A fact that is emphasized at every Appleseed shooting event put on by the Revolutionary War Veterans Association.
We must not lose sight of this. Our own governments continue to do that which our Founders fought a war over.
Well, to be completely fair, and as unbiased as possible, I'd put forward the following argument:
It wasn't an issue so much of the notion of private citizens owning guns and other forms of weaponry, military or otherwise. I don't think the British were making the claim that private citizens could not legally possess guns. Rather, the issue was more about who owned the guns/weaponry: the Crown or the people of Massachusetts by way of their provincial government. The Crown would argue that the weaponry to be confiscated---cannon and powder---were the property of the "legitimate" General Court, which was nominally British and loyal to the King. The radicals would argue that the old rules no longer applied: the MA government was no longer represented by the old guard but by the provincial government, and therefore, they owned the munitions.
All of this, of course, doesn't really matter, because possession is nine tenths of the law.
So while yeah, Lexington and Concord was a gun grab, it wasn't a "gun grab" in the way we use the concept today.