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 ther

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.