One Trap Second Amendment Supporters Should Avoid

Article V Convention

Philadelphia 1787/United States 2022 – -( 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 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,, and other national websites.Harold Hutchison

3.4 5 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Constitutional Texan

It is amazing how little people know about a Convention of States or the Constitution and American History. Would the founding fathers create a government, write a document to limit what that government can do and then give it all the power over those who created the limits in that doucment?? That is called logical fallicy. If the second amendment is on the table here, which it is not why is one of the endorsers of this constitutional protection for the states one of the top ligigators for the NRA? Don’t you think he might understand this?

Last edited 3 months ago by Constitutional Texan

The following is from Howard’s OpEd. He has not read the DIRECTIONS given by OUR FOUNDING FATHERS on how to accomplish the C.O.S.; “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.” It is a SHAME he speaks of what he has not read nor understands!


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 »

Wild Bill

Well said. The reforms needed can be made by Congress repealing the NFA and the GCA. Or by the S. Ct declaring the NFA and GCA Unconstitutional. Or the Executive branch could refuse to enforce those unconstitutional acts.
Any one of the branches could correct the situation, but none has.

Doug G.

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 »

Constitutional Texan

I need to point out that the claims in this article are inccorect and the author shows he has no real understanding of Article V nor the 300 years of legal and historical precedent nor any of the rulings of the court that have protected this process and upheld it either. There is a big difference between a Constitutional Covention and an Article V convention for proposing amendments. No part of the federal government is involved as this is assigned by the Constitution only to the legislatures of the states who are closest to the people. The Federal Convention of… Read more »

Last edited 3 months ago by Constitutional Texan
Wild Bill

Even if any of what you have written were true, would you trust your rights to any modern politician?

Constitutional Texan

I trust the people and the states more than the federal government. What do you suggest works better than the constitutional process the founders wrote? War maybe? Or do you think doing nothing will work? When the Constitution is clear they obey and when not they “interpret” and this is how we enforce the Constitution 2A and all.

Last edited 3 months ago by Constitutional Texan

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 »

Xaun Loc

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 »


We already have everything we need in the current constitution.


What we need is execution of that. With a fraction of the government we have now, things would be much more pleasant.


Wild Bill

Yes, get back to the Constitution and Restore the Republic.


Furher, there would ne nothing to limit what could go on the table for chainging things. Not a reliable way out. CoS is a bad idea, and that comes to me after deepstudying on what such a thing is, and how it COULD play out.

Constitutional Texan

A convention of states is the only option the Constutiton gives us to alter the structure of the federal government as mentioned in the Declaration of Independence so you would embrace the Constitution as beloved, but ignore the part you don’t understand or know the law on? I would say deep study involves over 3 dozens court rulings, 300 years of history and all of the legal and historical precedent which is in the law.

Last edited 3 months ago by Constitutional Texan
Wild Bill

I don’t think altering the structure of the federal government would be wise.
What makes you think that an Article V convention is different from a Constitutional Convention?
There are many very well read commenters here. It would be an error to presume that they don’t know just because they disagree with you .

Henry Bowman

“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 »


The first three boxes all depend on a majority of the people having a desire for weapons to be of use in people’s affairs. The last box is the only one where a minority of the people can entrench and protect their Life Liberty and Property.



I could not disagree more with the take in this article.

Have you even read the charter being ratified by the COS movement?

Do you understand how the process works?


“even make the right to keep and bear arms untouchable”.

It already is…


Wild Bill

The Right to Keep and carry firearms should be untouchable … ON PAIN OF DEATH!


It already IS! The DemoKKKrat COMMUNIST party have pasted laws that have INFRINGED on OUR Second Amendment RIGHT —- under the color-of-law — ILLEGALLY!!!!!


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 »


UT: I agree with your comment her; “The Constitution didn’t fail the people, the people failed the Constitution. The Bill Of Rights doesn’t need rewritten, they need to be followed. We need to hold elected officials accountable. Elect moral, ethical, and constitutionalists that will follow their oaths.
The CoS, which IS STRICTLY controlled and limited in scope, WOULD enable TERM LIMITS-which are DESPRITLY needed to stop these PERMINIT PROFESSIONAL POLITICIANS from SUCKING the TEET of the American Citizens!!!

Wild Bill

When you write CoS, do you mean Convention of the States? Where do you read about a convention of the states other than Article V of the Constitution?


The ballot box failed to render legitimate results due to cheating by Democrats . They are forcing the American people to counter thier deception with the cartridge box . Why do you think there is no ammo available ? They know the end result of thier corruption will be a revolution . They took steps to make sure ammo would be limited to stop the correction on thier bullshit . It’s only a temporary stop gap the shit is going to hit the fan if they keep pushing thier Marxist agendas . Its inevitable. Arm up and make every shot… Read more »


Well yeah. Given the current mess of politics, a Constitutional Convention would make things worse, not better. That seems obvious.

Henry Bowman

He’s saying that the same crooked politicians who are currently taking your liberties away by ignoring the Constitution would be the same ones who would set all the parameters for a Con-Con (including selecting delegates), and would in all certainty toss the current Constitution out!

The clear danger is that we could lose all of our rights with a stroke of a pen, and that would force Americans to either give up their guns and the rest of their liberty, or take up arms in defense of the same.

Last edited 3 months ago by Henry Bowman
Wild Bill

I can not speak for anyone else, but it is obvious to me based upon the character and quality of todays politicians.


I have to agree with this one. An Article V ConCon could/would play right into the power-hungry, self-serving hands of the left. As much as they like to need to change the rules whenever they can just for a win at any cost, this would be their ultimate opportunity to change any and every thing that currently stands in their way of controlling their law-abiding subjects. It’s also their best chance at changing how we elect lawmakers into office; effectively cementing their power for decades. Remember, there are no rules for a Constitutional Convention; they’re made up as they go… Read more »

Constitutional Texan

Jim, most of this article is completely inaccurate-you need to learn more about it. There are rules (mostly laws and court rulings that uphold them) They cannot propose amendments not germane to subject matter of the application for a convention passed by the state legislatures and Article V does not permit a whole new Constition either. A convention cannot alter the ratification process and it is not a Constitutional Convention. The author has zero information in his article correct.

Wild Bill

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.


ya know, even a dead clock is right twice a day. Do yuo go and wash your hands when that time comes round two times each day?

Wild Bill

No, just when they get dirty, like having to type agreement with some disagreeable person.


Try this – It is not that I am agreeing with Harold, rather Harold is agreeing with me, which he needs to do much more often.


There is no guarantee that ANY part of our current government would survive an Article V ConCon. The rules and scope of the process would be written by the delegates themselves. The last time one occurred, the original purpose was to pass a few amendments to fix The Articles of Confederation. But that was derailed by a small group who convinced the others to throw out the whole thing and start over. What I’m saying is that once a convention is called, all bets are off. “These men, with the help of Robert Morris and Gouverneur Morris, shaped the contours… Read more »

Wild Bill

Oh yeah, Joseph Ellis! He is a terrific author. He does lots of original research, does not write like a total academic, and really puts the founding fathers in context.


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 »

Alan in NH

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.


Must agree. Constitutional Convention would probably result in dissolution of this union. Were anti’s to get their way, I for one would move from hoping to save our country to fighting for Texas leaving the union. I suspect we would go and that many other states would go with us. It is frustrating to chip away at infringements – but it has been working. There is a long ways to go and there is no finish line. No matter what we do there will always be those attempting to limit our rights. So lets stick to moving the line in… Read more »


add OreGONE and Washington which is loaded with commiefornians.


you mean like parts they ignore now?