Top Categories

Joshua Boston Debates Piers Morgan

Joshua Boston, the Marine who wrote the now famous letter to Dianne Feinstein stating that he would not register his guns, was on the Piers Morgan show this evening to discuss gun control. Piers is a glutton for punishment, to be sure.

Mr. Boston represented the gun community extremely well, and it’s worth noting that Piers did show Mr. Boston much more respect than he has other guests he’s debated on gun control. Perhaps he’s still reeling from the screaming tirade Alex Jones unleashed on him?

Watch below.



17 Responses to Joshua Boston Debates Piers Morgan

  1. Eric Lopez January 8, 2013 at 10:34 pm #

    Yes Alex def. left an impression on him and Boston did a great job…
    I would never ask somebody to break the the law, but I will ask responsible citizens to never register or surrender their arms. I do not plan to.

  2. Obscura January 8, 2013 at 10:45 pm #

    Fantastic job. That Marine kept his cool, presented the facts and spoke with a clear voice that people will understand. Thank you sir, for your continued service.

  3. AWarfield January 8, 2013 at 11:44 pm #

    this is how this discussion should be going, two people speaking their beliefs calmly and not looking lik they are going to have a coronary at any moment.

  4. justin January 9, 2013 at 4:51 am #

    How do we get in touch with him? I would like to personally thank him for the fight he’s giving for our rights and how well spoken adn composed he is!

    • Mike January 9, 2013 at 9:54 am #

      Justin go to, go to general, scroll down to politics and their are several ways to thanks him. Hope this helps.

  5. Godngunz January 9, 2013 at 5:36 am #

    Very well said Marine. Piers Morgan is such a pretentious dip shit.

  6. Eddie January 9, 2013 at 7:54 am #

    Well done.

  7. andrea January 9, 2013 at 10:16 am #

    I have the same belief of gun control that Piers Morgan has stated at the start of each of his shows – I think there is no place for citizens who are not in law enforcement or on active duty to have automatic or semi-automatic weapons, and the gunshow loophole should be closed. However, Mr. Boston made very good points and did such a better job at articulating his point of view, which is reasonable. I wish Piers would have let Mr. Boston say more about what he means about “education”. I would have been interested in hearing those points of view, but its too bad Piers can’t discuss or debate an itelligent thoughtful person.

    • Brandon January 9, 2013 at 10:55 am #

      Thanks for your comment. While I disagree with you on your beliefs on gun control, it’s refreshing to hear an open-minded dissenting comment on the topic. If you’d like to discuss gun control and/or education further please email me, I’d be happy to provide my thoughts.

    • Obscura January 9, 2013 at 10:56 am #

      I saw a movie where only the military and police had guns. It was Schindler’s List.

  8. L Michael Burns January 9, 2013 at 12:41 pm #

    Waht Senator Feinstein and other politicians do NOT know about firearms and thier uses would fill volumns!

  9. Radio Matty January 9, 2013 at 12:59 pm #

    Mr. Boston did an excellent job of representing responsible gun owners- and he is certainly worthy of our thanks.

    I also agree with AWarfield’s comment above; “…this is how this discussion should be going, two people speaking their beliefs calmly…” Alex Jones did us all a great mis-service when he appeared on Piers’ program as a stark raving lunatic (which I guess he kinda is anyway). On any other program with actual viewership or ratings, that tirade could have condemned us all.

    So again, thank you Mr. Boston. No thank you Mr. Jones, and the Hell with you, Piers Morgan.

  10. twobirdsflyingpub January 9, 2013 at 6:00 pm #

    Response To MSNBC And Gen. McChrystal’s Comments.
    Posted on Tuesday, 8 January, 2013 by twobirdsflyingpub
    I have the deepest respect for Stan McCrystal and, like may Americans, am thankful for his service, but he blew this one.

    Gen. McChrystal’s comments are based on his experience with the M16 and M4 rifles which are selective fire weapons that can fire continuously with a single pull of the trigger. The modern semi-automatic weapons, in the commercial space, are semi-automatic – one round is fired with the pull of the trigger and no more. Think of it as dating a transvestite. It looks like the real deal but works completely different.

    What the media outlets, like MSNBC, refer to as an “assault” rifle is nothing more than a semi-automatic rifle dressed to look like a military specimen. Physically, they are constructed to impede fully automatic operation.

    All of us are concerned with violence in this country but, as Gen. McChrystal knows, uninformed decisions translate to bad policy, and the electorate in this country is becoming weary of bad policy. Therefore, addressing the gun violence requires that all parties be responsible enough to review the facts.

    In 2011, the FBI reported a total of 8,583 gun related homicides down from 10,129 in 2007. Of the 8,583 homicides reported for 2011, only 323 were committed using rifles. The data does not support the fallacy that modern semi-automatic rifles are the issue.

    The FBI further reports that the lion’s share of gun related crimes, about 60%, are perpetrated by gangs and gang related business activities, like street level drug distribution. Chicago, which has the dubious distinction of leading the nation in gun homicides, reported that 80% of those homicides are gang activity. However, MSNBC and other “news” media never tell you this, and there is a reason for that. These organizations, have become purveyors of theater and sensationalism not impartial and factual distributors of information.

    I invite Gen. McChrystal, MSNBC, CNN and others to download the FBI’s 2011National Gang Threat Assessment-Emerging Threats and read it. It is 100 pages of some amazing stuff.

    Gen. McChrystal your comments are uninformed and you of all people should take to heart John K. Galbraith’s humorous quotation:

    “If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.”

    -Sal Palma

  11. Aahmused January 9, 2013 at 8:46 pm #

    I do not agree with Mr. Boston, but he handled himself well. Mr. Morgan, on the other hand, was not paying attention. While Boston was talking about concealed handguns, Piers was talking about AR-15’s. In my opinion, he should have been making the point that a handgun is no match for an AR-15, and that in order for a citizen or an armed guard in a school to adequately engage an attacker with an AR-15 they must at least be carrying an AR-15 or it’s equivalent.

  12. RooDog January 9, 2013 at 10:07 pm #

    Aahmused – You are making our point (those of us that believe all law-abiding citizens are entitled to own AR-15s, that is). If a handgun is no match for a AR-15, then adequate self-defense as you said would also necessite an AR-15 in the hands of a free citizen.

    If government officials want to restrict ordinary citizens from owning AR-15s and similar weapons, why is it OK for police to have them??? It’s really all about control. THIS is the REAL reason the 2nd Amendment was written: to ensure our government would never have the physical means (i.e. superior firepower) to control its citizens. It really has NOTHING to do with hunting, recreational shooting or really even about individual self-defense. It’s all about ensuring the security of a free state.

    Everybody DESPARATELY needs to go back and read the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. Unless a person understands WHY we needed to throw off the rule of King George III and the parlament of Great Britain all those years ago, they won’t truly understand the true reason for the U.S. Constitution in general, or the 2nd Amendment in particular.

    Alot of the grievances the colonists had against the British government in 1776 have come full circle, and those of us who are sheep dogs (and not sheep) recognize wolves when we see them!

  13. Ckole January 9, 2013 at 11:39 pm #

    The difference here is he kept his cool and didn’t rant and rave like the idiot from Whether you agree with his opinion or not at least he was articulate and not a raving lunatic. Guess what kids the left thinks you are all raving lunatics so shouting and acting like one won’t help your case. In the end current majority public sentiment and useless politicians may truly change the ability to own certain weapons. I am sure people will find loopholes and be come up with different mouse traps. Not sure how to win the argument against banning these weapons. Education and civility is key though. You have a great site here. Keep up the good work.

  14. Eddie January 10, 2013 at 7:04 am #

    Great review of Morgan’s UK stats by Local Fox reporter Ben Swan.