Editorial: No right to that gun


A headline in Saturday’s newspaper made a notable distinction: “This AK-47 not covered by the Second Amendment.”

The article by Register reporter Brandon Addeo was a deeper dive after the arrest of a Vermilion man. The weapon — which was customized to have automatic firepower — was found in the man’s home along with other weaponry.

About 10 days earlier, the man sped from a traffic stop after telling the police officer who stopped him that he was a “sovereign,” a person not subject to the laws of any government — local, state or federal — a person subject to nobody’s rules but his own.

The man — a convicted felon, by weight of his circumstance and the video recorded statements he made that day — is instantly a person police view as armed and dangerous, and you should, too. We all should view such circumstances as dangerous. The chase he led police on that day put anyone and everyone in the general area at risk of harm or injury, even death, by his recklessness.

But the fact he’s in possession of an unlawfully customized weapon capable of firing off 600 rounds a minute should scare each and every one of us, no matter what our own circumstances or beliefs might be. It should scare us all.

It is important not to confuse the rights of law-abiding citizens to own lawful weapons with what this is. This AK-47 is unlawful. It isn’t protected by the Second Amendment, and a convicted felon has no right to possess any weapon, of any kind, in any event, let alone one like this, which is manufactured to be highly, violently and wildly destructive in an offensive manner.

Don’t be fooled by anyone who claims differently.

— Sandusky Register, June 2

No posts to display