[King Prout]

yes, fails to consider.

I am armed, I am not lazy.
I can conceive of situations where I would need something RTF-now, and refusal would be unacceptable.
I would not trade my weapon (a tool for providing for myself in a survival scenario) for what I needed, when I could use my weapon to secure what I needed.

So, yeah: fails to consider.

[Dead Corpse]

So you are admitting to limited intelligence and imagination? For someone who can make a yumi from scratch, I find this hard to believe.

For any thinking, reasoning being... there are always options other than initiating force, fraud, or theft.

You also leave out restitution for involuntary trespasses. If I fall off a balcony, and save myself by landing on your balcony. I owe you rent and damages for however long I was on your property without your consent. Ethically, I would demand to pay the restitution to balance the score. Ethically, you could not refuse to accept it.

Same would go if I was crossing the desert and came upon your well. I would owe you restitution for taking your water. Trade can be worked out and ethical parties on both sides would be able to reach a commodation. In fact, lucrative trade businesses could arise from providing such services to those in need.

As I said, it isn't a failure of the philosophy. It's a failure to apply it correctly.