Deltaville wrote:
Some political think tanks, especially left leaning organizations, have suggested that the bill of rights should be amended to exclude the 2nd Amendment. Their flagship argument is that it is a way of enforcing control over firearms in a more stringent manner, and consequently, reducing gun violence. This would have tremendous implications, for instance, the Supreme Court has ruled that the 14th amendment incorporates 2nd amendment privileges and imposes them upon the states. As a result, if a repeal of the 2nd Amendment ever materialized, it would create tremendous legal gaps.
Please discuss.
The amendment process for the Constitution for the United States of America is:
Wikipedia.org wrote:
The framers of the Constitution, recognizing the difference between regular legislation and constitutional matters, intended that it be difficult to change the Constitution; but not so difficult as to render it an inflexible instrument of government. The amending process they devised, codified in Article Five of the United States Constitution, has two steps. Amendments to the Constitution must be properly Proposed and Ratified before becoming operative.
An amendment may be proposed and sent to the states for ratification by either:
The United States Congress, whenever a two-thirds majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives deem it necessary;
OR
A national convention, called by Congress for this purpose, on the application of the legislatures of two-thirds (presently 34) of the states.
To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either (as determined by Congress):
The legislatures of three-fourths (presently 38) of the states, within the stipulated time period—if any;
OR
State ratifying conventions in three-fourths (presently 38) of the states, within the stipulated time period—if any.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_a ... nstitution As such, it is very difficult to accomplish an amendment of the existing Constitution. The current political climate among the states effectively prohibits adoption and/or ratification. The Founders made it this difficult intentionally.
This is why the president has never even mentioned the idea of a constitutional amendment. Instead, he nibbles around the edges and describes his actions as presidentially monumental. Bark versus bite.
Last edited by AspieUtah on 16 Jan 2016, 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
16 Jan 2016, 1:48 pm
) and national mood are not in favor of repealing the 2nd. Even suggested attempts since 2009 to curtail this right have resulted in huge gun and ammo buying surges, namely in 2009 and again in 2012-13.
