This is not correct. A Con-Con must be called with a specific goal or bill. A Con-Con isn’t called and mustered just to “talk.” A Con-Con is called with specific documents on the table for a vote. They have to get the plurality of governors to vote.
The worst that would happen is that poison pills are placed in the amendments and are thus voted down. No Con-Con would be called to rescind the 2nd Amendment or any of the things you suggest.
“A Con-Con must be called with a specific goal or bill. A Con-Con isn’t called and mustered just to “talk.” A Con-Con is called with specific documents on the table for a vote.”
Article V does NOT say that.
or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall CALL A CONVENTION for PROPOSING AMENDMENTS
(clearly meaning, we call/start/summon a convention, and amendments may be proposed when it convenes,,,almost precisely, to talk and argue, and negotiate. Just like the original. It is a convention precisely FOR proposing there is nothng saying it is limited to one topic, or that you even have to HAVE a topic. It just says “call a convention”),
which, in either Case, 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
Once a constitutional convention is begun there are no limitation except what the representatives of the conventions imagination limits. This is a suicidal idea. The U.S.Constitution is not the problem. It is our best hope, our only hope on this earthly plane, to reconstruct a civil society and a nation of laws, not men. Once Pandoras box is open Conservatives, by their nature, would be deferential while the liberal mind is militant and would codifiy it militancy. It would become the French Revolution. It is a very, very bad idea.
Excellent points