When reality contradicts your premise, it's pretty clear that there's something wrong with the premise. 'Cause, you know, arrows do hit their targets, faster runners do overtake slower ones, and people do make decisions in response to others' actions.
Given a free-will POV, people can choose to
reply to others' actions and call it a response in the casual sense. However, it is not a "forced reaction" in the sense that a ball bounces back after hitting an obstacle. If a reaction is somehow forced, this implies that there was no choice in the matter.
It seems that you want to have it both ways: enjoying the freedom of having free will, while avoiding the necessary responsibility that goes with it!
This has been one of my major areas of contention. If I had to name a single habit of society that keeps gnawing at us and hurting our character, it is the continual habit of people trying to dodge responsibility and the inability for them to take responsibility for their actions.
This is a major flaw of AnCap & NAP as a potential system. Until the human nature of people trying to dodge the rules at others expense is dealt with, a voluntary society will just fall apart into chaos and guess what shows up in the wake.......
The State. Where you don't get to choice what is your responsibility or not. I personally think we can easier determine between reasonable people what these basic responsibilities are, and come up with rules/laws to enforce them. AnCap thinks these are a choice, but in fact they are not if you want a functioning and thriving society. You need a basic environment/foundation for people to build and evolve on.