People do have the right to defend themselves with the minimum force needed to repel the attack, and only as a last resort.
When did I say that people doesn't have the right to live? Please stop putting words in my mouth.
My first question was "Do you think an individual has the right to defend himself against aggression?" and your first answer was "No". Am I misunderstanding something?
We now live in the real world where there is IP.
You infringe, I find out, I send you a notice, you ignore it. You are now the agressor. I had a rightful claim that you ignored.
By this same logic... when slavery was legal, a slave that ran away was aggressing against his master, who had a rightful claim the slave ignored. Do you agree with this? If not, what's the difference?
If you start shooting at the police you have a problem, as they have the right to defend themselves.
I don't know about you, but if armed men come to my house and threaten me with imprisonment, I consider that an act of aggression. I never agreed to the terms you placed upon the use of your idea.