Chapter III
                         Of the State of War

  16. The state of war is a state of enmity and destruction; and
therefore declaring by word or action, not a passionate and hasty, but
sedate, settled design upon another man's life puts him in a state
of war with him against whom he has declared such an intention, and so
has exposed his life to the other's power to be taken away by him,
or any one that joins with him in his defence, and espouses his
quarrel; it being reasonable and just I should have a right to destroy
that which threatens me with destruction; for by the fundamental law
of Nature, man being to be preserved as much as possible, when all
cannot be preserved, the safety of the innocent is to be preferred,
and one may destroy a man who makes war upon him, or has discovered an
enmity to his being, for the same reason that he may kill a wolf or
a lion, because they are not under the ties of the common law of
reason, have no other rule but that of force and violence, and so
may be treated as a beast of prey, those dangerous and noxious
creatures that will be sure to destroy him whenever he falls into
their power.
  17. And hence it is that he who attempts to get another man into his
absolute power does thereby put himself into a state of war with
him; it being to be understood as a declaration of a design upon his
life. For I have reason to conclude that he who would get me into
his power without my consent would use me as he pleased when he had
got me there, and destroy me too when he had a fancy to it; for nobody
can desire to have me in his absolute power unless it be to compel
me by force to that which is against the right of my freedom- i.e.
make me a slave. To be free from such force is the only security of my
preservation, and reason bids me look on him as an enemy to my
preservation who would take away that freedom which is the fence to
it; so that he who makes an attempt to enslave me thereby puts himself
into a state of war with me. He that in the state of Nature would take
away the freedom that belongs to any one in that state must
necessarily be supposed to have a design to take away everything else,
that freedom being the foundation of all the rest; as he that in the
state of society would take away the freedom belonging to those of
that society or commonwealth must be supposed to design to take away
from them everything else, and so be looked on as in a state of war.
  18. This makes it lawful for a man to kill a thief who has not in
the least hurt him, nor declared any design upon his life, any farther
than by the use of force, so to get him in his power as to take away
his money, or what he pleases, from him; because using force, where he
has no right to get me into his power, let his pretence be what it
will, I have no reason to suppose that he who would take away my
liberty would not, when he had me in his power, take away everything
else. And, therefore, it is lawful for me to treat him as one who
has put himself into a state of war with me- i.e., kill him if I
can; for to that hazard does he justly expose himself whoever
introduces a state of war, and is aggressor in it.
  19. And here we have the plain difference between the state of
Nature and the state of war, which however some men have confounded,
are as far distant as a state of peace, goodwill, mutual assistance,
and preservation; and a state of enmity, malice, violence and mutual
destruction are one from another. Men living together according to
reason without a common superior on earth, with authority to judge
between them, is properly the state of Nature. But force, or a
declared design of force upon the person of another, where there is no
common superior on earth to appeal to for relief, is the state of war;
and it is the want of such an appeal gives a man the right of war even
against an aggressor, though he be in society and a fellow-subject.
Thus, a thief whom I cannot harm, but by appeal to the law, for having
stolen all that I am worth, I may kill when he sets on me to rob me
but of my horse or coat, because the law, which was made for my
preservation, where it cannot interpose to secure my life from present
force, which if lost is capable of no reparation, permits me my own
defence and the right of war, a liberty to kill the aggressor, because
the aggressor allows not time to appeal to our common judge, nor the
decision of the law, for remedy in a case where the mischief may be
irreparable. Want of a common judge with authority puts all men in a
state of Nature; force without right upon a man's person makes a state
of war both where there is, and is not, a common judge.
  20. But when the actual force is over, the state of war ceases
between those that are in society and are equally on both sides
subject to the judge; and, therefore, in such controversies, where the
question is put, "Who shall be judge?" it cannot be meant who shall
decide the controversy; every one knows what Jephtha here tells us,
that "the Lord the Judge" shall judge. Where there is no judge on
earth the appeal lies to God in Heaven. That question then cannot mean
who shall judge, whether another hath put himself in a state of war
with me, and whether I may, as Jephtha did, appeal to Heaven in it? Of
that I myself can only judge in my own conscience, as I will answer it
at the great day to the Supreme Judge of all men.