He realizes of course, that throwing out the Constitution means NO position of government is safe, even the President's. Without the Constitution, our entire government is erased and we're left with nothing, not even our sacred Bill of Rights. This is probably the most ridiculous suggestion I've ever read. I think this person is insane and hasn't thought through to conclusion his ridiculous statements.

Listen, the Second Amendment is there to protect us from the police.  It's the last form of defense against tyranny.  It's not about hunting, it's not about self defense incase of a robbery or burglary, (even though both are permitted and completely reasonable), it's so the free people can protect themselves should it ever become necessary, if the government were to attempt to impose martial law or try and take our arms.  If the Second Amendment is ever taken away from us, this is no longer the United States of America.

The Constitution is violated on such a regular basis that it has become meaningless anyway. Also, LOL at the idea of actual liberals existing in America. Lincoln was a liberal, modern Democrats are not. Democracy has been eroding behind the scenes in America for quite some time now, take drastic measures to restore the Republic or face a new order of fascist-corporatism.

"See what those god-awful liberals are poposing, just horrible and unheard of..."

It would serve you well to avoid having typos in your opening statement. Ironically, I mistyped typos as "ypos" when I wrote this >_>

The author is an idiot. The article is stupid. The people in favor of it are ignorant beyond belief.

I am mostly happy with our constitution. I would rather have the ancient document... think of the alternative... throwing out something that has worked for hundreds of years and relying on incompetent powerhungry government to draft another one. No fucking thank you.

Exactly.  Can you imagine the people in power right now drafting a new Constitution?  Oh my God.  I wouldn't even trust them to drive my kids safely to school, let alone re-interpret the Bill of Rights.

you just need to look at the fiscal cliff, patriot act, and many other instances of the last 20 years to realize this is a terrible terrible idea.

Actually it would be state legislators (not congress) who would rewrite the constitution, since it was initially a contract of the states, but still I don't trust the states either.

Maybe if there were a solid majority of people with similar beliefs to Ron Paul in both chambers, I would consider this author's proposal.  People who actually give a damn and respect the Constitution.  Of course, if that were the case, then it wouldn't even be necessary in the first place because we never would have gotten into the messes we're currently in with people like that in charge.

Imagine Diane Feinstein and her peers rewriting the constitution, lol. She's attacked almost every single amendment in the Bill of Rights.

Sure, if they follow Article V. That's of course nowhere near likely to pass, so politicians choose unconstitional means to rid Americans of the second amendment. 

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.