>Government does not have a 'monopoly of violence.' You are perfectly entitled to defend yourself if attacked by a criminal, for example.

That's a misunderstanding of what the phrase "monopoly of/on violence" entails. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence) Though to be fair, I'm not sure the OP really understands that.

The actual application of physical coercion is delegated or permitted by the state ... the law might permit individuals to use physical force in defense of self or property, but in this case ... the ability to use force has been granted by the state, and only by the state.