Case of Woman Denied Rights Over Husband's Felony Gets Worse

AP Photo/Brittainy Newman, File

In our nation, at least in theory, people cannot be denied their rights unless they’re convicted of a felony or found “mentally defective,” as the law reads. In other words, a person is supposed to have to go through due process and be determined to be unworthy of maintaining their right to keep and bear arms.


Lisa Marok, however, wasn’t. She’s just married to someone who was.

We covered this story back in October, but the summary is that Lisa’s husband screwed up and pled guilty to a felony charge. He’s not doing time in prison–probation only and that gets reduced if he does a few things–and Lisa wasn’t even accused of any wrongdoing.

But because she was married to the guy, she was told she had a choice, her Second Amendment rights or her husband.

She jokingly asked, “Can I have a minute?”

Law enforcement took every gun in their home, even her own and even those belonging to the couple’s adult son.

Now, things are getting even worse.

From Lee Williams over at The Gun Writer:

Thomas Marok, 36, served as a corpsman in the U.S. Navy. He currently works as an anesthesia technician at a hospital in the Milwaukee area and is studying to become a physician’s assistant. He drove home to Charlotte County over the Christmas holidays to see his parents and to retrieve his guns.

Thomas Marok called the Sherriff’s Office repeatedly over several days but got no response. Finally, Sheriff’s Sgt. Thomas Barker returned his calls.

“Barker told me the State Attorney said she’s not releasing the guns unless there’s a court order because the judge said specifically that my mom had to choose between her guns or her husband, and she chose her husband, so the guns won’t be released without an order from the court,” Thomas Marok said Wednesday. “I’m very upset and frustrated. At the very least, my personal firearms weren’t used in the incident involving my dad, so I don’t understand why I can’t get my firearms back.”

Thomas Marok said deputies seized his Chinese SKS, a Colt 1911 and a .357 Magnum revolver.

“I want all of my family’s firearms,” he said. “I’ll take them back to Milwaukee with me, where they’ll be in my possession in my gun safe.”

Charlotte County Sheriff’s Office spokesman, Thomas Conroy III, confirmed Marok’s account.

“The firearms belong to his father, Ralph Marok, who is a convicted felon. Thomas Marok now claims that he is the owner of the firearms. The State’s Attorney’s Office of Florida, (sic) advised that the guns will not be returned to Thomas without a court order. For any further questions, I would refer you to the [State Attorney’s Office],” Conroy wrote in an email.

In a follow-up email, Conroy wrote, “Just so we are clear after speaking with the [State Attorney’s Office], the order came directly from the Judge overseeing this case.


In other words, Thomas Marok can’t get his own property without a court order.

Now, while I disagree with the judge telling Lisa she can’t exercise her Second Amendment rights, I can at least see where that’s coming from. Her husband, Ralph, will live in the same home and is now a felon. She could claim any guns in the home are hers, even if they’re really not.

Again, I disagree with this vehemently. I’m just saying I can understand where the so-called logic in this is.

But Thomas doesn’t even live in the same state. Further, some of these firearms were his and were just at his parent’s house. He can’t even get those back without the judge’s permission.

Nothing about that is right.

What’s in the home of Thomas Marok in another state has nothing to do with Ralph or Lisa’s home in Florida. Further, it’s not unusual for a family member who doesn’t cohabitate with a newly convicted felon to take possession of their lawfully owned firearms. Plenty of guns are released to family members throughout the nation.

There shouldn’t be a problem with this, and yet, here we are.

Maybe I’m a little more miffed than I normally would be because Thomas is a fellow Navy Corpsman, but I doubt that’s it. Instead, I think I’m mostly upset that we have a judge in what’s supposedly a very pro-gun state deciding to deny non-felons their right to keep and bear arms just because of who they’re related to.


I can’t help but think he’d have loved to deny Thomas his Second Amendment rights as well, only he couldn’t figure out how to do it.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member