[quote]The supreme court ruled it does protect an individual right.[/quote] The supreme court also ruled that corporations are people. Just because they ruled something, does not mean I have to support their views, especially when votes are not unanimous... which just goes to show that a number of the highest ranking judges in the country support another view/interpretation. [quote]The common counter argument to the "individual right" is the national guard. Not only was the national guard not around when the second amendment was written, but I'd argue that government run and organized military force consisting of professional soldiers is not a "militia" by definition.[/quote] Being an 'outdated document' is not a great argument to support keeping things they way they have been. [quote]I would also point out, their is much evidence that the founding fathers meant for the second amendment to protect an individual right.[/quote] That's fair. Though i'd pose the question what they meant by 'well-regulated' then. That said, I'd suggest that we cannot look to people who existed over 200 years ago to solve modern problems that they could not have possible considered in their wildest dreams. [quote]I would further point out, that there is no evidence (that I have ever seen at least) to suggest they strictly meant, guns for the army and nobody else.[/quote] Aside from the 'militia' part, I believe you. [quote]I would also point out, that even if say, a video (I know) of all the people saying "okay guys we all agree this only applies to the national guard, right?" Before they wrote the second amendment could be produced, it doesn't matter anymore.[/quote] That's a poor way to look at something. The Supreme Court isn't the Pope, they are not infallible. For a greater look into why I support this view, I suggest you read [url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/554/570/dissent.html]Justice Stevens' dissent[/url]. I'm not saying I'm right or that firearms should be restricted from civilians, but simply, what I think the amendment was intended to be.

[quote]I think the war on drugs is a train wreck for the same reasons prohibition didn't work.[/quote] Yep. Keeping them illegal has proved far more damaging. We have large-scale organized crime on top of all all the health issues from consuming drugs. The latter is worse even, due to no regulation and improper "cooking".

That's fair- but many people do not hold he same view, that's all I'm saying. Though, personally I'd aim for decriminalisation first, and then perhaps later legalisation once proper regulation is established... but that's a topic for another day.