This and similar studies imply these correlations are the result of such policies. I find these highly suspect at best, what's more they are terrible arguments for conveying the need for the right to keep and bear arms to people undecided about the issue.

It's the correct premise, but terrible reasoning. Here are some better arguments to make your case to the average leftist/Democrat:

• the second amendment affords citizens of the United states the right to keep and bear arms. If you don't like this fact, change the constitution to something more palatable, it's been done before and is the best method to get everyone on board.

• the average response time for police to arrive on scene is over 5 minutes. Being able to protect yourself, your family, and your property is important. Long ago first responders referred to individuals first on scene who would help out, now it is a term reserved for individuals trained in a particular field to arrive on scene, while bystanders look on and periscope the tragedy.

• the police have NO to duty to protect you (Warren vs. D.C.).

• although the state may never come for us in the sense of the holocaust, firearms in the hands of individual citizens make it a costly proposition for police or state actors to confiscate your life/property. It also forces them to rethink certain tactics. One such example is the military style "no knock" raid conducted In Houston, Tx. The policy of no knock raids were stopped after multiple officers were wounded in the assault.

• although we live in the most enlightened 21st century, believing we have it so good that the state could never act in inhumane ways defies logic and the long recorded history that is humanity on earth. The founders believed that we have the right to defend ourselves against such oppression, as far fetched as it may sound.

• you believe Trump is a Nazi and i should have to give up my guns or register them with the state? The police/military aren't our friends. In fact, many of them were just "following orders" as stated in trials at Nuremburg. And so far, I haven't seen many officers; -resign over injustice, -refuse to conduct military style raids, -object to conducting Civil asset forfeiture, -object to the increased use of tactics and vehicles/weapons from war theaters here ( do they really need MRAPs??)

• these policies are better solved at the state, not federal level

• when the aliens invade, it's far better to go out fighting

Advocating for gun rights by making the case that crime dips is asinine regardless of how true it might be. It's like making the case against abortion because women having an abortion have higher rates of cancer afterward. No matter how true it may be, it's largely irrelevant and unconvincing. Now state that abortion is killing another person and make them take a stand on if that's ok or not, at least you'll get somewhere.

All that being said, i really think our gun rights days are limited. A majority of the people want restrictions on the first and second amendments. Further, one can see a blue wave coming.

What's more, the Trojan horse has just arrived ( SCOTUS just decided to take up the DACA case, if it's declared unconstitutional, and we have a blue house, and a blue Senate, and they amnesty these ppl, the USA just became California).