Keep in mind that those who ignore the supreme law of the land now are no more likely to pay attention to one more Amendment (or a dozen) than a mass murderer will be swayed from their crimes by another gun law.
They'd still have to be ratified by the states; I don't think there's going to be fewer than thirteen states that would be against bad/hijacked amendment proposals.
Keep in mind that those who ignore the supreme law of the land now are no more likely to pay attention to one more Amendment (or a dozen) than a mass murderer will be swayed from their crimes by another gun law.
Well, that's why some of them have mandatory loss of position and retirement benefits for their violation — if that's not enough, then only shooting remains as a tool for reform.
An article 5 Convention can not change one jot or tittle in the Constitution. It can only propose amendments. They must still be ratified by a 3/4ths majority of States.
All of this "runaway convention" rhetoric is used to scare the uninformed. READ the US Constitution, it is very clear. Amendments were made deliberately hard to get passed. This keeps us from passing laws on emotional knee-jerk reactions to some tragedy, real or imagined.