I'm saying we shouldn't block people from the internet as punishment for blocking people from the internet, we are committing the crime we're punishing. I realize that there isn't an external power that could block US access like the US can do to North Korea, which is why my original post used "sacrifice."
If you use violence to stop someone from using violence, you either reduced the amount of violence done or kept it the same. There can be some ethical uses there. The concept can be spread to some other areas, but only ones in which the intolerance could hamper the intolerant, which I don't think is the case here.
It's typically known as the "paradox of tolerance" by the way, your mistaken version didn't ring any bells, and I assumed you thought the argument ended in a logical paradox.
