Former Marine On Assault Weapons Ban: “Unconstitutional Laws Aren’t Laws”

Cpl. Joshua Boston, a former Marine, who penned a scathing letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) over her proposed assault weapons ban bill, appeared on CNN and absolutely owned the host as he responded to questions regarding the Second Amendment and his letter. In the end, when asked if the ban was in place and that required him to register his weapons, would he break the law? His response was simply, “Unconstitutional laws aren’t laws.”

Boston, a veteran of Afghanistan, was asked why he wrote the letter and if he expected it to get as much attention as it did.

While he didn’t expect the attention, he did say why he wrote the letter. “I wrote it because I kept seeing in the news this debate about gun control and all the points being brought up by Senator Feinstein…a lot of it is misinformation. It’s fearmongering that she is spreading and that is being perpetrated by the media as well. There’s just not a whole lot of double checking and not a lot of facts coming out in this discussion.”

Trending: A Fundamental Legal Argument Against Abortion: How Roe V. Wade Could Possibly be Overturned

The former Marine, once a Marine always a Marine, did say that his letter was a response specifically to her proposed legislation on her website, not necessarily towards other legislation. However, from his response, I gather that his arguments apply across the board as later he would state that the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to hunting and sporting purposes. He said that the text of the Second Amendment reads, “shall not be infringed.”

take our poll - story continues below

Is the Biden Administration Destroying Our Constitution?

  • Is the Biden Administration Destroying Our Constitution?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Freedom Outpost updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

When asked if the ban is passed, which requires all firearms owners with any of the guns that would fall under that ban, including semi-automatic handguns and shotguns with removable magazines and having at least one military requirement, what would he do. Boston replied, “Well, I’m not going to be registering and the precedent has already been set by David Gregory, who apparently doesn’t have to abide by the laws of Washington, D.C.”

Excuse me a moment….Score!

He was interrupted by the host to say, “Well, we don’t know that. There was some miscommunication there apparently.” Not to get sidetracked, but the communication was abundantly clear what the law was and that the DC police had, in fact, turned Gregory down from using a high capacity magazine on national television.

So what does Boston think would happen to him if he failed to register his weapons? “Whatever happens, happens,” he said calmly. “But I have a right granted to me by the Second Amendment in our Bill of Rights and it says, ‘shall not be infringed.'”

The host attempted to say that the ban applied to all weapons in the bill that are being labeled “assault” weapons, which they are not, prospectively, not retrospectively. While that is true for the “sale, the transfer, the importation, and the possession of these firearms,” what they don’t bring up is the “grandfather” portion for those who already own them. In that section, not only will you have to provide ID via a photograph and fingerprints for a national database, but also pay a tax of $200 per firearm that you own.

She then went on to quote part of a response that Senator Feinstein gave in response to Cpl. Boston’s letter.

“Senator Feinstein respects Cpl. Boston’s service, She has heard from thousands of people — including many gun owners — who support her plan to stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of assault weapons and large capacity magazines, strips, and drums that hold more than 10 rounds. As Senator Feinstein has said, the legislation will be carefully focused to protect the rights of existing gun owners by exempting hundreds of weapons used for hunting and sporting purposes.”

It should be noted that neither Sen. Feinstein nor the CNN host named one gun owner that supports her weapons ban bill.

The Feinstein response was a setup for another score on the part of Boston. When asked his response, he said,

“I’m still confused as to where the ‘hunting and sporting’ clause is in the Second Amendment. It’s nowhere to be found in the Bill of Rights or the Constitution, so I don’t understand what she means.”

Boston didn’t think there should be a change to the law following the shootings that took place in Colorado or Connecticut. He stated that the laws that we already have are “extensive.” He then warned, “The fact of the matter is that predators are among us and we have to recognize that fact. We don’t live in a Utopia. Our citizens have to be armed to protect themselves from these madmen.”

The host obviously didn’t get it as she appears to think, like the politicians do, that we can somehow stop every bad thing from happening to anyone. She asked, “So what is the solution then? Is that the solution to stop these tragedies, for everyone to be armed? How do you stop this from happening again?”

Cpl. Boston said, “Not for everyone, but it certainly ups the probability of successfully stopping a shooter before you have 20 dead….30 dead. People will choose whether or not they want to carry if they want to. I’ve made that choice, as have hundreds of thousands of Americans and should we unfortunately ever find ourselves in the situation to protect others in our lives we will.”

The host responded by demonstrating that this entire thing about banning weapons is about removing the citizens ability to protect themselves because her response is about “following the law.” She asked, “But the law is the law. If it becomes law, then you’re just willing to break it.”

Apparently she would have been on the side of other people in history who put terrible laws in place to disarm their people for the express purpose of controlling them and killing those opposed to them. But Boston, simply addresses her properly about unconstitutional laws.

“Unconstitutional laws aren’t laws,” he said.

In other words unlawful laws are usurpation of the law. At the end of the interview: Cpl. Boston – 3, CNN host – 0.

Watch the interview below:

Additionally, for the audience that is a bit younger, I found this little tidbit of American history:

Before 1968 you could mail order a semi-automatic 20mm anti-tank cannon right to your door. No background checks necessary. $0.75 per shot.
Before 1968 you could mail order a semi-automatic 20mm anti-tank cannon right to your door. No background checks necessary. $0.75 per shot.

We honestly need to return to those days!

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook and Twitter, and follow our friends at

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Freedom Outpost email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

You Might Like
Previous Gun Control Dictator Style - Tyrants Who Banned Firearms Before Slaughtering The People
Next Obama's Gun Task Force Member Has Son Convicted Of Planning School Mass Murder

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon to the right of the comment, and report it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation. If you don't see a commenting section below, please disable your adblocker.

Sorry. No data so far.