(Carla Gericke, President of the Free State Project, speaking in front of Concord City Hall last night before the City Council Meeting began.)
The Non-Agression Principle (NAP) is what members of the Free State Project always point to as an attempt to illustrate to us that they are peaceful, nonviolent individuals. They are adherents of this principle, therefore they come in peace. That they are armed and claiming peaceful intent isn't supposed to occur to us, because hey, they're non-violent! They say so!
This is from the NAP wiki:
The non-aggression principle (NAP)—also called the non-aggression axiom, the zero aggression principle (ZAP), the anti-coercion principle, or the non-initiation of force—is a moral stance which asserts thataggression is inherently illegitimate. NAP and property rights are closely linked, since what aggression is depends on what a person's rights are.[1] Aggression, for the purposes of NAP, is defined as the initiation or threatening of violence against a person or legitimately-owned property of another. Specifically, any unsolicited actions of others that physically affect an individual’s property or person, no matter if the result of those actions is damaging, beneficial, or neutral to the owner, are considered violent or aggressive when they are against the owner's free will and interfere with his right to self-determination and the principle of self-ownership.
Supporters of the NAP often appeal to it in order to explain the immorality of theft, vandalism, assault, and fraud. In contrast to nonviolence, the non-aggression principle does not preclude violence used in self-defense or defense of others.[2] Many supporters argue that NAP opposes such policies as victimless crime laws, taxation, and military drafts. NAP is the foundation of most present-day libertarian philosophies.
It's not exactly clearly defined. And there's a huge component missing from it - verbal aggression. The Free Staters are very verbally aggressive.
Last night, Free State President Carla Gericke spoke to the Concord City Council, concerning the poor FSP's wounded feelings about being named as potential domestic terrorists in a grant application by the Concord PD. The Concord PD is trying to get an armored vehicle. The folks turning out to that meeting last night were supposed to be there to protest the militarization of police and the wasteful spending by the Dept. of Homeland Security, but Carla and the Free Staters managed to turn the whole issue into being about them.
From my notes:
Ms. Gericke was allowed to speak first. She started off by saying that the Free Staters are productive citizens moving here to be part of the shared values of the state. By then she was warmed up, and began to get loud. I hate the word shrill as an adjective because it's so often applied unfairly to women, but she was shrill. She accused the police chief of perjury. "We're good people. I volunteer for Concord Reads at the Concord Library, and I am deeply offended by this misleading, fraudulent, secret application!" She bellowed that as President of the FSP, she has called for the retraction of this grant and a letter of apology! The people in that room didn't respect her enough to respond to her! And here's where she reached operatic heights: "I will be filing a complaint with the Dept. of Homeland Security!" (An agency of the very gubmint she claims disdain for) She called for the public resignation of all of the people involved with this application. When people make false statements, the penalty is PRISON.
She was screaming by the end of her comments. She was red faced and angry when she left the room.
If her intent was to show the City of Concord that the Free Staters are peaceful and nonaggressive, Carla failed in an epic manner.
