To usurp, according to John Locke, is the assumption of power in a government that is conducted with the principles of moral legitimacy. In this form of government that Locke describes, morals of governance and principles of laws are the basics of governance. The limits that Locke puts on the rulers in his theory of government assume a moral basis. The issue of human entitlements in relation to natural law and natural justice backs up this treatise proposed by John Locke. As Locke proposes, the Supreme Being, God is the granter of these rights, which are regarded as natural rights. In this case, they apply to all the people since they are given universally by one source.

According to John Locke, when the king surpasses the requirements of the moral rights and obligations, they are regarded as tyrants. He postulates that no one has a moral obligation, or even the right to act as such. Further, he regards this as a misuse of official power, for a gain that is to benefit the individual in power, but not to benefit the people who are being led. Again, when the king interprets their self-wish, and apply them as if it were the governing law, then they are acting as tyrants. In this case, the pursuance of the king is not to safeguard the betterment of the electorate, but to extend a personal agenda. According to Locke, this translates to tyranny. Therefore, Locke’s definition of tyranny is that leadership which violates the set moral guiding principles, with a personal agenda. According to Locke, a leader in a monarchy follows the set moral guidelines while governing. However, a tyrant does not. Therefore, the king is not necessarily a tyrant, because they can lead with the needs of the people at heart, and hand over power in a smooth transition.