13 votes

The End of Gun Control - Help thousands of Ron Paul supporters worldwide

„The Wiki Weapon project is to produce a CAD file for distribution and sharing across the Internet. http://www.indiegogo.com/wikiwep

This CAD file will be a schematic for a modest, 3D printable plastic firearm. A 2nd Amendment for Liberty supporters worldwide!“

I am from Germany, supporting and fighting for Ron Paul since 2006. This is the first time in my life that I see a possibility for me and others around the world to make an impact for upcoming "scenarios" in countries without a 2nd Amendment.

I donated $123,- to the project b/c I don't have the right neither to bear nor to possess a weapon to protect me.

I hope you can see the possibilities that I see as a person with no chance to defend myself against a too Big Government in the near future.

Help me, help us to kickstart a US based project which could kill gun controls worldwide! You can reach me via my twitter account @propagare for further questions or just to support this project. Thank you for your small contribution & for spreading the word about http://www.indiegogo.com/wikiwep !

Go Ron Paul! Peace!

Short Summary

„In a world where 3D printing becomes more ubiquitous and economical, defence systems and opposition to tyranny may be but a click away... Let's pull the world toward this future together.
By designing and testing concepts for a 3D printable defense system, and by then sharing that information with the world, WikiWep will serve to protect and ensure political processes and human rights.

The Impact

This project could very well change the way we think about gun control and consumption. How do governments behave if they must one day operate on the assumption that any and every citizen has near instant access to a firearm through the Internet? Let's find out.Every dollar contributed to this project is also a vote to export the protections of the Second Amendment to the entire world.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Some more pertinent links:

DISCLAIMER: This is NOT a legal advice, but from all publicly available info ATF has ruled several times that ALL private manufacture of NON-NFA (SBR, Suppressors, etc.) items are legal, for PRIVATE personal use. You cannot sell it, but for private use, it's perfectly legal, as far as currently available info suggests.

Even IF so, use at your own peril; among the R3VOL choir this should go without saying, but obviously the whole submitting to statist 'laws' issue aside: you assume full responsibility for manufacturing, liability resulting from it, and the use of it at any stages to prototype as well as the eventual 'final product.'


Ares Armor is a CALIFORNIA vet-owned company; if it's legal in California, it's legal in 49 other states. (I would assume, again check/verify all local 'laws,' use info at your own risk, and you assume full responsibility.)

Legally Make your own Gun
Rudius 80% 1911 Sneak Peak

If you want to know what the tolerances and stress specs, or simply what a complete polymer AR lower looks like for reference and/or comparison, check out these two leading mfg. of polymer AR receivers, the new post-ATF-raid-selloff-Calvary Arms: http://www.gwacsarmory.com/index.html

and New Frontier Armory, out of LV, NV:

Once you have the lower, the rest, as with all AR, you can purchase commercially available components, at any infinite number of available online vendors, like http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/Default.asp

Also, if you're worried about the typical direct impingement gas system of AR 'melting' your lower, while a bit boutique, there are plenty of piston kits and uppers that won't blow gas back down into the lower receiver. Problem solved!



Or, if you actually want to run a gun, that will last practically forever, and will go bang, w/almost every press of the trigger?

Screw all that! Build your own AK from sheet blanks, 100% legally!


Predictions in due Time...

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

Next stop, print your own bullets.

I actually saw an article not too long ago about printable guns finally being here. Didnt read it though because I already know the basics of how this has come about. May have been about this.

Strictly speaking, there is no absolute need for money when it comes to actually designing the weapon itself and making the file to pass around.(heck, I could make one up right now if I wanted to as I was busy making a model when I got sidetracked)
If you want to optimize the weapon to use the least material needed etc, you will need materials simulations(and/or real thing to test) and/or people who have expertise in the area of weapons and/or materials.

He mentioned in the video that soon bots will be able to print the parts that are needed to make them. This has already happened and I am not too happy that I can not find the link to this.
There is a project where the people will print you off the parts needed and send them to you at no cost(or maybe just shipping) with the only the stipulation that you then print out the parts needed to make another printer and send them to another person who wants one. And so the cycle will continue.

The next stop for this will be printing your own ammo. Once the government cant regulate the sale of basic weapons very well, they move to regulating bullets.

To climb the mountain, you must believe you can.

Yes, they're already trying it in California

They just posted this today, and the news video is from today. Buy 1,000 rounds and get reported to the police and put on a list.


¶~~*~~Losing an illusion makes you wiser than finding a truth. ~Ludwig Börne~~*~~¶



Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html

No Worries, Good Idea!

I can see your article is being treated like the Plague! haha!

But your creative thoughts are why freedom can not be held down for long.

I think this is a good idea, and one to weigh and promote;

With 3-D plastics fabrication being developed and plastics strength capable of providing both stock, clip, barrel and projectiles of all types.

I think creating a single group and or a single design is "self defeating" however because your group and design will be targeted Day One.

...and is probably why others have not joined this thread:)

That's OK, and probably good that they read your idea and NOT respond,...they will be one of those "undetected and feared" "LONE WOLFS" that keep the people that want to suppress freedom in their place.

What is needed is talented individuals working on their "own" which is ideal, or very tight knit groups; information simply "dropped" online, our passed about on a flash drives or CDs.

Weapons designs are easily available in old and new dictionaries, collections (which parts can be scanned), and other online sources. Weapons need not be limited to rifles. So, getting designs are easy.

New technology is not the only way to provide arms or means of defense and offense for an so called unarmed populous.

Creating arms barrels from automotive axle steel and a homemade lathe, or a flat bolted frame, Bombs & barrels from pipes, Oxygen explosives (yes, liquid oxygen was used regularly as a explosive just like dynamite - it evaporates quickly though, so that needs to be considered). The First German rockets were propelled with gasoline and other fuels with oxygen... So now you have rocket fuel, like to weld? You can acquire any assortment of gasses for any number of uses. Air pressure itself is also a "propellant".

But modern "Arms" of all types can also be acquired by the enemy by "trapping" them and taking "theirs", or lifted from them when they get careless... Human Nature is predictable...

And you do not need internet for simple local defense or operations;

You can signal your neighbor by putting a bucket on one side of the porch or the other; or at a certain time of day; a light on in a room at a certain time... A short static code on a old radio can be used as a signal or predetermined code known by only two persons.

A small light that is well inside the house that can only be viewed in one small direction can easily convey a message over many miles.

You can acquire the enemies radio as well.

During WW2 French resistance was very affective;

Escapes and tunneling for escaping were accomplished under the most watchful eye of a Nazi prison camp. The same stealth can be used in offense; The enemy has to sleep sometime; search for their vulnerabilities, both as individuals and groups...study "THEM"...

During the Revolutionary War, we won by learning from our Indian enemies, we shot the British from behind trees, we shot their highest ranking soldiers in the field and Off the field...; In Vietnam we learned trap methods, and now we are learning from IRAQ, IRAN and Afghanistan and the Trade Center that "Cell" fighting tactics and constant realigning with other peoples (as we did also in the Revolutionary war with the French and the Indians) can hold at bay the might of the United States armed forces and United Nations combined. We are now mired down in a religion fed "FEUD" that can never be won, They will simply WALK BACK IN WHEN WE DO LEAVE!!!

So, No Worries!!! Educate "yourself(s)". Be prepared; Get Creative! Design defense with easily acquired normal items, easily assembled and disassembled to look as ordinary as harmless as they first were....

Keep them guessing...


On the Political Side, some strategy can be established by Propaganda; Using one power faction against the others.

Weaken the enemy and strengthen people's freedoms by educating those that will listen to Common Law and Constitutional Principles of Liberty and Property;

For that, read these 4 documents:


Also take a look at Republics and Representation, and the need for smaller stronger republics.


RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Watch these videos on 3-D Plastics as well See also text below.

For those that do not understand what the poster is expressing.

Here are some videos (also read text below links):

FROM - http://www.explainingthefuture.com :


Write down all the web links to view

others to find related links:





AR - 15From Metal:

Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAdnZ6xsWtU

Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_929308...

And another:


Cad programs (Autodesk) and plastics (OR METAL) machines allow anyone with the software and the plastics machine that forms plastics (OR METAL) into ANY 3-D Design.

This includes ARMS, Weapons of any type, i.e. rockets, grenades, bombs, guns, etc.etc...

You enter the design, and out comes a plastic production piece.

With present Plastics Strengths, an INSTANT WEAPON can be produced.

In other words, an unarmed populous can with a number of these machines and software, can quickly arm themselves... and as well, in a covert action, discard the weapon by melting it down.

Those that have the ability should begin practicing the art of 3-D Weaponry construction; and the ability to begin small and large scale production on a moments notice.

Along with that, begin working on how to conceal your work and workplace and activities, so that your day to day activities will seem normal; A machine that is sitting on a workbench can be viewed as something unusual to someone using infrared to view inside your house; But a machine behind a false wall inside a refrigerator, could easily be discarded;

Tunnels in the middle of the house can be viewed as very suspicious, but foundation walls are common. Trucks with quickly assembled false walls or floors can provide mobility to operate machinery and move products.

Scents can fool dogs trained to look for plastics, metal and gun powder, etc. Start collecting such information.

Learn codes and code sending methods that you can easily employ that will look like normal day to day tasks for YOUR situation.

Dress Normal, if you start walking around in camo, thats a dead give away. Camouflage doesn't work against infrared scopes anyway. i.e. they will not only be able to pick you out as a militant, they will see you anyway and pick you off! So stealth means acting in a plain usual way.

Regarding heat profile, "Acrylic" DOES block heat, and can keep infrared from detecting it. It doesn't take too much Acrylic to help shield or block heat waves that infrared uses to detect heat, just make sure the acrylic doesn't get hot itself...adequate fans for air circulation. Google Infrared, Acrylic, and Night vision.

Infrared scopes are available but expensive; *** This is Something else CAD printing would be good to begin developing designs for constructing! But if you can afford it, buy one! Infrared beats Night Vision 100 to 1. both or a combo unit would be good.

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

reedr3v's picture

bump for weighing and evaluating


Bump - For Thought

The Post has merit.

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Some Importrant Founders Quotes:

1.) President George Washington presented his mistrust in the federal government very clearly and defined the true intent where the powers should lay, and that is in the hands of the civilians.

In response to a proposal for gun registration George Washington in 1790 said: "Absolutely not. If the people are ARMED and the "federalists" do not know where the arms are, there can never be an oppressive government."

The right to "conceal" from the federal government; The purpose clearly stated to have the power to put down an oppressive federal government. This is clearly in line with the 12th Grievance of the Declaration of Independence. This defines the Intent of the 2nd Amendment and the intent of the Founders.

2.) George Washington January 7, 1790 :

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence. From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable.

The very atmosphere of firearms "EVERYWHERE" restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."

3.) George Mason when the Constitution was being debated:

"To disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them."

4.)Elbridge Gerry, a representative to Congress from Massachusetts during the debates over the Bill of Rights "What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty ... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins."

5.) Lets review other words of James Madison with regards to militias and standing armies; The purpose and the power ratio between them:

James Madison who wrote the Constitution together the Bill of Rights:

"The highest number to which a standing army can be carried in any country does not exceed one hundredth part of the souls, or one twenty-fifth (1/25th) part of the number able to bear arms.

This portion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men.

To "these" would be OPPOSED

(APP: indicating that the "MILITIA" is to be a "OPPOSING FORCE" to the standing army, as well as that of foriegn enemies)

a militia amounting to near half a million "CITIZENS" with arms in their HANDS,

"officered by men chosen from "AMONG THEMSELVES",

(not by government or the standing army)

fighting for "their" (the citizen / militia's) common liberties and united and conducted by government"S" possessing their (the citizen / militia's) affections and confidence.

It may well be doubted whether a militia THUS circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a "proportion" of regular troops (i.e. standing army).

Besides the advantage of being armed, it forms a barrier against the "enterprises of ambition", more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.

The governments of Europe are afraid to trust the people with arms.

If they did, the people would surely shake off the yoke of tyranny, as America did.

Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors."

More Insight at American Patriot Party.CC

Suggested Founders Reading 5 Free Founders documents For Your I-Phone: http://www.pacificwestcom.com/oregonpatriotparty/American_Pa...

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

John Locke Second Treatise of Civil Government

John Locke:


200: "...And therefore a king, governing in a settled kingdom, leaves to be a king, and degenerates into a tyrant, as soon as he leaves off to rule according to his laws." And a little after: "Therefore, all kings that are not tyrants, or perjured, will be glad to bound themselves within the limits of their laws, and they that persuade them the contrary are vipers, pests, both against them and the commonwealth." Thus, that learned king, who well understood the notions of things, makes the difference betwixt a king and a tyrant to consist only in this: that one makes the laws the bounds of his power and the good of the public the end of his government; the other makes all give way to his own will and appetite.

201: It is a mistake to think this fault is proper only to monarchies. OTHER FORMS OF GOVERNMENT are liable to it as well as that; for WHEREVER the power that is put in any hands for the government of the people and the preservation of their properties is applied to other ends, and made use of to "impoverish, harass, or subdue them to the arbitrary and irregular commands" of those that have it, there it presently becomes TYRANNY, whether those that thus use it are one or many. Thus we read of the thirty tyrants at Athens, as well as one at Syracuse; and the intolerable dominion of the Decemviri at Rome was nothing better.

202: "...For exceeding the bounds of authority (APP: Original Constitutional Compact) is no more a right in a great than a petty officer, no more justifiable in a king than a constable. But so much the worse in him as that he has more trust put in him, is supposed, from the advantage of education and counsellors, to have better knowledge and less reason to do it, having already a greater share than the rest of his brethren.

212: "212. Besides this overturning from without, GOVERNMENTS are "DISSOLVED" from "WITHIN":

First. When the legislative is ALTERED (i.e. CHANGED),...When any one, or more, shall take upon them to make laws whom the people have NOT appointed so to do, they make laws WITHOUT AUTHORITY, which the people are NOT therefore bound to obey; by which means they come again to be out of subjection, and may constitute to themselves a new legislative, as they think best, being in full liberty to resist the force of those who, without authority, would impose anything upon them. Every one is at the disposure of his OWN will, when those who had, by the "delegation" of the society, the declaring of the public will, are excluded from it, and others USURP the place who have no such authority or delegation."

213: This being usually brought about by such in the commonwealth, who misuse the power they have,..."

214: First, that when such a single person or prince sets up his own arbitrary will in place of the laws which are the will of the society declared by the legislative, then the legislative is changed...."

215: Secondly, when the prince hinders the legislative from assembling in its due time, or from acting freely, pursuant to those ends for which it was constituted, the legislative is altered...."

216. Thirdly, when, by the arbitrary power of the prince, the electors or ways of election are altered without the consent and contrary to the common interest of the people, there also the legislative is altered...."

217: Fourthly, the delivery also of the people into the subjection of a FOREIGN POWER, either by the prince or by the legislative, is certainly a change of the legislative, and so a "dissolution of the government".

For the end why people entered into society being to be preserved one entire, free, independent society to be governed by its own laws, this is lost whenever they are given up into the power of another.

218. "Why, in such a constitution as this, the dissolution of the government in these cases is to be imputed to the prince is evident, because he, having the force, treasure, and offices of the State to employ, and often persuading himself or being flattered by others, that, as supreme magistrate, he is incapable of control; he alone is in a condition to make great advances towards such changes under "PRETENCE" of lawful authority, and has it in his hands to terrify or suppress opposers as factious, seditious, and enemies to the government; whereas no other part of the legislative, or people, is capable by themselves to attempt any alteration of the legislative without open and visible rebellion, apt enough to be taken notice of, which, when it prevails, produces effects very little different from foreign conquest....But yet so far as the other parts of the legislative any way contribute to any attempt upon the government, and do either promote, or not, what lies in them, hinder such designs, they are guilty, and partake in this, which is certainly the greatest crime men can be guilty of one towards another."

219: There is one way more whereby such a government may be dissolved, and that is: When he who has the supreme executive power neglects and abandons that charge, so that the laws already made (i.e. Constitution) can no longer be put in execution; this is demonstratively to reduce all to anarchy, and so effectively to DISSOLVE the government...."

220: In these, and the like cases, when the government is dissolved, the people are at liberty to provide for themselves by erecting a new legislative differing from the other by the change of persons, or form, or both, as they shall find it most for their safety and good....To tell people they may provide for themselves by erecting a new legislative, when, by oppression, artifice, or being delivered over to a foreign power, their old one is gone, is only to tell them they may expect relief when it is too late, and the evil is past cure. This is, in effect, no more than to bid them first be slaves, and then to take care of their liberty, and, when their chains are on, tell them they may act like free men. This, if barely so, is rather mockery than relief, and men can never be secure from tyranny if there be no means to escape it till they are perfectly under it; and, therefore, it is that they have not only a right to get out of it, but to prevent it.

221. There is, therefore, secondly, another way whereby governments are dissolved, and that is, when the legislative, or the prince, either of them act contrary to their trust.

For the legislative acts against the trust reposed in them when they endeavour to invade the property of the subject, and to make themselves, or any part of the community, masters or arbitrary disposers of the lives, liberties, or fortunes of the people.

222. The reason why men enter into society is the preservation of their property; and the end while they choose and authorise a legislative is that there may be laws made, and rules set, as guards and fences to the properties of all the society, to limit the power and moderate the dominion of every part and member of the society. For since it can never be supposed to be the will of the society that the legislative should have a power to destroy that which every one designs to secure by entering into society, and for which the people submitted themselves to legislators of their own making: whenever the legislators endeavour to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any farther obedience, and are left to the common refuge which God hath provided for all men against force and violence. Whensoever, therefore, the legislative shall transgress this fundamental rule of society, and either by ambition, fear, folly, or corruption,

(APP Note: See this in Samuel Adams Statement within the Rights of the Colonists, 1772: "If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave.")

endeavour to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other, an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the people, by this breach of trust they forfeit the power the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the people, who have a right to resume their original liberty, and by the establishment of a new legislative (such as they shall think fit), provide for their own safety and security, (APP Note: See this in the Declaration of Independence) which is the end for which they are in society.

What I have said here concerning the legislative in general holds true also concerning the supreme executor, who having a double trust put in him, both to have a part in the legislative and the supreme execution of the law, acts against both, when he goes about to set up his own arbitrary will as the law of the society. He acts also contrary to his trust when he employs the force, treasure, and offices of the society to corrupt the representatives and gain them to his purposes, when he openly pre-engages the electors, and prescribes, to their choice, such whom he has, by solicitation, threats, promises, or otherwise, won to his "designs", and employs them to bring in such who have promised beforehand what to vote and what to enact. Thus to regulate candidates and electors, and new model the ways of election, what is it but to cut up the government by the roots, and poison the very fountain of public security? For the people having reserved to themselves the choice of their representatives as the fence to their properties, could do it for no other end but that they might always be freely chosen, and so chosen, freely act and advise as the necessity of the commonwealth and the public good should, upon examination and mature debate, be judged to require. This, those who give their votes before they hear the debate, and have weighed the reasons on all sides, are not capable of doing. To prepare such an assembly as this, and endeavour to set up the declared abettors of his own will, for the true representatives of the people, and the law-makers of the society, is certainly as great a breach of trust, and as perfect a declaration of a "design"

(APP Note: See this in the Declaration of Independence and compare 223-226:

(" ... But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a "design" to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government and to provide new guards for their future security.)

to subvert the government, as is possible to be met with. To which, if one shall add rewards and punishments visibly employed to the same end, and all the arts of perverted law made use of to take off and destroy all that stand in the way of such a >>"design", and will not comply and consent to betray the liberties of their country, it will be past doubt what is doing. What power they ought to have in the society who thus employ it contrary to the trust that along with it in its first institution, is easy to determine; and one cannot but see that he who has once attempted any such thing as this cannot any longer be trusted."

227: "...And if those, who by force take away the legislative, are rebels, the LEGISLATORS THEMSELVES, as has been shown, can be no less esteemed so, when they who were set up for the protection and preservation of the people, their liberties and properties shall by force invade and endeavour to take them away; and so they putting themselves into a "STATE OF WAR" with those (THE PEOPLE) who made them (THE LEGISLATORS) the protectors and guardians of their (THE PEOPLES) peace, are properly, and with the greatest aggravation, rebellantes, rebels."

228. But if they who say it lays a foundation for rebellion mean that it may occasion civil wars or intestine broils to tell the people they are absolved from obedience when illegal attempts are made upon their liberties or properties, and may oppose the unlawful violence of those who were their magistrates when they invade their properties, contrary to the trust put in them, and that, therefore, this doctrine is not to be allowed, being 'so destructive to the "PEACE" of the world';

>>> they may as well say, upon the same ground, that honest men may not oppose robbers or pirates

, because this may occasion disorder or bloodshed. If any mischief come in such cases, >>> it is not to be charged upon him who defends his own right, but "on him" that "invades his neighbour's".

If the innocent honest man must quietly quit all he has for peace sake to him who will lay violent hands upon it, I desire it may be considered what kind of a peace there will be in the world which consists only in violence and rapine,

and which is to be maintained only for the benefit of robbers and oppressors.

Who would not think it an admirable peace betwixt the mighty and the mean, when the lamb, without resistance, yielded his throat to be torn by the imperious wolf? "

229. The end of government is the good of mankind; and which is best for mankind, that the people should be always exposed to the boundless will of tyranny, or that the rulers should be sometimes liable to be opposed when they grow exorbitant in the use of their power, and employ it for the destruction, and not the preservation, of the properties of their people?

230. Nor let any one say that mischief can arise from hence as often as it shall please a busy head or turbulent spirit to desire the alteration of the government. It is true such men may stir whenever they please, but it will be only to their own just ruin and perdition. For till the mischief be grown general, and the ill designs of the rulers become visible, or their attempts sensible to the greater part, the people, who are more disposed to suffer than right themselves by resistance, are not apt to stir.

(APP Note: Again Review the Declaration of Independence for these exact words and or meaning)

The examples of particular injustice or oppression of here and there an unfortunate man moves them not. But if they universally have a persuasion grounded upon manifest evidence that designs are carrying on against their liberties, and the general course and tendency of things cannot but give them strong suspicions of the evil intention of their governors, who is to be blamed for it? Who can help it if they, who might avoid it, bring themselves into this suspicion? Are the people to be blamed if they have the sense of rational creatures, and can think of things no otherwise than as they find and feel them? And is it not rather their fault who put things in such a posture that they would not have them thought as they are? I grant that the pride, ambition, and turbulency of private men have sometimes caused great disorders in commonwealths, and factions have been fatal to states and kingdoms. But whether the mischief hath oftener begun in the people's wantonness, and a desire to cast off the lawful authority of their rulers, or in the rulers' insolence and endeavours to get and exercise an arbitrary power over their people, whether oppression or disobedience gave the first rise to the disorder, I leave it to impartial history to determine. This I am sure, whoever, either ruler or subject, by force goes about to invade the rights of either prince or people, and lays the foundation for overturning the constitution and frame of any just government, he is guilty of the greatest crime I think a man is capable of, being to answer for all those mischiefs of blood, rapine, and desolation, which the breaking to pieces of governments bring on a country; and he who does it is justly to be esteemed the common enemy and pest of mankind, and is to be "TREATED ACCORDINGLY".

231. That subjects or foreigners attempting by force on the properties of any people may be resisted with force is agreed on all hands; but that magistrates doing the same thing may be resisted, hath of late been denied; as if those who had the greatest privileges and advantages by the law had thereby a power to break those laws by which alone they were set in a better place than their brethren; whereas their offence is thereby the >>> greater, both as being ungrateful for the greater share they have by the law, and breaking also that trust which is put into their hands by their brethren.

232: Whosoever uses force without right -- as every one does in society who does it without law -- puts himself into a state of war with those against whom he so uses it, and in that state all former ties are cancelled, all other rights cease, and every one has a right to defend himself, and to resist the aggressor.

233: "...I answer: Self-defence is a part of the law of Nature; nor can it be denied the community, even against the king himself;..."

237. "What, then, can there no case happen wherein the people may of right, and by their own authority, help themselves, take arms, and set upon their king, imperiously domineering over them?...

...when any king harbours in his thoughts, and seriously promotes, he immediately gives up all care and thought of the commonwealth, and, consequently, forfeits the power of governing his subjects, as a master does the dominion over his slaves whom he hath abandoned.

238. "The other case is, when a king makes himself the "dependent of another", and subjects his kingdom, which his ancestors left him, and the people put free into his hands, to the dominion of another.

For however, perhaps, it may not be his intention to prejudice the people, yet because he has hereby lost the principal part of regal dignity -- viz., to be next and immediately under God, supreme in his kingdom; and also because he betrayed or forced his people, whose liberty he ought to have carefully preserved, into the power and dominion of a foreign nation. By this, as it were, alienation of his kingdom, he himself loses the power he had in it before, >>> without transferring any the least right to those on whom he would have bestowed it; and so by this act sets the people free, and leaves them at their own disposal. One example of this is to be found in the Scotch annals."

(APP Note: Relate this to a national government who places its people into the hands of a world government (or organization), or under the control of foriegn treaties - then Review the APP news letter on the Constitutional Debates, what must occur, and what are the protections of the states, with regard to when a national government becomes disingenuous to its "original compact".)

239. In these cases Barclay, the great champion of absolute monarchy, is forced to allow that a king may be resisted, and ceases to be a king.

That is in short -- not to multiply cases -- in whatsoever he has no authority, there he is no king, and may be resisted:

for wheresoever the authority ceases, the king ceases too, and becomes like other men who have no authority.

And these two cases that he instances differ little from those above mentioned, to be destructive to governments, only that he has omitted the principle from which his doctrine flows,

and that is the "breach of trust" in not preserving the FORM OF GOVERNMENT AGREED ON", and in not intending the end of government itself, which is the public good and "PRESERVATION of PROPERTY".

When a king (APP: executive, legislative, judicial) has dethroned himself, and put himself in a "STATE OF WAR" with his people, what shall hinder them from prosecuting him who is no king (APP: NO executive, NO legislative, NO judicial), as they would any other man, who has put himself (APP: executive, legislative, judicial) into a "STATE OF WAR" with them (the PEOPLE),..."


Here is a free .pdf copy of 5 Complete Founders Documents - APP's Suggested Reading for your iPhone:


American Patriot Party.CC

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.