Please read up on Article V more clearly.
If you think Kentucky is unicameral and Nebraska is not, then you need to seriously brush up on your facts, figures, and critical thinking.
An Article V convention cannot submit amendments for ratification without a yes vote from 34 states present.
So, if NY demanded repeal of the second amendment (to use your example), 33 other states would have to concur (and then 38 state legislatures would have to ratify).
Not possible.
You presume unwarranted honor on the part of the signatories, sir/madam.
They're politicians.
The Article V convention chairman must be someone we trust, who will not allow shenanigans or coopting attempts.
I propose Mark Levin for chairman.
Are you sure that these protesters are demanding that change, can you get any info please. Thank-you!
Hello? We don’t need a convention because the laws we ALREADY have are not being followed.
Zero has a phone and a pen, remember?
There would not be one encompassing amendment that says "The Constitution is repealed and replaced with this..."
Each change would be proposed as a standalone amendment, and the states must ratify each proposed amendment individually, not as a single "Article V" package.
-PJ
You have a poor understanding of the Article V Convention of States.
Anything that is proposed by one state will go nowhere.
Once the Article V Convention proposes an amendment, the ratification process is identical to the ratification process for amendments proposed by Congress.
In order to believe that we could lose the Second Amendment, you have to believe that the most conservative thirteen states in the U.S. will vote to get rid of the Second Amendment.
Not to worry, the states themselves are addressing concerns of a runaway convention. Simply put, their delegates face criminal penalties for voting for anything other than the purpose of the convention.
Mathematics handles the rest. That is, 38 states are needed to ratify anything. This means that if just 13 states are opposed, whatever it is fails. In practical terms, this means that though red states are in the majority, they must get the support of perhaps three or four blue states, almost an impossible obstacle on the surface.
So doing anything that could cost the vote of a single state kills any prospect for an out of control convention.
Those who oppose Article V and want the status quo support civil war. Period.
You need a 3/4 super-majority of states for crying out loud. If that many states want to destroy freedom, then we’re all lost anyway.