The law in most places doesn't distinguish between physical and non-physical threats mostly. A verbal threat to harm somebody is as much assault as a physical.
There are even a few (though this is tightly controlled based on the constitutional protections on free speech) crimes, where intent to do non-physical harm, is a crime, often involving some level of indecency.
But understand, self-defense is an excusal of what might be considered a crime when necessary to prevent an injury. Neither retaliation nor mutual brawling/argument fits under the category of self-defense.
Further, self-defense also doesn't equate to prosecuting or preventing crime other than when faced with imminent injury. I can't boobytrap my property to twart burglars. Nor can I go out on a vigilante mission to apprehend or punish those have committed crimes. This is the state's job.
You're going to have to define what you claim is a "liberty violation."

