By DR. LARRY MOSES

No one asked me but… I just finished reading a column in the Las Vegas Sun, the liberal insert to the Las Vegas Review Journal. The column was a lamentation against the fact there are many leaders in the country who are pushing for a federal law that would allow a person with a concealed carry permit in one state to have that permit honored in all states. Frank Bruni, a columnist for The New York Times, indicated many who support this federal government intervention are those who also vehemently support states rights.

The writer then hits the hot button issue of same sex marriages. He states those who support federal gun laws oppose federal marriage laws. The fallacy of this argument is that one is an explicit Constitutional issue and other is not so much.

There are those who argue that same sex marriages are protected by the Constitution under the 14th Amendment’s “equal protection clause”. While this may be a stretch and open for debate, the Second Amendment is clearly a Constitutional protection of the right to bear arms. It takes no interpretation but merely the ability to read to understand that the right of the citizen to “keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

To resolve the issue of one State’s laws being honored by other States one needs only to look at Article IV of the main body of Constitution. This article clearly states, “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Record, and judicial Proceedings in every State.” This should clear up both issues stated above.

I do not carry concealed or open and when I think of most of the people I know, I would not be comfortable knowing they are armed. However, I and they have a Constitutional right to do so no matter how uncomfortable that makes me.

Do I believe a society of people carry side arms is a healthy society? Not really.

Our forefathers had good reason to add the Second Amendment to the Constitution and it remains there today. If those who are so adamant against Americans owning and carry guns wish to see this changed, and if they can get a majority of Americans to agree with them, there is always the amendment process as stated in Article V of the Constitution. If one is going to go against the founding document of this country, they should do so in a Constitutional manner. Passing state laws that violate the federal Constitution is not the answer.

I was in central California visiting my granddaughters. Their mom and dad were there too, but I was visiting my granddaughters. This is California, one of the most unfriendly gun states in the union.

My eleven-year-old granddaughter was working on a homework project from her PE class. Yes, homework in PE. She was memorizing the safety rules for the Archery part of her PE class.

Her dad, who as a Marine has had six years of hands-on firearm experience, cannot carry a weapon but my granddaughter’s public school is teaching her to use a bow and arrows. This may be appropriate for California, as it will be back in the Stone Age when they can no longer use coal-generated electricity after 2017.

We have seen the eroding of basic Constitutional rights in all areas.

One must get a permit to peaceably assembly. Our Veteran’s Day parade must be permitted. The First Amendment does not say you may peaceably assembly if you get a permit. It merely states that American citizens can peaceably assembly.

Laws are passed that disallows “hate speech.” While I find much of what is defined as hate speech despicable when one begins to pick and chose what is valid free speech we are in trouble.

Voltaire is often credit with saying, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”. It was his biographer, Evelyn Beatrice Hall in 1906, who coined this phrase to sum up Voltaire’s attitude.

The point is free speech is free speech. Today we have fallen into the trap of political correctness. The real importance of free speech is that it makes it possible for you and me to understand where our leaders stand on issues. Today all speech has to be so guarded that no one feels free to express his or her true feelings.

In the name of security, we have given up our Constitutional rights under Amendment IV. It clearly states we are protected against the invasion of our persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. However, the federal government can now monitor your phones without probable cause or a warrant if they feel it is in the interest of national security. They may search your home or car without a warrant.

The Constitution clearly states that you cannot be searched or seized without a warrant or probable cause. Both search and seizure takes place at a DUI stop.

I wonder if it is reasonable to stop my car because it is 10:00 in the evening and I am driving down Tropicana Avenue in Las Vegas, Nevada. We all like the thought of getting drunks off the street. But, does it warrant the violation of the Constitutional rights of citizens.

We all have a tendency to wrap ourself in the Constitution when it suits our purposes, but ignore it when it protects programs we dislike. We would all be better off if we looked to the Constitution for answers and when we feel we have outgrown a portion thereof, use Article V. We have done so twenty seven times.

Thought of the week… “You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence.”

-Charles A. Beard