So even though they aren't citizens you're going to govern them by denying the right to own guns?
If you don't pass the very simple tests you are not fit to carry a gun, and if you refuse to pledge your allegiance to the principles of peace you are practically admitting that it is not safe to let you vote or to own and use a gun.
Again, how is this any different from the USA where I'm born into a system and then forced to bend to the will of others?
Are you saying that it is irrelevant whether you are born in North-Korea or in a Free State because both systems "force you to bend to the will of others"? Seriously? The Free State only enforces one thing on its citizens and residents: peace. Thus the only people who will "be forced to bend to the will of others" are criminals: murderers, thieves, rapists, swindlers etc.
Murder, rape, assault and theft are violence. Threats are coercion. It's nonsense to group them together with piracy which is neither.
You are not making an argument, but a claim.
By the very same token banning threats is to take away your freedom of speech. If you're not allowed to wave your gun around peacefully without harming anyone while saying "give me all your money or I will kill you!" then according to your logic YOU have been violated.
Again, threats are coercion, a form of aggression, which is what I'm against. Your argument fails.
I claim that piracy is a form of coercion, a form of aggression, which I am against too. It's not sufficient to make a claim, you have to substantiate it.
Also, I can deny that I am making threats. When I am saying "give me all your money or I will kill you" I am not physically harming you in any way. I am just making noises with my mouth. It's your problem if you take that as a threat. The same goes with a contract. That was just me scribbling on a piece of paper. I didn't agree to anything. I just nodded, made funny noises with my mouth and scribbled some doodles. By forcing me to abide to this so-called "contract" you are in fact assaulting ME!