
Philadelphia 1787/United States 2022 – -(AmmoLand.com)- Some Second Amendment supporters look to a constitutional convention as a means to restore our freedoms, and maybe even make the right to keep and bear arms untouchable. It’s understandable, given the mental gymnastics that a number of courts have carried out to keep bans on modern multi-purpose semiautomatic firearms from being stuck down, to name one such issue.
But let’s take a little time to review history before we urge our state legislatures to pass those resolutions calling for a convention. Because our constitution – the same one that protects our right to keep and bear arms – was never supposed to happen in the first place.
As History.com points out, what became the Constitutional Convention was actually supposed to amend the Articles of Confederation. As we now know – those of us who got an actual history education as opposed to whatever is taught in schools today – they didn’t amend the Articles of Confederation. The delegates replaced them.
The text of Article V is clear that Congress “shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments” when two-thirds of state legislatures send requests. But who would be sent to that convention? How would it be organized? What would be the process for deciding if an amendment went to the states for ratification? What would be the scope of potential amendments?
Article V doesn’t say. So, who would make the final call on the above questions? In all likelihood, it would be Congress. The same Congress currently under the control of anti-Second Amendment extremists.
In what world does allowing Nancy Pelosi and Charles Schumer to call the shots on the legislation that would set the ground rules for the body calling for amendments to the constitution make sense
In addition, any legislation establishing a convention to propose amendments might have to be signed by Joe Biden, so even if we had control of Congress, we’d end up negotiating with an anti-Second Amendment president. Again, do we want to do that?
Then there is the matter of the convention itself. It would be a magnet for antifa and other protesters, all trying to pressure the delegates. There would be massive media coverage, as well. Remember what NBC tried to do to Rittenhouse jurors? Expect that in spades for the delegates to any Article V convention.
Care to be that what actually emerges from such a convention is a proposal to repeal the Second Amendment? Three decades ago, an amendment proposing that was introduced in the 102nd Congress, and again in the 103rd. In the 104th and 105th Congresses, an Amendment to “clarify” the Second Amendment was proposed.
Furthermore, the gamesmanship with the Equal Rights Amendment should be another warning about what may emerge from an Article V convention. Anti-Second Amendment extremists have shown no compunction about twisting processes like civil litigation to attack the right to keep and bear arms. What could happen with this convention?
Second Amendment supporters have a much surer path to defeating anti-Second Amendment extremists at the federal, state, and local level: The ballot box. We need to put in the hard work to reach out to the millions of new gun owners to make that happen. The shortcut of an Article V convention is more likely to hurt than to help.
About Harold Hutchison
Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.
Even though a certain writer is correct, I just can not bring myself to write the words: ” I agree with Harold.” I have to go and wash my hands, now.
“Second Amendment supporters have a much surer path to defeating anti-Second Amendment extremists at the federal, state, and local level: The ballot box.” Sounds great till you realize that the anti-gun party have already rigged more than a couple primaries and a couple of federal general elections. While a CoS is a threat, the lack of election integrity, however, and the non-existence of any enforcement mechanism and/or penalties a more immediate threat to the Rights and liberties of ALL Americans! We have four boxes of liberty, and the last is interconnected with the 2nd Amendment. The genius of the 2nd… Read more »
I’ve said for years that a ConCon is a bad idea, for the 2A and all the other rights! For the above reasons and because our brains today are different from those of the Founders. We don’t think the same way. To them sustainability and self reliance/determination were paramount. Today, everything is disposable, lighters, pens, wives, children, cameras, pets, etc.. How would people with that mindset write a document or a bill that serves the best interests of the most people and that could last for 200 years? Plus, the functional morons in Congress can’t even follow what is clearly… Read more »
While I understand your frustration and want to stop the Feds with over reach. Who do you trust in your state’s legislative branches to change the greatest document the world has ever seen? There is no immediate or easy fix of Govt over reach. This has been going on for over 100 years and we ignored it. If the people in govt,state, local or federal ignored the constitution now that already limits govt, what make you think they’d follow any new Admendments in COTUS? The Constitution didn’t fail the people, the people failed the Constitution. The Bill Of Rights doesn’t… Read more »
Harold is one hundred percent correct on this one. If you think the other side lies and cheats during ordinary elections, just wait until we dangle this in front of them- the chance to completely rewrite our fundamental rules of law. Give them a chance to toss out the parts they don’t like, and stuff it full of their socialist, communist dogma. Once that door is opened things could go sideways really quick. Best thing to do is to use our existing system to preserve our best interests and improve the parts that have been abused.
The democrats are attacking free speech as they have learned that you silence the voices you can lie your way into everything and get away with it. The second amendment is being fought in small court rooms in every state the democrats have learned how to alter our constitution without voting in congress. There is a bigger fight in the next election going forward the fraud will be bigger and more distracting as even the truth is able to be altered by telling the same lie over and over. Video and Testimony from election workers will be tainted Nothing to… Read more »
In a Constitutional Convention, how would one be more emphatic on the right to keep and bear arms than “…shall not be infringed.” If politicians won’t understand and abide by that, how would you expect them to understand and abide by any other wording? Neither the Constitution nor Bill of Rights give Americans the right to keep and bear. Those documents merely suggest to politicians that they should not infringe upon said right. It is totally up to We The Little Peeps to make believers of politicians. We have a shaky D- thus far. That is a pre-existing, inalienable right… Read more »
“even make the right to keep and bear arms untouchable”.
It already is…
HLB
The subject of an Article V convention has been discussed many times in the last 11 or 12 years in the forums I’m a member of. The idea that it could actually hurt us more has been around that long at least as well. The possibility that we could end up worse off is there. So it’s not the end all, be all solution some may think it is. The only way I can see it being done, is a mutual agreement by all parties to leave the Bill of Rights (the First Ten Amendments) sacrosanct, untouchable by the convention.… Read more »
Mark today on the calendar as the one time I have ever agreed 100% with anything Harold Hutchison has ever written! Even if “we” managed a 2024 repeat of the 2016 Republican Hat Trick to take both houses of congress and the white house, a Convention of States is still dangerous at best – and most likely to be a disaster. As Harold correctly points out, it would be Congress that sets up the membership and procedures for such a convention. The picture that I keep seeing painted by conservative advocates of a convention is totally unrealistic. Advocates paint a… Read more »