I've decided to rewrite the above in order to better convey my thought process. Some people have thought what i'm intending to do is to actually condone the police to march into your home at any time. Quite the opposite.
I approached this "idea" with the presumption that most gun grabbers would argue they want gun control so that it'll "reduce crime". They would argue that "taking away an assault rifle" would reduce crime. They would say that we have to get guns out of the hands of criminals to make our streets safe again... But the obvious answer, the "preaching to the choir" answer, is "taking a firearm away from a law abiding citizen is not taking away firearms from criminals"
You know that. I know that. They know that. But they're not after THAT outcome. They're after an outcome where OUR guns go away, because they're afraid of guns, or they don't like guns, and if they're afraid of something, or they don't like it, then NOBODY should have it. That's the "no **** sherlock" prerequisite to being a liberal.
So, when having a discussion with anyone who might argue this, then you can simply throw it back in their face.
You can say: "Would you be okay if police were allowed to profile gangbangers and search them, at any time, for illegal firearms?"
or you could take it a step further and say
"Would you be okay with the police being allowed to march into the home of any known felon and making sure they don't have firearms?"
To which they would almost certainly reply "no, that's a violation of their rights"
To which YOU Get to respond "So you'll stick up for the rights of a convicted felon, but wont' stick up for the rights of a law abiding citizen?"
That was the whole concept of my "idea"
I've been able to polish it, however, and refine its approach, so thank you all for helping me there. Now, I just have to make sure its worth using.