What is the difference between the government claiming to use defensive force and actually using excessive force and individuals or private organizations doing that under free market anarchy?

I keep bringing examples and you keep deciding on not addressing them.

When someone commits force or fraud, ANYONE has the right to do what it takes to stop that.

And what happens? Everybody would agree on what was right and wrong? Rightful violence between people until market equilibrium? I keep asking how do you solve that practically and you keep telling me that ANYONE has the right to solve that problem. I find zero practicality in your answer. That's why I remain convinced that your position is utopian. I don't find it immoral, I find it *unfeasible.