Honestly, it actually is kind of hard to follow.
Not to enter into some weird bizarro world where I'm asking you to defend gun violence, but what makes a death by handgun any different than a death by rifle? This isn't really doing much to dispel the notion that inner city violence is not an actual concern for liberals, with the real goal being just to irk conservatives (because Corn Pop ain't regulating some busters with an AR-15, but Cletus has a collection of them). If we're trying to go about this in good faith it'd make sense to me to target what is the actual source of the vast, vast majority of deaths. Are we legislating by feels rather than statistics?
If you're trying to pull a 5D Reverse UNO Trap Card then I'll give you a polite clap for the effort, but I think it's clear at this point that neither gang violence nor spree shootings are going to change the stance of those who are pro 2A.
And as much as people on your side tend to hate being corrected, we're not talking about Assault Rifles. Terminology matters because legislation relies on that terminology.