Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Coyotl

(15,262 posts)
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:49 PM Jan 2013

Marine To Sen. Feinstein – ‘Some Woman’ Will Not Limit My Assault Weapons

Marine To Sen. Feinstein – ‘Some Woman’ Will Not Limit My Assault Weapons
2013/01/05 - http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/01/05/marine-to-sen-feinstein-some-woman-will-not-limit-my-assault-weapons/
By Lorraine Devon Wilke

.....

The letter in its entirety, without corrections, is as follows:

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
74 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Marine To Sen. Feinstein – ‘Some Woman’ Will Not Limit My Assault Weapons (Original Post) Coyotl Jan 2013 OP
Then this piece of shit will go to jail. Problem solved. MjolnirTime Jan 2013 #1
Where he can take a few classes and work on that IQ problem. Coyotl Jan 2013 #3
That's what I was thinking Pretzel_Warrior Jan 2013 #6
What a sexist marine! Can a female marine chime in here???? SugarShack Jan 2013 #2
Seems like he could be the next mass murderer. This "some woman" comment, showing SharonAnn Jan 2013 #40
Fuck off, Josh TheCowsCameHome Jan 2013 #4
I'm not really familiar with all things Marines, but 8 years and still an E-4 (Corporal)? Siwsan Jan 2013 #5
I hear you. My dad was a Seargeant in the AF when he left after serving only 4 years. rateyes Jan 2013 #8
My experience is outdated, but... Marengo Jan 2013 #13
The Marine Corp is a relatively small Lurks Often Jan 2013 #26
It is REALLY hard to make rank in the Marines if you're not in the infantry jmowreader Jan 2013 #66
"Respectfully" my a**. n/t crim son Jan 2013 #7
Dear Cpl. Boston, rateyes Jan 2013 #9
I hope there's no violence against those advocating stricter gun control laws. This guy is scary. Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #10
Keep reaching for that rainbow, Josh MrScorpio Jan 2013 #11
While I disagree with the mysogyny, I agree with his sentiment regarding guns. Undismayed Jan 2013 #12
So you support people not complying with registering their assault rifles if that becomes a law? Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #14
So you support tearing down the Second Amendment? derby378 Jan 2013 #17
I don't know fuck about weapons. I'm asking if he/she supports refusal to comply with new laws. Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #20
Post removed Post removed Jan 2013 #47
Oh, this is too good... (n/t) derby378 Jan 2013 #50
I am a law abbiding citizen. However, I will cheer on the romanticists. Undismayed Jan 2013 #19
Really? I don't understand that. Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #21
You are talking to billh58 Jan 2013 #43
But to me that view (gungeon) seems incongruous with being a Democrat and the values Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #44
I totally agree billh58 Jan 2013 #45
Right, and that overrides blatant misogyny every time, eh? Darth_Kitten Jan 2013 #39
I don't understand your point. Undismayed Jan 2013 #41
wanna bet, hotdog? spanone Jan 2013 #15
Well, some women will not have sex with a man who expresses these kinds Cleita Jan 2013 #16
Serving in the military does not confer special rights on one. Ikonoklast Jan 2013 #18
From what I understand... derby378 Jan 2013 #22
That proposed legislation has little chance of being passed as written. Ikonoklast Jan 2013 #24
Perhaps - but I'll oppose that as well derby378 Jan 2013 #51
I'm very interested to learn what 200 year-old weapon you think is semi-auto. jeff47 Jan 2013 #57
That's what I originally thought... derby378 Jan 2013 #60
Um, no. jeff47 Jan 2013 #64
Doesn't matter... derby378 Jan 2013 #70
Yet it's still not semi-auto. jeff47 Jan 2013 #71
Neither were the pump-action shotguns targeted in Washington state derby378 Jan 2013 #72
the fatal flaw in his argument is one sentance Takket Jan 2013 #23
I think I've seen this movie. He drives a taxi, right? n/t gulliver Jan 2013 #25
No, but he fantasizes about shooting people who cut him off. Robb Jan 2013 #36
maybe skittles can set him straight madrchsod Jan 2013 #27
Does Feinstein own an Assault Weapon? NashvilleLefty Jan 2013 #28
Owns a handgun and has a ccw- opposes ccw for others. Undismayed Jan 2013 #30
Enjoy your stay bashing Dems with false info. Coyotl Jan 2013 #31
+1 Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #32
Which part of what I said is false? Undismayed Jan 2013 #42
To get a CCW, her gun had to be registered. Kaleva Jan 2013 #46
If only every gun owner had to go through the same firearms training he went through. JaneyVee Jan 2013 #29
pic of the guy JI7 Jan 2013 #33
Dude with 'tude. Just as I figured. TheCowsCameHome Jan 2013 #38
Here is a screen grab of his posting. Note the avatar text. He is a SICKO!! Coyotl Jan 2013 #63
Oh yes he will comply. The military is very harsh on lawbreakers. Even those who break seemingly stevenleser Jan 2013 #34
What a misogynist prick. undeterred Jan 2013 #35
Save the contempt and hatred of women for your female relatives, boy... Darth_Kitten Jan 2013 #37
I agree with him. Oldenuff Jan 2013 #48
No, he is totally disrespectful and entirely wrong. Coyotl Jan 2013 #53
So, you advocate breaking the law if some sort of legislation were to pass-- Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #59
The gun control law is what will be illegal. The 2nd amendment takes precedence davidn3600 Jan 2013 #61
Will the gun control law truly be illegal (will the Supreme Court declare it illegal) or Mrs. Overall Jan 2013 #62
Now you are part of the problem too. Coyotl Jan 2013 #68
You people?? Oldenuff Jan 2013 #74
So if she was a man could he deal with that. I wonder if he listened to Raine Jan 2013 #49
poor little Josh, paranoid a woman will take his weapons Skittles Jan 2013 #52
Typical under-educated, gun toting yahoo. Hoyt Jan 2013 #54
Now there's a smart career move, a military guy announcing he isnt going to follow the law nt NoGOPZone Jan 2013 #55
Guys, if you haven't seen this yet... derby378 Jan 2013 #56
This message was self-deleted by its author Cali_Democrat Jan 2013 #58
I wonder whether Joshua Boston understands why Dianne Feinstein is particularly interested JDPriestly Jan 2013 #65
No wonder you got out as a corporal! jmowreader Jan 2013 #67
Isn't he precious? ellie Jan 2013 #69
Everybody Check Out The Rude Pundit's Site. Paladin Jan 2013 #73
 

Pretzel_Warrior

(8,361 posts)
6. That's what I was thinking
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:58 PM
Jan 2013

You better be a good boy! One felony and then they can tell you "You'll have nothing and like it!"

 

SugarShack

(1,635 posts)
2. What a sexist marine! Can a female marine chime in here????
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:53 PM
Jan 2013

Just as easily, a male senator could be trying to remove assault weapons from a female service member.

That's why I call him "sexist".

SharonAnn

(13,772 posts)
40. Seems like he could be the next mass murderer. This "some woman" comment, showing
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 07:49 PM
Jan 2013

who he's outraged with is the tipoff.

In Newtown, CT, the mother was apparently going to take action to have guardanship of her son so he "showed her".

This seems to be a strong current in these killings, an outrage against women or a woman.

I told my friend when we first heard about the Newtown, CT shooting "I'll bet he's angry with some woman who laid the law down to him."

Turns out I may have been right.

TheCowsCameHome

(40,168 posts)
4. Fuck off, Josh
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:55 PM
Jan 2013

I couldn't care less about what you were or who you are.

Seek help before you go over the edge completel.y

Siwsan

(26,260 posts)
5. I'm not really familiar with all things Marines, but 8 years and still an E-4 (Corporal)?
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 01:57 PM
Jan 2013

Serious question, going by his signature - is that a typical rate of advancement? Especially during a time of conflict?? I am a cold-war Navy veteran and the rate of advancement was much faster than that.

I just get the feeling there's a lot of story in this guy.

 

Marengo

(3,477 posts)
13. My experience is outdated, but...
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:48 PM
Jan 2013

When I served, it wasn't unheard of depending on the MOS. In my MOS field, 2500, there were a multitude of what were known as "contract corporals", or Marines who signed into the 2500 field for a guarantee of E-4 within a certain period of time in service (I don't remember what that time period was). Owing to the glut of contract E-4's, it was very difficult for the rest of us to acheive even E-4 in the first enlistment. Most did in the second, but it could be a couple more years depending on the "cutting score".

In other MOS fields, such as infantry, the promo rate was much faster due in part to much higher attrition.

It is my understanding that promo rates are traditionally accelerated in war-time, but I could very well be wrong.

 

Lurks Often

(5,455 posts)
26. The Marine Corp is a relatively small
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:34 PM
Jan 2013

branch of the armed forces, so promotions, on average, would be slower then in the Army, Navy or Air Force.

It can also vary by unit, since a unit is only authorized a certain number of individuals in a given rank

jmowreader

(50,556 posts)
66. It is REALLY hard to make rank in the Marines if you're not in the infantry
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:30 AM
Jan 2013

8 years is "high year of tenure" for Marine corporals - if they don't get promoted to sergeant by then, they go home.

During the Cold War, it was much easier to get promoted in any branch than it is now - now, they're trying to get rid of people and HYT (retention control points in the Army) are the easiest way to do it...they hit RCP, they go home, no sitting around trying to make up atrocities about reasonably decent people.

MrScorpio

(73,630 posts)
11. Keep reaching for that rainbow, Josh
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:45 PM
Jan 2013

Only, soon, you'll be reaching for it while you're out of the Corps.

 

Undismayed

(76 posts)
12. While I disagree with the mysogyny, I agree with his sentiment regarding guns.
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:48 PM
Jan 2013

Diane Feinstein is an unabashed hypocrite. She perpetuates the guns for the rich ,but not the poor meme.

derby378

(30,252 posts)
17. So you support tearing down the Second Amendment?
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 03:07 PM
Jan 2013

Good luck with that. I don't care much for the "some woman" remark, but the rest is certainly worth considering.

And since "assault rifles" are by convention fully automatic, what sort of weapons are you referring to?

Response to derby378 (Reply #17)

billh58

(6,635 posts)
43. You are talking to
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:48 PM
Jan 2013

a Gungeon supporter, and one who has claimed that the 2nd Amendment allows for an armed insurrection against the government of the United States of America.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2124742

Mrs. Overall

(6,839 posts)
44. But to me that view (gungeon) seems incongruous with being a Democrat and the values
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:55 PM
Jan 2013

that are traditionally Democratic.

I can't believe DU tolerates some of the awful crap I just read in that forum. Really nasty anti-government, anti-Biden, etc... posts. Wow. We are very tolerant.

billh58

(6,635 posts)
45. I totally agree
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:16 PM
Jan 2013

and the Gungeon is basically a right-wing, neoconservative enclave on DU. Since the Admins have recently allowed the discussion of guns in GD, the Gungeoneers have brought in recruits from other right-wing sites who have been heavily trolling DU. MIRT has been removing them in droves, but they keep coming back.

I guess you could say that we are tolerant, but it certainly stinks up the place...

 

Undismayed

(76 posts)
41. I don't understand your point.
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:33 PM
Jan 2013

I said that I don't appreciate the misogyny, but hold a similar view regarding guns.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
16. Well, some women will not have sex with a man who expresses these kinds
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 02:50 PM
Jan 2013

of misogynist opinions. I hope he enjoys his solitude.

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)
18. Serving in the military does not confer special rights on one.
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 03:09 PM
Jan 2013

Break the law, suffer the consequences.

If it comes to it, registering ownership of a semi-automatic weapon is easier than having to serve prison time for refusing to do so, becoming a convicted felon, then losing your right to own a firearm.

But, stupid people usually make poor decisions.

derby378

(30,252 posts)
22. From what I understand...
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 03:17 PM
Jan 2013

...if Feinstein's bill becomes law, that Marine's weapon is confiscated. Immediately. Then it gets registered. And then this Marine has to go through the entire process to get a permit (actually, an NFA Class 3 tax stamp) that would allow him to repurchase the gun in question.

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)
24. That proposed legislation has little chance of being passed as written.
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 03:31 PM
Jan 2013

I'd put it at 0%.

There will be no confiscation or retro-active banning.

Registration is about it, and some transfer rights regulated under the auspices of an expanded NFA.

At best, that's what will come out of all this.

derby378

(30,252 posts)
51. Perhaps - but I'll oppose that as well
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:00 AM
Jan 2013

Semi-automatic firearms have been in civilian hands in America for over 200 years, and it's far too late for Sen. Feinstein to start trying to restrict them now.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
57. I'm very interested to learn what 200 year-old weapon you think is semi-auto.
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:15 AM
Jan 2013

I think you were meaning 1776, but we'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say 1813.

Once you do, you should probably go edit this Wikipedia page, since they point out the first semi-automatic weapon was invented in 1885. In Germany. Meaning it would be very unlikely to be found in the US at that time.

derby378

(30,252 posts)
60. That's what I originally thought...
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:17 AM
Jan 2013

...until I learned about the Girandoni rifle that Lewis and Clark carried into the wilderness. Semi-automatic with a 20-round magazine. Wikipedia is indeed your friend.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
64. Um, no.
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:32 AM
Jan 2013

First, it was an air rifle, not a firearm.

Second:

This gravity operated design was such that the rifle had to be pointed upwards in order to drop each ball into the breech block.

That's as semi-auto as a lever-action rifle. Which isn't semi-auto.

derby378

(30,252 posts)
70. Doesn't matter...
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:56 PM
Jan 2013

The air reservoir generated enough pressure to bring down game. This wasn't some ol' pellet gun. And with a 20-round mag, too.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
71. Yet it's still not semi-auto.
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:54 PM
Jan 2013

Again, it had to be waved in the air to reload it. It did not "chamber" a new round after firing.

That means it's not semi-auto. Just like bolt-action or lever-action rifles are not semi-auto. Just like single-action revolvers aren't semi-auto.

So what semi-auto is 200 years old?

derby378

(30,252 posts)
72. Neither were the pump-action shotguns targeted in Washington state
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 07:53 PM
Jan 2013

They were labelled "assault weapons" by state legislators, too.

Nice try.

Takket

(21,563 posts)
23. the fatal flaw in his argument is one sentance
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 03:20 PM
Jan 2013

"I am the person whom you serve."

No, sir, she does not serve YOU. She serves the PEOPLE. She serves the common good of the public.

NashvilleLefty

(811 posts)
28. Does Feinstein own an Assault Weapon?
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:56 PM
Jan 2013

I thought she just had a CCW. In which the "hypocrite" label is pure nonsense.

 

Undismayed

(76 posts)
30. Owns a handgun and has a ccw- opposes ccw for others.
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 05:04 PM
Jan 2013

Yes, she thinks she's so special that she gets to carry and no one else does.

 

Undismayed

(76 posts)
42. Which part of what I said is false?
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 09:41 PM
Jan 2013
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/feinstein-1995-her-concealed-carry-permit-i-know-urge-arm-yourself-because-thats-what-i-did

She admits that she obtained a ccw and a handgun on video. Not only that ,but she got it in California where an average citizen has no hope of getting one.

Kaleva

(36,294 posts)
46. To get a CCW, her gun had to be registered.
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 10:16 PM
Jan 2013

The Marine who wrote the letter is arguing against having his AR-15 registered and says he won't do that if it becomes the law.

At the time Senator Feinstein got her CCW back in the 1970s, she was a target of the New World Liberation Front. She got rid of her permit once that organization was no longer a threat to her.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/273989-feinstein-doesnt-have-concealed-carry-permit-anymore

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
34. Oh yes he will comply. The military is very harsh on lawbreakers. Even those who break seemingly
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 07:17 PM
Jan 2013

minor laws. And anyone who has been in for eight years knows that quite well.

I would not be surprised if this corporal has already been made to stand at attention while a major or higher ranking officer has reminded him of his obligation to obey all laws and that officer made sure the corporal said "yes sir" or "yes ma'am" before being dismissed.

Darth_Kitten

(14,192 posts)
37. Save the contempt and hatred of women for your female relatives, boy...
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 07:26 PM
Jan 2013

I'm sure they are used to it.

Grow up, honey.

Mrs. Overall

(6,839 posts)
59. So, you advocate breaking the law if some sort of legislation were to pass--
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:16 AM
Jan 2013

you would refuse to register your weapon or give up a automatic/assault (whatever the hell it is) weapon? And you would advise other Americans to also refuse to follow any new legislation?

Wow, you people really love your guns or else you are really scared.

 

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)
61. The gun control law is what will be illegal. The 2nd amendment takes precedence
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:24 AM
Jan 2013

People who own guns see it as a Constitutionally-protected right. If gun bans are passed, lots of people will see it as the government attempting to trample the Bill of Rights.

Mrs. Overall

(6,839 posts)
62. Will the gun control law truly be illegal (will the Supreme Court declare it illegal) or
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:28 AM
Jan 2013

are gun advocates just using that as an excuse. I guess I'm asking what's truly "legal"--the law or the protected right.

 

Coyotl

(15,262 posts)
68. Now you are part of the problem too.
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 08:11 AM
Jan 2013

A law is not illegal by definition. A law can be declared unconstitutional by a court.
If you are in high school yet, you should have learned this by now.

 

Oldenuff

(582 posts)
74. You people??
Tue Jan 8, 2013, 06:56 AM
Jan 2013

Just because I don't toe the party line and can think for myself,I am one of "those people"?

I am grateful that I can think independently,and wish that more people would/could.Rights are rights.You can spin the issue up to make it look like something else,but it is still a right.

Do you suppose there are many Republicans who believe what they believe because they have been deceived and won't think an issue thru and make their own determination based on fact?If you believe that Republicans can be lead astray,why wouldn't you believe it could also happen to Dems?

The effort to separate people from their guns has to start sometime,and I believe that time has begun.An unarmed populace is far easier to control.

To answer the question: you would refuse to register your weapon or give up a automatic/assault (whatever the hell it is) weapon? And you would advise other Americans to also refuse to follow any new legislation?

If we had been a law abiding people,we would still be one of the Colonies.Just because someone passes a law restricting a right,does not mean people will obey it.Some people will always stand up.

Raine

(30,540 posts)
49. So if she was a man could he deal with that. I wonder if he listened to
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 11:16 PM
Jan 2013

his mother when she told him to pick up his toys, probably mother had to have father tell him. His attitude toward women is disgusting if he was my son I would be so ashamed.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
54. Typical under-educated, gun toting yahoo.
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:10 AM
Jan 2013

Nothing like my Marine buddy who can't stand guns and respects Democrats.

Response to Coyotl (Original post)

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
65. I wonder whether Joshua Boston understands why Dianne Feinstein is particularly interested
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:06 AM
Jan 2013

in preventing the abuse of guns.

On November 27, 1978, San Francisco mayor George Moscone and supervisor Harvey Milk were assassinated by a rival politician, Dan White, who had resigned from the Board of Supervisors only two weeks prior. Feinstein was close by in City Hall at the time of the shootings, and discovered Milk's body after hearing the gunshots and going to investigate. Later that day at a press conference originally organized by Moscone to announce White's successor, Feinstein announced the assassinations to the stunned public, stating: "As president of the board of supervisors, it's my duty to make this announcement. Both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed."[15]

Feinstein appears in archival footage and is credited in the Academy Award-winning documentary film The Times of Harvey Milk (1984). She appears again briefly in archival footage, announcing the death of Moscone and Milk in the 2008 film Milk. Feinstein and her position as President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors are also alluded to several times in the movie, and a portrayal of her character has a few off-screen lines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianne_Feinstein#Mayor_of_San_Francisco

Moscone planned to announce White's replacement days later, on November 27, 1978.[113] A half hour before the press conference, White entered City Hall through a basement window to avoid metal detectors, and made his way to Moscone's office. Witnesses heard shouting between White and Moscone, then gunshots. White shot the mayor in the shoulder and chest, then twice in the head after Moscone had fallen on the floor.[114] White then quickly walked to his former office, reloading his police-issue revolver with hollow-point bullets along the way, and intercepted Milk, asking him to step inside for a moment. Dianne Feinstein heard gunshots and called the police. She found Milk face down on the floor, shot five times, including twice in the head at close range. After identifying both bodies, Feinstein was shaking so badly she required support from the police chief.[113][note 10] It was she who announced to the press, "Today San Francisco has experienced a double tragedy of immense proportions. As President of the Board of Supervisors, it is my duty to inform you that both Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot and killed," then adding after being drowned out by shouts of disbelief, "and the suspect is Supervisor Dan White."[96][113] Milk was 48 years old. Moscone was 49.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Milk

I think Boston is way out of line.

jmowreader

(50,556 posts)
67. No wonder you got out as a corporal!
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:36 AM
Jan 2013

Tell me this dumbass, in his nastygram to a sitting United States Senator, didn't just admit he owns an AR-15.

Paladin

(28,254 posts)
73. Everybody Check Out The Rude Pundit's Site.
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 08:02 PM
Jan 2013

The Rudester hands this guy his ass on a platter, in typically vicious, foul-mouthed fashion.

Hope you enjoyed it, Cpl. Boston. If it helps any, The Rude Pundit is a man.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Marine To Sen. Feinstein ...