[Protagoras]

The “attain goals” wording kind of needs a little explanation before I could go along with it.

Political goals.

For instance is a police officer turning on his red lights to pull over someone the officer believes is drunk driving a use of force, and if so is the officer using force that would be a use of force in the defense of rights or to attain a goal?

Defense of rights is the only legitimate use of government force. The goal is to defend rights. Government exists to defend rights.

My problem is I see most all use of force must have a goal so where are your perimeters?

Force is legitimate in defense of rights, not to make others do what you want them to do.

[Democrap]

TJ You really didn’t answer my question on defining what you mean by the use of force. The only thing I can read from your answer is that you feel the use of red lights on a police vehicle is an unconstitutional use of force.

You say Government exists to defend rights is this the sole purpose of government?

[Robert_Paulson2]

Force is legitimate in defense of rights, not to make others do what you want them to do.

---

Yes, but what if the other guy is really having a lot of fun, and YOU are a miserable uptight "enforcer type?" What is a miserable "church lady" type of person to do?