Why is it so controversial to suggest that the USA needs a new constitution?

Your first point is valid - assault rifle is a hard to define term. I think people who use this term are referring to any military style rifle (AR-15, AK-47, M16, etc.) Personally, I think it's hard to argue that anyone needs a semi-automatic rifle of any kind. I will admit that they are fun as heck to shoot though.

Your second point is just not true. Automatic firearms weren't developed until the mid-19th century. The gatling gun is the first i can think of and it was developed in the 1860's. Think about it: the Napoleonic wars were more than a decade after the bill of rights was ratified.

It bums me out that this issue is so polarizing for our country. Chris rock might have had the right idea :D

There were firearms in existence that could shoot 14-30 rounds without having to reload well before 1776. I’d say it’s understandable that the founding fathers were able to predict advancement in firearm technology when the 2A was ratified in 1791.

Brilliant. Let the outstanding minds of Mitch McConnell and Nancy Pelosi rework the constitution that was framed by Madison, Hamilton, and Jay. Great idea.

Perhaps the most ridiculous argument for constitutional change I have ever heard. Ignoring the fact that there were already guns in existence, are you suggesting we can only write documents that stand the test of perhaps 20 years? There are absolute truths and these things will withstand the test of history as our constitution has done thus far.

Many of the arguments being posted here in response to the ridiculous assertion that we abandon the constitution is the very reason we NEED guns--or at least some of us. What "bums me out" is that so many Americans feel this detached from the very document that has made us great.

Because the constitution doesn’t protect those that molest children, run drag shows, and shoot at police officers…. So, the democrats. Hence they want change.

just get rid of the constitution. its undemocratic to put some document from 200 years ago on an infallible pedestl without critical thought.

When a Brojo turns off the idiotic takes and makes a sensible point. I guess a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes.

I'd bet a lot of money you've only read liberal opinion pieces attacking Sowell and haven't actually read or heard any of his own arguments in context.

They did make a marketing decision to change the name from global warming to climate change. Do you deny this?

The climate models forget about a lot of things. That's why they're all laughably wrong.

Always amusing to see lily white liberals who live an breath identity politics try to argue that black conservatives just don't understand what it's like to be black in America... lol...

Sowell has his own world view. He doesn't need your help.

Change procedure already exists, it is called an Amendment. If some change is SO important as to be added or changed to the actual Constitution, pass an amendment. This was last done in 1992.

If y’all aren’t trusting scientists and doctors for covid then we ain’t trustin some dumb ass sowell on societal learnings

Stunning the reverence not only for the document but the writers. It was innovative IN THE 1700s, which is NOT the same as it being acceptable in 2022.

Knowing that the winners always write the histories, there is no reason to accept that the fellows who wrote the now-old, dusty, quaint documents were anything particularly special. They were the same rich, fat, entitled, hypocritical white men that existed before them and continue to rule to this day.

The only thing that kept them from going down in history as dead traitors hanging from a rope was that the British army fought poorly and without imagination.

The minute citizens in the US realize that we are NOT exceptional, NOT better and have a LONG way to go toward becoming 'a more perfect union', that will be a wonderful start.

There have been dozens of posts about single issues such as firearms.... not sure how that has to do with anything (and if it's worth anything, I have zero issues with responsible gun ownership). Like I've stated a number of times already, I'm not talking about individual provisions of a constitution. This conversation isn't about "but muh freedoms."

I think there are serious issues with the way our government is currently structured. All of you people who say they'd rather not have contemporary politicians drafting a new constitution sort of just reinforces my points, too. We have a political class dominating our legislature that seems entirely out of touch with the needs of the citizens they're supposed to represent. Our executive branch has become far too powerful (both major parties are responsible for this). The judiciary has become highly politicized. Our established system of "checks and balances" doesn't seem to be working out very well.

Our system also strongly favors two big parties, which is IMO really problematic for a number of reasons. For one, it catalyzes polarization and inevitably results in bipartisan gridlock. Huge portions of the country feel politically disenfranchised and just toss their vote at the candidate that is perceived to be the lesser of two evils. Some people's votes count more than other people's.

There are ways that our government could be restructured (and I've already mentioned some) that would help us get over these sorts of issues. My initial question asks why it's so controversial to suggest that we do so.

The CDC and Fauci have been caught lying on multiple occasions. Sowell hasn't.

Amendments are very tough to pass.
The Equal Rights Amendment sailed through Congress in 1972.

It needed 38 states to ratify it for it to pass.
35 states ratified it one point.
3 more went on to ratify it but not before 5 states revoked their ratification.

A Congressional term limits amendment has been submitted but not passed.

As have:

Amendment to ban abortion.
Amendment to protect abortion.
Abolishing income tax.
Maximum wage of one million dollars.
A limit to investment income.
Repealing President term limits.
They passed a bill to repeal the electoral college but it is as filibustered.

In Canada a person can be arrested for using the wrong pronoun...._uck Canada...

Not surprising to see you misconstrue my position (you learned from Sowell). Never said there is only one acceptable way to grow up black in America. I’m intimately familiar with that fact that there are a variety of ways to achieve success. But people like Sowell & Thomas(and you) believes there is only one way to do it.

it helps to have white sounding names, ignore your culture, and marry white women.

Ultimately, sowell like Thomas cannot get over being rejected by black liberals. And I Hate to break it you , but your embrace of them won’t help get over it either.

ask bin laden how that went for him - the one they tried to hide and protect the most

and beyond that - do you think the US committed it's full force of the military to the taliban; I seriously doubt it