Piers Morgan confronts ex-Marine who wrote scathing letter to Dianne Feinstein
His argument, such as it is, seems to be this: “I see no need for anyone to have an assault rifle, and neither does some high-ranking former General.” To which the obvious reply is, “Yeah? Well, I do. So, you know, impasse!”
But Joshua Boston, the ex-Marine, goes further — and in my opinion exposes the ignorance of anti-gun agitators:
Look: if Piers Morgan doesn’t wish to hand down a “killing machine” to his children, then he doesn’t have to. But if I wish to train my children for self-defense, and pass my weapons down to them, that is my choice.
Boston is precisely right: any law that seeks to make such an exchange of private property illegal is a de facto attempt at disarming the populace. Not only that, but it is in fact an attack on the very idea private property itself: because it turns our gun “ownership” into a kind of rental or leasing operation, with the federal government as the ultimate owner of your private property.
This is in every way fundamentally un-American. It is about power, and their desire to wield it with impunity. The question is, do we have the will to stop it?