As with most libertarians when you point out fundamental flaws in their reasoning, they deflect the conversation and try to talk about an ideal as opposed to anything based in reality.
Well first of all you didn't point any fundamental flaw in reasoning; you engaged in it yourself. Second of all this is just pure ad hominem. On top of that you've failed to respond to the point at hand, i.e. my underscoring of your fallacious mode of reasoning, namely that you can't rationally reject a general method on the grounds that the method didn't spell out all applications for you.