I agree, and I think there's an even more charitable phrasing: that the "private property" argument could be neither totally negligible nor totally compelling,

I agree, and I think there's an even more charitable phrasing: that the "private property" argument could be neither totally negligible nor totally compelling, but "somewhat persuasive". When someone does something borderline it might change the calculus, and when someone does something unambiguously laudable or egregious it may not. Making the argument even when it's not compelling (that is, even when there are other hypothetical cases in which it doesn't sway you) isn't necessarily hypocritical.