Should America Repeal the Second Amendment?

Podcaster and film propagandist Michael Moore has admitted what many Americans are thinking. Moore wonders if we should repeal the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.

In the 10 June 2022 episode of his entertaining Rumble with Michael Moore podcast, the right’s favorite bogeyman suggests Second Amendment Repeal as a response to the Uvalde tragedy in Texas. Essentially, Moore wants to end the “right to bear arms” and make it easier to enforce gun control.

Moore’s suggestion is hardly new. Retired US Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens made the same suggestion after the Parkland, Florida, school shooting in 2018. Like Moore, Stevens wanted a nationwide ban on guns, which the Second Amendment blocks.

The Second Amendment is not the Problem the US Senate is

I think Moore and Stevens are right and wrong. Repealing the Second Amendment is a terrible response to mass shootings because it will not fix the underlying problem. To explain the underlying problem is that the present structure of Congress makes federal gun control politically impossible.

To elaborate, it is impossible to get effective gun-control legislation through the US Senate. The US Senate blocks gun control legislation because the Constitution gives low-population rural states disproportionate representation in the Senate.

Article 1, Section Three of the US Constitution reads: “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State.” Section Three gives each state two senators with two votes regardless of size or population.

This favors rural, low-population states where gun-rights are a big issue because there are more of them. For example, I calculate that there are six states (Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Delaware) with less than one million people. Each of those states has two US Senators. So 12 US Senators represent those states with under six million people.

Similarly, I calculate that there are 14 US States with under two million people using World Population Review’s data. Those states are Nebraska, Idaho, West Virginia, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Maine, Montana, Rhode Island, Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Delaware. The Constitution gives each of those states two US Senators. Hence, those states have 28 US Senators or over one fourth of the Senate’s membership.

I calculate there are 25 states with populations under five million. Each of those states gets two US Senators. Hence, 50 US Senators or half the Senate’s membership represent those states.

Meanwhile, I calculate the four most populous states California, Texas, Florida, and New York have 111.162 million people. Hence, eight US Senators represent 111.162 million Americans in a nation of 334.732 million people.

Hence, Senators from rural-low population states appoint the members of the US Supreme Court and block any effective federal gun control legislation. Currently, clever gun control opponents such as US Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) back symbolic actions such as Red Flag Laws to fool voters into thinking they are making progress.

In reality, I think McConnell wants to keep guns widely available while expanding police power. Cynics will speculate McConnell and other fake conservatives could use Red Flag Laws to disarm blacks, the poor, and other groups while leaving guns in the hands of middle-class whites. Red Flag Laws allow police to confiscate guns from individuals branded dangerous without a conviction.

Under current rules, the Senate can appoint Supreme Court Justices with a 51 vote, but filibuster rules require a vote of 60 Senators for new gun control legislation. Thus, we have a pro-gun US Supreme Court that could soon overturn New York State’s Sullivan Act and other historic gun-control laws..

Should We Repeal the US Senate?

Thus, it makes more sense to repeal Section 3 of Article 1 of the US Constitution than the Second Amendment. For example, to abolish the Senate or elect Senators by population.

Interestingly, the 17th Amendment partially repealed Section 3 of Article 1 by requiring the popular election of US Senators. Before, they ratified the 17th Amendment in 1913, State Legislatures appointed US Senators.

If we could repeal or change Section 3 of Article 1, we could have a Senate that reflects the opinion of the US people. For example, a 26 May 2022 Ipsos poll estimates 74% of Americans favor bans on automatic weapons. (Popularly called assault weapons).

Does the Second Amendment give you a right to own a gun?

Changing the Senate could enable gun control because the Second Amendment does not explicitly grant a right to own guns. Here is what the Second Amendment says:

“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

I think the Second Amendment is deliberately vague. For example, the amendment does not define the words militia, people, and arms. You could interpret the Second Amendment as saying citizens have a right to own guns. Yet you could also say the Second Amendment gives the Federal or state governments the right to organize a military.

Notably, the US Supreme Court did not rule the Second Amendment imparts a right to own a gun until District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008. In that case, the Supremes ruled the Second Amendment gives law-abiding citizens the right to own guns. Interestingly, that decision reversed over two hundred years of courts, allowing local governments to ban or restrict gun ownership.

Notably, the US Supreme Court did not rule the Second Amendment imparts a right to own a gun until District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008. In that case, the Supremes ruled the Second Amendment gives law-abiding citizens the right to own guns. Interestingly, that decision reversed over two hundred years of courts, allowing local governments to ban or restrict gun ownership.

An Interesting Constitutional Compromise

Interestingly, the popularity of the Second Amendment could lead to an interesting Constitutional Compromise.

We could preserve the Second Amendment in exchange for an Amendment adding Senators by population. For example, an amendment that gives each state an additional US Senator for every five million people.

Such a compromise could give small rural states plenty of representation because each of them will still have two senators. Yet it would give us a Senate that reflects the nation’s population. Under my proposal, California, with 39.664 million people, would have nine US Senators, seven additional US Senators, and Texas, with 30.098 million people, would have six additional Senators or eight US Senators.

In the final analysis, the key to gun control is the US Senate, not the Second Amendment.