One, section 2.4 was struck down in court a while back.
Two, unless it's to get around point one, I don't see the need for this to be a constitutional amendment when the original dueling provision was an ordinary bill.
Three, my own personal position on dueling (for what it's worth) is I wouldn't initiate or take one up myself but anyone in favor of banning the practice – as several people tried recently – are certified wet wipes. As long as you people come up with something that complies with what Poirot and the Supreme Court are saying, I don't mind what it is.
