The arrest of Ohio’s top law enforcement official on 70 felony counts of child sex abuse isn’t just another headline—it’s a gut-punch reminder that the people entrusted with enforcing the law can be the very ones who need watching most. When the individual wearing the badge and carrying the state-issued firearm is accused of such depravity, the public’s trust in “only the police should have guns” rhetoric collapses under its own weight. Law-abiding citizens who choose to carry are statistically far less likely to commit violent crimes than those who already hold positions of authority, yet the same politicians quick to disarm the former are often the last to vet the latter.

For the 2A community this case underscores why the right to keep and bear arms was never meant to be a privilege dispensed by government gatekeepers. Background checks performed by agencies that later shield their own predators are only as good as the integrity of the people running them; an armed populace serves as the ultimate check against both street-level criminals and the badge-wearing variety. Every new restriction that makes it harder for honest Ohioans to defend themselves simultaneously concentrates more unchecked power in the hands of officials who may themselves be compromised.

The fallout will likely include renewed calls to “do something,” but the something that actually works is rejecting the monopoly-of-force fantasy altogether. When the top cop can allegedly spend years victimizing children while still controlling who gets to carry, the only rational response is to keep the means of self-defense in the hands of the people—not the institution that just failed them spectacularly.