Replies

Quite the opposite.

Mark Levin tells the way amendments can be proposed and passed without Congress stopping the changes. The states meet, decide on amendments and 3/4 of the state legislatures must pass the amendment. The state legislatures are majority republican so the loony led liberal states are on the losing end.

It is the way the founders gave us the power to stop an overpowering federal gov’t.

See: The Liberty Amendments by Mark Levin.

The Article, Mike Bost’s opinion, and all the comments are uniformly uninformed and as a result are totally off base in every possible way.

First off, if Illinois passes a resolution calling for an Article V Convention on campaign finance reform, they will need to convince the other 2/3 of the States to do likewise - ON THE SAME SUBJECT. Since other States are calling for an Article V Convention on reining in the power and reach of the federal government - a different topic altogether, the petitions will not be counted together. In other words, Illinois is engaging in theatre, merely pissing into the wind.

Secondly, it’s not a Constitutional Convention in any case. People who keep making this mistake are ignorant of the facts and ought to educate themselves. This includes Mike Bost, who is just as ignorant as the most ignorant among us.

Third, an Amendment V Convention may ONLY consider proposing Amendments, which must then be ratified by 3/4 of the States DEALING WITH THE SPECIFIC SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CONVENTION CALL.

No Article V convention called to restrain the power of the Federal Government can consider nor would consider proposing revising or repealing the 2nd Amendment. And, even if they did propose such a thing against all logic and protocol, there is no way on this Earth that 3/4 of the States would agree to such a thing by ratifying it.

SO, please, everyone, why not help end the endless BS and FUD buy posting TRUTHFUL comments on the possibility of an Article V Convention?

And please, everyone - call out anyone who ignorantly calls it a “Constitutional Convention”, which it is not, and which no body whether State or Federal has any Constitutional authority whatsoever to call or convene under any circumstance at all, ever.

Kiss the Second Amendment goodbye.

I doubt you could find 38 states to ratify getting rid of the 2nd amendment.

On the contrary, I think you could find 38 states to agree to strengthen the 2nd amendment, for example: federally mandated CCW reciprocity among all states (take that, CA, NY and MA!). And considering that more states are legalizing silencers for hunting, I think there's a fair chance at silencers being excluded from NFA control. You could probably get those same states to agree to remove the silly short-barrel rifles/shotgun control from NFA as well. I think you have a better chance getting 38 states to ease off the NFA, than to ratify dumping the 2nd amendment.

Here's the fear: Everyone thinks that with a Con-Con, all sorts of loony leftist proposals will be made -- and they probably will. *HOWEVER*, it takes 38 states to ratify for it to become an offical amendment. I challenge anyone to find 38 states that would remove the right to keep and bear arms. Ain't going to happen.