That's a fair challenge, and a good exercise anyways.
Could any of us put our thoughts together coherently enough to present it as a reasonable starting point for the conversation about gun control?
Because the article is exactly that, a starting point for the conversation that actually does require compromise from the other side, and regains lost territory in the process.
Forget for the sake of the argument what the outcome of legislation might be, and deal with the ideas presented in the article.