Here's an interesting test: if you're dealing with someone going on about wealth redistribution, how the rich have too much power, about the need for social justice, how the poor need the same standard of living, that healthcare is a right that the rich are too greedy to pay their fair share.
So you have someone doing class based agitation, about how the rich get preferential treatment in this nation and how it needs to be fixed.
Now you can always ask them how much they make and followup with why they're not already doing their fair share.
Well, here's another thing, ask them about Conceal Carry. Do they support May Issue or Shall Issue? What to they think of "sensible gun control" laws?
If they're all for it, point to places like New York City, Boston, San Francisco, Baltimore, New Jersey or anywhere that has discretionary issue, explain how in those places the only people that can legally carry are the politically connected, and those wealthy enough to buy political connections.
Ask them if they're still okay with an organized governmental plan to keep the poor from being armed. If they're an NYC or Boston or NJ resident tell them to just try to get a carry permit.
Then it's pretty simple to ask: How can someone so sensitive to wealth inequality be okay to a system so fundamentally unfair and biased towards the powerful?
There's two options. 1) This equality is all a scam on their part to ensure that the proletariat is satisfied with bread and circuses while solidifying their own position in a type of new aristocracy.
Or 2) They honestly think the poor are due equality by the force of the state in everything but self defense and firearms rights. Because, well, the poor can't handle or don't need to be armed. Which betrays a paternalistic superior mentality of an enlightened class that oversees the poor as some sort of benevolent caretaker.
This is also why I'm not persuaded by the argument of "Every other civilized nation does X, but the US. The US should do it too!"
Again I wouldn't want to take egalitarian advice from country that bans firearms save for toys for the rich (UK) or that reduces carry to those that are politically connected, celebrities, or the wealthy (Germany, Italy).
Again if you think Canada is morally superior because they have Socialized Healthcare I'm free do thing they're morally inferior because of how corrupt and elitist their Authorization to Carry system is. For example the ATC has provisions to be authorized to a woman who is fearful of reprisals by her ex husband. But no ATC has ever been issued for that reason. Classy.
You'll note that many of the same people that complain about the police throwing around terms like "pigs" are just fine and dandy with the police having the arbitrary power to decide who can and cannot have guns, or failing that being the only people allowed to have them.