Posted on Jun 18, 2016
31 States have called for a Constitutional Convention. 34 are needed to convene one. What should be discussed and amended during the event?
8.91K
93
101
13
13
0
I recommend we (not in any particular order):
1. Clarify the 2nd Amendment
2. Establish a requirement for a balanced budget
3. Establish term limits for elected Federal Officials
4. Establish a time limit on Supreme Court Justice service
5. Establish a flat income tax rate with no loopholes
6. Clarify the 4th Amendment in terms of digital/electronic privacy
1. Clarify the 2nd Amendment
2. Establish a requirement for a balanced budget
3. Establish term limits for elected Federal Officials
4. Establish a time limit on Supreme Court Justice service
5. Establish a flat income tax rate with no loopholes
6. Clarify the 4th Amendment in terms of digital/electronic privacy
Constitution
2nd Amendment
4th Amendment
1st Amendment
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 26
11
11
0
Please everybody, keep your hands off the 2nd Amendment. Opening it up to "clarification" will only see it either removed or watered down to protect nothing
(11)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
The only problem is, once you open up the Constitution via a convention, you open up the WHOLE Constitution. Everything is up for grabs. And every group in America is going to have someone at the table, you can bet, and each state will get a vote on the finished product. So the people who want to castrate the 2nd Amendment will be fighting just as hard as you will be, and the blue states may outnumber the red states when it comes time to vote. So this could be a very big gamble!
(1)
(0)
PO1 Tony Holland
Entirely agree - there is no procedure in place to limit the harm that could be done.
(0)
(0)
SPC(P) (Join to see)
The Supreme Court has defined part of the 2nd Amendment that is a crucial argue point, what is a "well regulated Militia". The Supreme Court defines (Heller vs DC) that it is an individuals right. I would like for the SCOTUS to define more amendments
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Be careful what you ask for - you just might get it. Personally I have more faith in the wisdom of the founders than the morons that are involved in the political process today.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
This sounds like an invitation to a nightmare, most of our politicians are in office not because they represent the people, but because they represent Wall Street. I'd prefer not to allow Wall Street the opportunity to rewrite our constitution.
(3)
(0)
SGT Tony Clifford
I tend to agree with you on this. Amending the constitution does happen from time to time, but talking about clarifying amendments with no ambiguity is foolish. The second amendment makes it clear that because we have a military, we need to allow citizens the tools to resist the same military.
The 4th amendment has absolutely no ambiguity. If you want to look at personal affects then you need a warrant stating exactly what you want to search and what you're searching for. You need to prove to a judge that you have a legitimate suspicion.
Giving politicians the chance to undo fundamental rights once, gives them the authority to do it again. I say that the next amendment proposed should be a rule that makes the first 10 amendments irrevocable. Meaning that future amendments can never alter the bill of rights.
The 4th amendment has absolutely no ambiguity. If you want to look at personal affects then you need a warrant stating exactly what you want to search and what you're searching for. You need to prove to a judge that you have a legitimate suspicion.
Giving politicians the chance to undo fundamental rights once, gives them the authority to do it again. I say that the next amendment proposed should be a rule that makes the first 10 amendments irrevocable. Meaning that future amendments can never alter the bill of rights.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google