The whole point Of the Article V approach is to give a voice to those forces at home and to deny destructive forces in Washington a role to play. Of course these so-called "destructive forces" would have their rights of free speech, but they would be as effectively excluded from the process of reforming the Constitution as you are right now from the ongoing process of changing the Constitution as it happens every day in Washington.
They’d probably end up managing to repeal the 2nd amendment or something.
This sentiment expresses the real source of the opposition among conservatives, an ungrounded, and I must say, a selfish fear of loss of second amendment rights. It is ungrounded because the arithmetic of ratification of any such amendment renders it realistically impossible. It is selfish because elements of the National Rifle Association would see the whole country lose its Bill of Rights if they can retain their right to bear arms. At the rate we are going we will lose not only our second amendment but what is left of the rest as well.
As Benjamin Franklin said, "if we do not hang together we shall most assuredly hang separately." If you sacrifice the rest of the Bill of Rights to appease the crocodile, he will ultimately come for the second amendment. In fact, the only long-term hope for the Second Amendment is restoration of the Constitution by the very means it provides.
