Michael Moore proposes 2A ‘repeal and replace’ days AFTER saying he rejects ‘full citizenship’ privileges

Absolute control of your daily life is the only acceptable outcome for progressives and every erosion of individual rights is just another step in the long march to that end. Filmmaker Michael Moore provided a glimpse into that agenda with a proposed 28th Amendment to replace that Second Amendment, and it’s just as tyrannical as you think.

Like many of his ilk, Moore has consistently failed to comprehend the phrase “shall not be infringed” in the right to keep and bear arms, but seemed to finally realize that the only appropriate way to do away with a constitutional protection is through the amendment process. As such, he posted his version of a new amendment that either continues in his failing to understand the meaning of words, or would usher in the end of the Constitution outright.

“The inalienable right of a free people to be kept safe from gun violence and the fear thereof must not be infringed and shall be protected by the Congress and the States,” Moore began. “This Amendment thus repeals and replaces the Second Amendment.”


The eight section amendment goes on to ban all automatic and semi-automatic firearms and limiting legal possession to only include firearms that can hold less than six bullets at a time. To be granted such a privilege, one must full into the categories of “(a) licensed hunters of game; (b) licensed ranges for the sport of target shooting; and (c) for the few who can demonstrate a special need for personal protection.”

Of course, he offered his proposed amendment just days after declaring his independence from America. Well, sort of, as Moore whined on the Fourth of July that he no longer wants “full citizenship” after the overturn of Roe v. Wade.

Moore’s gun proposal is not merely the musings of a lone radical leftist either. Vice President Kamala Harris her favorability toward the renewal of the so-called “assault weapons ban” Sunday on “Face the Nation.”

“We have to stop allowing those weapons to be available to civilians living in communities of people who have a right to believe that they are not in a war zone,” she expressed after stating, “Assault weapons were specifically and intentionally designed to kill a lot of human beings quickly. It is a weapon of war. If you’ve ever looked at, if I may be so blunt, an autopsy photograph to see what it does to the human body and the fact that we can’t get Congress to renew – it’s not like we’re pulling something out of our hat, we’ve done it before as a nation – to renew the assault weapons ban, is outrageous.”

“And you can support the Second Amendment, I support the Second Amendment,” she claimed, “but we should agree we should not have weapons of war on the streets of America.”

The ambiguity of terms was present in Moore’s proposed amendment that also aims to ban “any homemade equipment and machinery or a 3D printer that can make a gun or weapon that can take a human life,” and he further stated, “Congress may create future restrictions as this amendment specifically does not grant any American the ‘right’ to own any weapon.” Any person in possession of a banned weapon would be required to relinquish it without a guarantee of a buyback.

Moore also fully embraced red flag laws and outlined the vetting process for the select few who would be permitted ownership to include “a thorough background check, including the written and confidential approval of family members, spouses and ex-spouses and/or partners and ex-partners, co-workers and neighbors. A mental health check will also be required. There will be a waiting period of one month to complete the full background check.”

Caution: Adult Language

Furthermore, only those over 25 would be permitted to seek licensure and it requires the annual renewal through passage of a written test. Moore also shoehorned in a means to diminish the police force by including a dismissal of any officer “found to exhibit any racist or violent behavior” without a standard being applied to determine what that means.

In other words, the filmmaker successfully demonstrated precisely why the process to propose and ratify an amendment to the Constitution is as involved as it is.

Others were quick to point out the numerous flaws proposed by these gun grabbers who continue to see law-abiding citizens as the problem to the violence progressivism perpetuates.


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Kevin Haggerty


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Latest Articles