relevant factor for consideration; it makes no difference however many people might want to be aggressive, to obey natural law all must bow to and recognise the rights of (the) others, even if they are solitary.