Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

melm00se

(5,111 posts)
3. One of the biggest complaints
Tue Nov 22, 2022, 01:29 PM
Nov 2022

out there is that people have never sat down and read the Constitution and, in your case, the section that particularly talks about Amending and ratification.

Having said that, you have 1 part correct in that a Constitutional Convention can be called. The salient part is here:

"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments"


But you need to continue to read Article V:

&quot these) amendments...shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress"


To get any proposed change (in this case the 2nd Amendment), the proposed amendment must be ratified by 3/4 of the states' legislatures or conventions. Now Congress could propose an alternative ratification process but that has only happened once with the ratification of the 21st Amendment repealing the 18th Amendment. Congress' action was in response to United States v. Sprague via House Joint Resolution Proposing the Twenty-First Amendment to the Constitution.

Based upon current alignment of red vs blue states, there is zero chance that there will be 38 states needed to ratify your proposed amendment. The drafters of the Constitution established this high bar to make changes to prevent willy-nilly changes to the Constitution because folks didn't have anything better to do that day. California didn't exactly get the memo which is why their constitution has been amended more than 500 times in the last 143 years (or averaging more than 3 times a year).

Furthermore, the verbiage for changing of the 2nd Amendment would have to be almost draconian to overcome 43 states that specifically grant the right to keep and bear arms which may poison some states' efforts to ratify your suggested constitutional amendment.

The part of your suggestion that, to me at least, is scary is that if you are successful in "occupy(ing) the (Constitutional Convention) as liberal-progresive-destroyers of the 2nd amendment" and tossing this amendment, the door has been opened to have other amendments that you agree with getting tossed because the other side took your blueprint and used it.

Be very careful what you wish for...it could blow up in your face.

Sources:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlev
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-5/choosing-a-mode-of-ratification

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»We're taking an ostrich a...»Reply #3