Can we have material property, or even simply land property, without the use of force, or the threat of violence?
Is the use of force to protect your property justified? How does it relate to the non-aggression principle?
If it is justified, then should we re-evalute the non-aggression principle? Is the threat of violence to uphold laws still not justified? Under "anarcho-capitalist" and non-aggression principles?
Is the use of force and threat of violence only justified with individual material property? What about community, or public, property.
Is the threat of violence to keep a Park from being vandilized justified?
Or is the line at self-defense, and the protection of the innocent? "Don't hit them or I'll hit you." Or is the only justified use of force in detaining, or restraining, a violent acting person? Is the threat of violence in that case even justified?