What I said:

"Do you think it's acceptable for others to punch you" is inherently an emotional argument because nobody will say "no" to that.

What you claim:

I can find videos of people advocating for violence online

Nowhere do you contradict my statement that "do you think it's acceptable for others to punch you" is an appeal to emotion.

Appeal to emotion is:

A logical fallacy characterized by the manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence. This kind of appeal to emotion is a type of red herring and encompasses several logical fallacies, including appeal to consequences, appeal to fear, appeal to flattery, appeal to pity, appeal to ridicule, appeal to spite, and wishful thinking.

Nobody wants to get punched.

Now let's go back to the original discussion.

Now, do you think it's acceptable for you to threaten George in order to get him to give money to Oliver?

I think it's acceptable for the government to penalize people who refuse to contribute to public services they use, like: the police, firefighters, hospitals, public roads, public education and other social benefits.

I don't see how George or Oliver are relevant to the discussion.