UN Small Arms Treaty - Constant Vigilance and Education are Necessary to Protect Freedoms.Submitted by Richard Taylor APP on Sat, 05/04/2013 - 16:38
JBS News: http://www.jbs.org
John Locke - Second Treatise on Civil Government 1698 - on the Limitations of the Legislative and Executive:
John Locke - Dissolution of Government: (Government is Dissolved When):
#217. Fourthly, the delivery also of the people into the subjection of a "FOREIGN POWER" (i.e. UNITED NATIONS), either by the prince (EXECUTIVE) or by the LEGISLATIVE, is certainly a change of the legislative, and so a DISSOLUTION OF THE GOVERNMENT. For the end (Protection of CERTAIN RIGHTS, LIBERTIES & PROPERTY) 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."
#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 (EXECUTIVE i.e. PRESIDENT), 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 (ORIGINAL CONSTITUTIONAL COMPACT), 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"."
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 LOOSES THE POWER he had in it before, >>> WITHOUT TRANSFERRING THE LEAST RIGHT TO THOSE WHOM HE BESTOWED IT; and so by this act sets the people free, and leaves them at their own disposal."
i.e. Any treaty in violation of our Right to Keep and Bear Arms under our ORIGINAL COMPACT is NULL and Void.
To further understand this, read our "Suggested Reading" of Four Essential Founders Documents on our Website.
American Patriot Party.CC
Educate Yourself. Educate Others.