Article V: Convention of the States -- (Pro gun effort in Virginia)

Virginia was the first state to call the Philadelphia Convention of 1787. Once again, the historic state is standing up to defend the rights of the American people. With several states soon to follow, Virginia recently claimed the title of first to pre-file an application to call a Convention of States.

Del. Scott Lingamfelter (R-31) is leading the effort in Virginia, along with Del. Jim LeMunyon (R-67) who has been deeply involved in the process. After meeting with COS Leader, Michael Farris, Del. Lingamfelter agreed to push the application through as the prime sponsor during Virginia’s 2014 legislative session.

Click to expand...

skidmark said:

Yes, it would be nice.

But the odds are stacked such that that might be the least possible outcome of such a move.

Never ask a question that you do not already know the answer to also goes for ConCons.

stay safe.

Click to expand...

davidmcbeth said:

Ya gotta pass it before you can read it? lol

Also, why should I be held to a document that I had no vote or representation in producing?

Click to expand...

skidmark said:

Yes, it would be nice.

But the odds are stacked such that that might be the least possible outcome of such a move.

Never ask a question that you do not already know the answer to also goes for ConCons.

stay safe.

Click to expand...

Grapeshot said:

+1

Do NOT wish to have a Constitutional Convention at this time. Also do not believe the GA would vote in favor of it either.

Click to expand...

Citizen said:

I think it was Chief Justice Warren Burger who remarked that there is no way to muzzle a constitutional convention.

Look what happened with the last one. A convention was called on the pretext to tune up the Articles of Confederation, but some of the agitators for it intended all along to create a strong central government. Once it started, it promptly morphed into a convention to write a new scheme of government. Some delegates left at the beginning, saying they had only the authority to tune up the Articles of Confederation. This historical fact says it all--the delegates went there on a lie. Individual delegates were either in on the lie, or didn't object when it was revealed. Only a few went home in protest.

Then, after wrangling and dickering like the selfish men they were, they sent us a constitution with no bill of rights. Then during the ratification period some who were also on their side said to ratify first and then get the bill of rights. The only reason we've got the Bill of Rights is because men like Patrick Henry and George Mason knew exactly what was up and worked hard gathering support that threatened to derail ratification.*

The pro-ratification crowd advanced some ludicrous arguments (lied) to lull people into accepting the constitution.

Only eight or ten short years after ratification, the scumbags who styled themselve Federalists--the pro-ratification crowd--passed the Sedition Act, a blatant violation of the First Amendment. Men went to jail. That's how some of the holy Framers behaved with a Bill of Rights to slow them down. Imagine what they would have done without a Bill of Rights. This is the same crowd that during ratification advanced the argument that a Bill of Rights was unnecessary because the federal government only had the powers granted, and since there was no power to restrict (insert specific right here.) Same crowd that later passed the Sedition Act.

You can bet every last dollar and the whole family farm that if this latest concon business starts to look like it might go somewhere, then every force of evil in the country will mobilize to ensure it turns out to their advantage. I'm talking about the hushed conversations in back rooms, and dens off to the side of the elegant parties--bankers, major government contractors, that sort of thing.

Oh. And, look who will be the VA governor if it happens in the next four years. Yeah, right. Like he won't steer things the wrong way.

Click to expand...

Grapeshot said:

+1

Do NOT wish to have a Constitutional Convention at this time. Also do not believe the GA would vote in favor of it either.

Click to expand...

Approval ratings for Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court are all at record lows, reflecting the public’s dissatisfaction with a runaway federal government. Many are concerned about Washington D.C.’s culture of corruption, entitlement programs on the path to bankruptcy, and a complicated tax code and bureaucracy which stifle both economic growth and liberty.

With this in mind, nearly one hundred state legislators from 32 different states gathered at George Washington’s home in Mount Vernon, Virginia, on Saturday. They met to discuss the possibility of a Convention of the States for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution, as described in Article V of the United States Constitution.

...

Many more state legislators had expressed interest in attending the Mount Vernon Assembly, but the room was at capacity. Other legislators not in attendance have expressed their doubts about an Article V Amendments Convention becoming a reality, although Virginia and South Carolina recently became the first states to pre-file an application for such a convention.

Click to expand...

Repeater said:

Well, I'm not so sure. I was stunned to read this:

State Legislators discuss Convention of States at Mount Vernon Assembly - December 8, 2013 by Garrett Humbertson

This was last Saturday. I wonder if any of our GA legislator attended? I wonder if this could actually happen. An alternative way to rebel against the Marxist tyranny of DC.

Click to expand...

Grapeshot said:

Are they so foolish as not to know that opening a Constitutional Convention is worse than a can of worms? Those worms have fangs and could destroy all that we hold dear and good.

Nothing is sacred or off-limits in a Constitutional Convention....nothing!

Click to expand...

We are beginning to reach critical mass in our efforts to use Article V of the Constitution to rein in the power of the federal government. The Mount Vernon Assembly is one of the major steps in that effort.

While the work of this group of legislators cannot be binding until actually adopted by a Convention of States, it will be critical to have this work done in advance and to have a majority of the states endorse it in advance. This will ensure the Convention itself can avoid prolonged disputes on the rules and can get right to work on the substance of drafting amendments that limit the power of Washington, D.C.

But there is another, somewhat unfortunate piece of evidence that shows this project is reaching critical mass. Conservative critics of this idea have recently increased both the loudness and shrillness of their long-standing claims that this approach is a dangerous threat to our country through a runaway "Con-Con."

Here is why their arguments are doomed to fail: 1. They are based on faulty history. The original Constitution was not adopted as the result of a runaway convention. Their entire argument is premised on this fallacy. 2. They have to convince state legislators that we can't trust state legislators.

You see, state legislators control the Article V process from beginning to end. The "Con-Con" argument requires state legislators to believe that we should be afraid of state legislators who might abuse their power.

But what's the alternative? These fear-based arguments leave us in the utterly precarious position of trusting Washington, D.C., to right itself.

Click to expand...

Grapeshot said:

Are they so foolish as not to know that opening a Constitutional Convention is worse than a can of worms? Those worms have fangs and could destroy all that we hold dear and good.

Nothing is sacred or off-limits in a Constitutional Convention....nothing!

Click to expand...

Grapeshot said:

Are they so foolish as not to know that opening a Constitutional Convention is worse than a can of worms? Those worms have fangs and could destroy all that we hold dear and good.

Nothing is sacred or off-limits in a Constitutional Convention....nothing!

Click to expand...

This Saturday is not just about pausing to remember the stealth bombing of Pearl Harbor and the brave individuals whose lives were lost. This December 7th is also about wielding off an attack on the very thing those Americans were defending — the United States Constitution.

...
...
...

We agree that the United States Constitution is in jeopardy, but the substance of that sacred document is not the problem. The problem is the elected officials that refuse to honor, defend, and uphold the principles and laws set forth by it.

The idea of a Constitutional Convention is not only a bad one, but it is a distraction from the real task at hand — winning elections. We do not need new amendments to the Constitution. Our Founders gave their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to establish this land of liberty. We need Americans to do the same and return to the original, founding principles of our great country.

Click to expand...

Repeater said:

I used to think that way, and I remain skeptical, and yet there are those who apparently believe otherwise.

Here are some other articles:

Gaining Steam? Nearly 100 Lawmakers Descend on Mount Vernon to Talk Convention of States

And this by Virginia's Michael Farris:

Reflections on the Mt. Vernon Assembly


As I said, I remain skeptical. But he makes a persuasive point.

Click to expand...

Lawmakers and lobbyists proposing amendments to the United States Constitution celebrated a first small victory Friday when a House committee passed a resolution that would petition Congress to call for a convention of the states.

“I hope that years from now people will come back and say that on the 31st of January of 2014, people spoke very loudly that we are going to return the fundamental balance to our federal system,” said Del. L. Scott Lingamfelter, R-Prince William. He is the sponsor of House Joint Resolution 9, the key measure among four proposals with similar objectives that advanced in the Rules Committee Friday.

Click to expand...

But Senate Democratic leader Richard L. Saslaw, D-Fairfax, has signaled that Lingamfelter’s resolution would be a nonstarter in the state Senate.

Click to expand...

The John Birch Society opposes amending the Constitution because the nation’s present problems are due to “rampant usurpation of powers,” not a defective Constitution, spokesman Bill Hahn said.

Click to expand...

Repeater said:

Resolution calling for convention of the states moves to House floor
Goal is a convention to propose amendments to the U.S. Constitution


Senator Saslaw does not approve:


Neither does the John Birch society:

Click to expand...