I said that libertarians use "voluntary" to refer to a situation that doesn't involve coercion. I did not say that a coerced individual had no choice in the matter. Why would anyone bother to coerce someone who had no choices?

> Coercion implies lack of free choice. That's what it is.

"free choice" != "choice"

"choice" != "voluntary"

I mentioned semantics for a reason.

> A mugging is coercive precisely because the alternative choice (getting shot) is not meaningful.

Its not really desirable but neither is it wholly without meaning. Some things are worth dying for. For some people increasing the cost of robbery to murder for their assailant is one of those things.