I do not know Ayn Rand's position, but maybe she meant she wanted the gov't to have monopoly on the use of force to enforce court decisions and lock up criminals instead of armed factions deciding legal questions by use of private force. (That's a wild guess. AR experts here will know the real answer.)

This does not mean that people should never use any force, that we must simply watch crime happen and wait for police to arrive. How can we trust people to establish and maintain a gov't if we don't trust them to keep weapons and act in emergencies.

The article starts with this identity politics crap, but then it gives specific examples of people acting to stop bad guys. For me the most interesting thing is the juxtaposition of the complete nonsense at the beginning with clear-cut cases of people acting to stop violent crimes.