Of course I can. That's all that's being offered by way of limp rebuttal, after all: "... oh, but he felt entitled to behave in such-and-such a way, our theoretical visitor -- despite being explicitly told not to, by said property's host/owner -- because he FELT that [Insert Flimsy Rationale Here] -- !"
Arrant, addled nonsense. You wouldn't tolerate someone pissing all over the good furniture and setting fire to the dog, after repeatedly ordering them not to do so, in your own house. Afford others that same baseline amount of control over theirs.
What was that about having to restate arguments and its affect on the validity of what you claim, that you said earlier?
And suffering an injury does not boil down to mere subjective feelings: an implied promise was breached.
And you have utterly failed to show how any analogy to what happened can be drawn to “setting fire to the dog” and such.