'I am not your peasant... I will NOT be disarmed:'

Marine's scathing letter to U.S. senator over her proposed ban on assault weapons goes viral

By Daily Mail Reporter
PUBLISHED: 18:51 EST, 3 January 2013 | UPDATED: 13:37 EST, 4 January 2013 
 

A scathing letter written by a Marine veteran blasting a proposed ban on assault weapons has gone viral online.
Cpl. Joshua Boston wrote the letter to U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat from California, who proposed the bill banning certain firearms and requiring gun owners to register their weapons.
'I am a Marine Corps veteran of eight years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one,' he writes in the letter.
'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.'

Anger: U.S. Marine Corporal Joshua Boston's letter to Senator Diane Feinstein telling her that he will not comply with her proposed legislation to ban assault weapons has gone viral

Boston was first deployed to Afghanistan from 2004 to 2005 and spent a total of eight years oversees serving as a Marine. He admits he owns guns - 'a hobby if you will', he writes on one blog.
In his letter, which has been shared across social media sites since it was posted on CNN iReport, he argues the bill would lead to the government confiscating weapons - a move he deems a threat.

 

More...

• Record gun sales at Virginia weapons show as families ‘stock up’ on arms after Sandy Hook massacre
• Hypocrisy of the anti-gun Hollywood stars: Hilarious YouTube video reveals the bloody roles filmed by celebrities now calling for gun control
• Teachers trained to use guns in classroom: American school tutors get free weapons lessons ‘to protect pupils' after Sandy Hook massacre

'I own the guns I own because I acknowledge mankind's shortcomings instead of pretending like they don't exist,' he told CNN. 'There are evil men in this world and there just may be a time when I need to do the unthinkable to protect me or my family.'
In the letter, he tells Feinstein: 'You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain.'

In the letter, he tells Feinstein, (D-CA) (pictured) 'You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain'

'I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public,' he writes, adding, 'We, the people, deserve better than you.'
The letter was posted on CNN iReport on December 27 and has since been shared extensively on social media sites like Facebook and Twitter.
On Twitter, a user named Mid Stutsman provided a link to the letter and wrote, 'Go Joshua Boston...Semper Fi! U.S. Marine’s Scathing Response to Sen. Feinstein’s Gun Control Proposal.'
Twitter user @LaTicaChica added: 'Doesn't get any better that that! Big fist pump, three cheers, etc. for Joshua Boston's verbal smack down with the TRUTH!'
Feinstein's bill names 120 specific firearms she seeks the country to ban, import and manufacture, as well as other semiautomiatic rifle, handguns and shotguns that have more military characteristics.

Defiant: Boston (left) served in Afghanistan from 2004 until 2005 and in 2011, and says he owns guns, right

Love: He has called guns his 'hobby' and said he may one day need them to protect his family

At work: Boston (left) talks to an Afghani man during a patrol in Sistani, Helmand Province in 2011

It also bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices accepting more than 10 rounds.

Yet it seeks protection for legitimate hunters and gun owners by allowing more than 900 weapons used for sport and those that are antique and manually operated.
Cpl. Boston's reference to Feinstein carrying a weapon may be a reference to her desire to outlaw handgun ownership while admitting she carries one herself, for protection.
This latest debate over gun ownership was sparked by the December 14 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, where six staff and 20 children were shot dead.

Wading in: CNN host Piers Morgan outraged thousands of Americans for his tough stance on gun control

CNN host Piers Morgan has taken one of the toughest stances on gun control, even calling one pro-gun campaigner an 'unbelievably stupid man' after he said more guns would cut crime.
His comments have led to more than 100,000 people signing a petition to get the British host deported from the United States, claiming he has undermined the 'rights of Americans'.
More than 30,000 people die from gun injuries each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Gun injuries account for nearly 1 in 5 injury deaths in the U.S.

'YOU MA'AM HAVE OVERSTEPPED A LINE': JOSHUA BOSTON'S LETTER

Senator Dianne Feinstein,

I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government’s right to know what I own. 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.

You ma’am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and 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 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.

I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.

We, the people, deserve better than you.

Respectfully Submitted,

Joshua Boston

Cpl, United States Marine Corps

2004-2012

Drudge Report: PIERS MORGAN TO 'QUIT' CNN... AMERICA TURNED ON ME

America is fed up of me: Morgan to quit CNN job

The New York Times: There have been times when the CNN host Piers Morgan didn’t seem to like America very much — and American audiences have been more than willing to return the favor. Three years aftertaking over for Larry King, Mr. Morgan has seen the ratings for “Piers Morgan Live” hit some new lows, drawing a fraction of viewers compared with competitors at Fox News and MSNBC.

It’s been an unhappy collision between a British television personality who refuses to assimilate — the only football he cares about is round and his lectures on guns were rife with contempt — and a CNN audience that is intrinsically provincial. After all, the people who tune into a cable news network are, by their nature, deeply interested in America.

CNN’s president, Jeffrey Zucker, has other problems, but none bigger than Mr. Morgan and his plum 9 p.m. time slot. Mr. Morgan said last week that he and Mr. Zucker had been talking about the show’s failure to connect and had decided to pull the plug, probably in March.

Crossing an ocean for a replacement for Larry King, who had ratings problems of his own near the end, was probably not a great idea to begin with. For a cable news station like CNN, major stories are like oxygen. When something important or scary happens in America, many of us have an immediate reflex to turn on CNN. When I find Mr. Morgan telling me what it all means, I have a similar reflex to dismiss what he is saying. It is difficult for him to speak credibly on significant American events because, after all, he just got here.

I received a return call from Mr. Morgan and was prepared for an endless argument over my assumptions. Not so. His show, he conceded, was not performing as he had hoped and was nearing its end.

“It’s been a painful period and lately we have taken a bath in the ratings,” he said, adding that although there had been times when the show connected in terms of audience, slow news days were problematic.

“Look, I am a British guy debating American cultural issues, including guns, which has been very polarizing, and there is no doubt that there are many in the audience who are tired of me banging on about it,” he said. “That’s run its course and Jeff and I have been talking for some time about different ways of using me.”

Mr. Morgan said that his show, along with much of the rest of CNN, had been imprisoned by the news cycle and that he was interested in doing fewer appearances to greater effect — big, major interviews that would be events in themselves. Although a change has long been rumored, it was the first time that both he, and the CNN executives I talked to, acknowledged that his nightly show was on the way out. Plans for a replacement at the 9 o’clock hour are still underway, but Mr. Morgan and the network are in talks about him remaining at CNN in a different role.

Mr. Zucker, the former chief of NBC, inherited Mr. Morgan from Jonathan Klein, his predecessor, but it is now his problem to fix. In the year he has been there, CNN has introduced promising shows around the edges and will be unveiling documentaries along the lines of the very successful “Blackfish” to run on Thursday in the 10 p.m. hour.

But the chronic troubles of prime-time remain. Sometime before the network “upfront” events in April, when advertisers buy commercial time for the fall season, Mr. Zucker needs to signal how he will fix CNN’s prime-time problem, and that begins with Mr. Morgan, whose contract ends in September.

Mr. Morgan has some significant skills that do translate across platforms and cultures. While working as a newspaper editor and television personality in Britain, he was involved in a number of controversies, but he developed a reputation as a talented, probing interviewer. In his current role, he has shown an ability not only to book big guests — former President Bill Clinton, Warren Buffett, the real Wolf of Wall Street among them — but also to dig in once they are on set.

“I think I can credibly do news and the ratings reflect that, but it is not really the show that I set out to do,” he told me. “There are all kinds of people who can do news here. I’d like to do work — interviews with big celebrities and powerful people — that is better suited to what I do well and fit with what Jeff is trying to do with the network.”

Old hands in the television news business suggest that there are two things a presenter cannot have: an accent or a beard. Mr. Morgan is clean shaven and handsome enough, but there are tells in his speech — the way he says the president’s name for one thing (Ob-AA-ma) — that suggest that he is not from around here.

There are other tells as well. On Friday morning, criticizing the decision to dismiss a cricket player, he tweeted, “I’m sure @StuartBroad8 is right and KP’s sacking will ‘improve performance’ of the England team. Look forward to seeing this at T20 WC.” Mr. Morgan might want to lay off the steady cricket references if he is worried about his credibility with American audiences. (His endless trolling of his critics on Twitter did not exactly help, either.)

People might point to Simon Cowell as a man with an accent and a penchant for slashing discourse that Americans loved, but Mr. Cowell is dealing with less-than-spontaneous musical performances, not signal events in the American news narrative. There was, of course, the counterexample of David Frost, who did important work in news, but Mr. Frost did popular special reports and was not a chronic presence in American living rooms.

Mr. Morgan, who was chosen in spite of that fact that he had never done a live show, had the misfortune of sliding into the loafers of Mr. King, who, for all his limitations, was a decent and reliable stand-in for the average Joe.

In a sense, Mr. Morgan is a prisoner of two islands: Britain and Manhattan. While I may share his feelings about the need for additional strictures on guns, having grown up in the Midwest, I know that many people come by their guns honestly and hold onto them dearly for sincere reasons.

Mr. Morgan’s approach to gun regulation was more akin to King George III, peering down his nose at the unruly colonies and wondering how to bring the savages to heel. He might have wanted to recall that part of the reason the right to bear arms is codified in the Constitution is that Britain was trying to disarm the citizenry at the time.

He regrets none of it, but clearly understands his scolding of “stupid” opponents of gun laws was not everyone’s cup of tea.

“I’m in danger of being the guy down at the end of the bar who is always going on about the same thing,” he said. He added that he was sure there were plenty of people in the heartland angry “about this British guy telling them how to lead their lives and what they should do with their guns.”

In the current media age, no one is expected to be a eunuch, without values or beliefs, but Mr. Morgan’s lecturing on the evils of guns have clanked hard against the CNN brand, which, for good or ill, is built on the middle way.

We don’t look for moral leadership from CNN, or from a British host on a rampage. Guns, along with many other great and horrible things, are knit into the fabric of this country. There are folkways peculiar to America that Mr. Morgan is just learning, including the fact that if you want to stick out, you first have to work on fitting in.

Written by Conservative Outfitters — February 23, 2014

CNN's Piers Morgan uses stupidity, dead 1st graders to sell gun control

I don't know about you but listening to a guy from another country question a very basic RIGHT guaranteed to me by my country's constitution doesn't sit well with me. It's even worse when that guy is British. My ancestors fought and in some cases died to ensure that I have the rights written in that document, and it was written in direct response to the British oppression of the time. So you can imagine the rage I felt listening to this:

But let's get to what Piers is doing here. First he is using complete nonsensical stupidity and ignorance to sell the idea of ridding the U.S. Bill or Rights of its 2nd Amendment. In the video, Steve Dulan makes a perfectly logical case by saying that licensed and properly trained people who carry should be allowed "to carry in places that [they] couldn't carry before." He goes on to say that the only way to stop a deranged killer is to shoot him. At this point Piers loses his mind and calls it "a load of total hogwash"because "if everyone was armed in [the Aurora, Colorado] theater, TWICE as many people would have been killed in the mayhem that would have erupted." 

Here are the list of things you have to either ignore, or be completely stupid about in order for that to be correct:

1. That trained, law abiding citizens would somehow become careless about innocent human life when it came time to use a weapon. Where this comes from is that people like Piers are so terrified of guns that they think the guns are possessed to the point that it has its own personality, that it is an evil living thing and that it wants to kill and will when given the opportunity. They also believe that ALL people that possess guns are also under the gun's spell - that they must find an excuse to use it, and to kill as much life as possible. Because of this irrational fear of guns, all logic gets thrown out the window. You can tell when Piers says that when other, innocent citizens in a massacre are armed, that "twice as many people would be killed," what he really means is that those armed citizens will just simply join in on the massacre! Or maybe what he means is that the armed innocents will draw their weapon and start shooting as fast as they can pull the trigger while they spin in 360 degree circles, completely disregarding human life? Let's reintroduce LOGIC into this debate. A mass murderer points ONE gun at many people, and of course, many people die. When MANY, properly trained people take aim at ONE person, the only way more than ONE person dies is by freak accident. Considering the body count in Colorado, Connecticut and elsewhere, I think anyone not willing to take the chance of an accidental death to save so many DOZENS of lives is kidding themselves.
2. That video games replicate the complexities of aiming and shooting a weapon. Everyone that has had the luxury of comparing video games to real life know that your view through a monitor is extremely limited and that aiming is extremely cumbersome. In real life you are much more aware of whats around you and aiming is about as difficult as changing the channels on a TV with a remote.
3. So let's show the real-world proof:

Grandpa here knows his stuff! Lots of people around, and he shoots right past them. "Twice as many people" were NOT killed. Piers' argument is based on nothing more than his cowardly, European inspired FEAR of guns.

But besides Piers' use of fear, ignorance and pure absence of logic to make his point, at 6:44 of the video he plays Tarzan on the heartstrings of devastated and mourning America while simultaneously BLAMING those patriots that defend the Constitution by screaming out "HOW MANY MORE KIDS HAVE TO DIE BEFORE YOU GUYS SAY WE WANT LESS GUNS NOT MORE?"

For that, Piers earns the Low-Life of the Year award for 2012.

Here's a suggestion Piers - you need to assimilate to OUR country by embracing everything we stand for, or get the hell out of here. You DO NOT belong here and you have officially worn out your welcome.