I disagree. I think it SHOULD be amended to make it clearer. Yes, we'd lose part of our rights, like the 2nd amendment right to have tanks and missile systems and a nuclear bomb in your backyard, all of which are considered arms, the right of which to keep and bear cannot be infringed. Of course, even with the 2nd amendment, we don't have the right to those things anyway. An Amendment that says the right to keep and bear arms shall be taken to mean guns, and not ICBMs, would make perfect sense. I would hope to get back some of the other 2nd amendment rights we've lost, like the right to brass knuckles, switchblades, a pocketknife without a concealed carry permit, as well as the more traditional swords, bows and arrows, axes, and the ever helpful baseball bat. With the possible exception of the bat, I'm fairly certain wandering down the street with any of these things in hand would likely earn you a trip to jail. Almost certainly in the case of Brass knuckles and switchblades, which are illegal. If the 2nd amendment isn't clarified, the Supreme court might someday rule that it only applies to the National Guard, as a well regulated militia, and that said militia is what the right of the people to keep and bear arms meant.
Sadly, I CANNOT think of any way to make the 10th Amendment ANY more clear. ALL powers NOT given to the government, NOR prohibited to the States, shall be RESERVED FOR THE STATES. How the hell can that possibly be misinterpreted? Unlike the 2nd Amendment, the 10th is VERY clear about which powers belong to who. Yet according to some politicians 90% of what the Federal Government does in not found in the Constitution. Which means that 90% of the Government is Unconstitutional, and therefore illegal. I would hate to lose this one. Of course, this Amendment has been so blatantly ignored and disregarded, I doubt we would notice the difference if it WAS revoked.
I;ve said this before somewhere, and I'll say it again. The biggest flaw in our Constitution, the Supreme law of the Land, is that there is absolutely no penalty for breaking it. If you break a minor law like a speed limit, you at least get a fine. But someone who defies the highest law of our land, the indisputable, unchangeable, Supreme Law of the Land, doesn't even get that. They don't get thrown out of Congress, or fired from whatever job they had (think illegal police searches and seizures), and barred from any public service for life, or at least a number of years. They don't even get a fine! If the Constitution is EVER to be respected as the Supreme Law, there needs to be criminal penalties for breaking said law. Otherwise, its basically meaningless.
So yes, A constitutional convention to amend and update the Constitution is essential. It will not survive otherwise.
Reply
