Marine Vet Says ‘No Ma'am’ to Weapons Ban in Crazy Awesome Letter to Senator

United States Marine Corps Corporal Joshua Boston has written an open letter to California Senator Diane Feinstein explaining why he will not be registering his firearms should her bill be passed. “I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own,” he writes, “Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime.”

In the aftermath of the horrific shooting by Adam Lanza at Sandy Hook Elementary School last month, Senator Feinstein introduced legislation that would reinstate and strengthen the expired 1994 Assault Weapons Ban. The bill bans the sale, transfer, importation, and possession of ‘weapons of war’, as well as big clips, drums, or strips of more than 10 bullets.

The law, if passed, would not be retroactive, but grandfathered in to “protect” current gun-owners. However ... the only way people will be allowed to legally keep their firearms would be to register them with the government, as well as be photographed and finger-printed. Does that sound an awful lot like getting arrested to anyone else? Then what would happen to those records? Would they go into a database? Would they be available for criminal investigations? Because that’s not cool.

Corporal Boston is one of the many Americans not happy about the possibility of such legislation becoming law, so he penned a letter to Senator Feinstein to remind her that it is she who serves him, not the other way around.

“I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America. I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.”

The corporal was also not shy in calling out Senator Feinstein’s hypocrisy in enjoying the protection of armed guards while decrying the public’s right to the same as a crime. He writes, “I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.”

I want to give this guy a hug and buy him a beer. He hits the nail on the head about the ‘good enough for thee, but not for me’ attitude prevalent in Washington. If guns really are evil, why do these politicians have armed guards? They should be more careful -- they might shoot their eyes out.

Do you think legislators should give up their armed guards before demanding that we give up our own weapons?

Image via Official U.S. Navy Imagery/Flickr

crime, discrimination, guns, human rights, law, in the news, media, politics


To add a comment, please log in with

Use Your CafeMom Profile

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Comment As a Guest

Guest comments are moderated and will not appear immediately.

dirti... dirtiekittie

good for Corporal Boston, and RIGHT ON!! he has it right: we are NOT servants, we are NOT peasants, and we are NOT indebted to the government - on the contrary, it is the other way around. to that, i leave these two thomas jefferson quotes - relevant, often repeated, not often enough remembered:

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

 Most bad government has grown out of too much government.

Doomy234 Doomy234

Way to go for this man! He has it absolutely right. Stop insisting that every (legal) gun-owner is going to jump off the deep end and murder a dozen people. By fingerprinting individuals you are essentially branding them a criminal when they have done nothing more than express their rights. The ONLY ones to take action against are the ones who are responsible for mass murders and felons in possession of weapons. But good luck finding them because they arent gonna go in and have you identify them when they are already breaking the law.

The right to own and bear arms shall not be infringed upon. The end.

nonmember avatar Joshua

The right to own and bear arms is not being infringed upon. No one is taking away your guns. Fingerprinting is standard practice when applying for a gun license where I live, and I have absolutely no problem with that. Registering your firearm, matching the serial number to your name, is not some grave infringement on our constitutional rights. It's taking responsibility for your weapon, and assuming responsibility if someone else (or yourself) use that weapon in a negative manner.

jagam... jagamama0710

Meh. I don't have a problem with guns. They shouldn't be banned and people have a right to own them, blah blah blah. I'm a rare breed in that I'm indifferent to the whole debate. I hate the crazies on both sides. :D

That said, what's the problem with requiring people to register their guns? I assumed that was already a requirement....? Is it not? 


lulou lulou

I assumed too that this was already a requirement, just like biological and chemical agents are tracked - thanks for bringing it to my attention so I can support it.

Doomy234 Doomy234

The reason that it is such a big deal for people to register their weapons is the fact that we are being treated like criminals in the process. It should be nobodys business what you choose to own if its legal. Nor should it matter how much of something you own. To track what someone owns is an infringement on privacy. And you really believe that they wont be taking guns and ammunition away if they deem you as a "hazard to others"? They will make rules as to how many weapons and how much ammunition you can own and THAT is an infringement, telling someone that they DONT have the right to own as much as they want when they clearly do.

And none of this gun control is going to do a thing from preventing CRIMINALS from doing bad deeds with guns. And that is why I have a problem with this bill. They are infringing on how much I can defend myself, whereas politicians have as much protection as they deem necessary.

nonmember avatar Riss

First of all FORMER Cpl. Thank you for your service. However, you are out, and therefore equal with the rest of us civilians these days. My Uncle is a 'nam Vet and most of my family owns guns (locked in safes). I have no problem with saying gun owners should register. If your fear is your guns being taken back- well guess what happened during the Holocaust- you think the Nazis went to the local government building to check the registry for Jews? You think the name Stone signifies Jew? No, they took anyone they could, because they were in power. Count your government officials. Compare to the number of citizens (and in that mindset, count our military, because why would they turn on the people they are sworn to protect?).
You register your car, your home ownership is registered where you live, you pay taxes, and you probably have some form of banking/credit. Therefore it's already POSSIBLE to find you and your guns. Unless of course, you're a criminal hiding everything behind cash and thievery. A reminder that when you served, you served ME. I paid your salary for your protection, not for you to become superior to me, and have rights beyond my own.

nonmember avatar Liz

You do realize your car is registered, right? Does that mean we're all being enslaved because the government knows what cars we own? Am I someone's servant because I had to get a license and have my picture taken before I could drive my car? Why do we accept that as normal, but the idea of registering one's gun is ridiculous? They can both be dangerous, and it needs to be known who they belong to so that that person can be held accountable is the property is misused.

expat... expatalfa

But, you have to register a car in California and no one is freaking out over that.

You guys are weird.

In some places which are REALLY expert on organized crime, they know the crooks are up to no good but they can never nail them. So they get them on things like tax fraud and so on. So, if everyone registered their guns then the real criminals (who wouldn't register their gun probably) could get nailed for not having done so.

Whatever, words are wasted on some people. Sorry but so many reactions are just "jump up and bite". How about an intelligent consideration of this idea? A dialogue?

1-10 of 37 comments 1234 Last