The right to personal freedom doesn't include the right to set fire to your neighbour's house, or to encourage others to do so. Nor does it give you the right to steal his goods, slap his wife or destroy his garden. Libertarians are first in the ranks of those who claim the right to defend themselves from such incursions - often violently - and not just a few claim the right to inflict retribution beyond the degree of harm faced, such as those who would shoot unarmed burglars. So I'm at a loss to pick up dissent in Libertarian circles against the confirmation by the appeal court of the four-year sentences imposed on two thugs who used the internet to incite riot and violence. So it's fine to shoot a burglar dead, but not OK to jail one who encourages his mates to burgle you?
What's behind this of course is those who want to apply double standards, those who imagine it's fine for them to incite violence, revolution, anarchy and criminal activity on the interweb, but not OK for those who disagree politically to do so. I've made my own position on this very clear in the past, that I'm unequivocally opposed to the use of violence in any form to achieve political ends, and those who do so on the internet must face the same penalties as though they were rousing the howling mob on the street. Libertarians should support these riot sentences.