Anarcho-capitalism would turn into anarcho-communism or socialism given enough time

Capitalism is typically defined as "private ownership of the means of production". It is my opinion that the state is necessary to protect the private ownership of the means of production, because it makes sense. If we have an anarchist capitalist society, who exactly is going to protect a business owner's business? It has to be the business owner themselves typically, or perhaps a privately-run police force that they hired. Without the state however, there is no limit on what weaponry citizens can use. As it is today, there are limits put out there by the government on what a citizen can and can't use, for example in most states it's illegal to have a fully-operational tank. While you can own a tank, the weapons system has to be offline. In an anarcho-capitalist society there is no such law. Plus, even if the business owner has a privately-run police force, it's not like that police force has authority to lock people up in jail or prison, as there is no state to make such laws. So, what I'm getting at is the workers would eventually take the business from the business owners. There are more workers than there are business owners, so the workers have numbers on their side. In addition, since there would be no limit on weaponry, they would also have an even playing field in terms of that, since they could in theory get access to weapons military has, and they don't necessarily have to buy any, just steal some since there is no state to protect private property. If the arms factory has a police force, well, all you have to do is sneak past them and get to the tanks, and then you'd likely win against that police force. So, a state is absolutely necessary to maintain capitalism, as the state protects private property. If you get rid of them, who protects private property now? There's no reason why the workers would willingly work for a company any more since, why would they do that when they could get more money if they owned the company themselves and made it worker-controlled? The business owner only takes a percentage of the profits, which could be going to the workers if there was no single business owner. Plus, workers would probably not want to submit themselves to working under a business owner who controls an aspect of their lives. The only reason workers do today is because of the state gets in the way. The state has done several things to also make it worthwhile for workers to work under someone, such as a minimum wage, requirement for some jobs to offer health insurance plans, basic environmental regulations, safety regulations, etc. However, if you get rid of the state, all of those incentives for workers to work under someone go away. Just look at what the 1800s were like: terrible working conditions, hardly any pay, terrible safety conditions(need I bring up the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire?) etc. Those are the conditions business owners would make the workers work under since it's more profitable to do so(as it takes more money to give workers a livable wage, to make sure safety is a priority and to regulate oneself's own business). Such conditions like that would only last so long before workers would rise up, and without a state to make minimum wage laws, regulations on the business, or even a state to protect the business owners private property rights etc they have to do it themselves and force the employer to comply or else get rid of the employer completely and take control of the business themselves, which would result in an anarcho-communist society or a libertarian socialist one. While someone may be able to argue that a privately-run police force would protect business owner's rights, who protects the business owner of the privately run police force's rights? Why wouldn't the workers of the privately run police force also rise up against the owner of the police force? Again, there's no state to make sure the workers of that police force have good working conditions, a minimum wage, etc, so it would again default to what the 1800s were like and eventually the police would rise up against the police business owner, thus the police workers would see a reason why all businesses should be structured in a way where the workers own the business, and probably wouldn't defend other business owners, and they may even help the workers of that business instead.