I agree with all of those solutions, as you've described them.

If I'm understanding you correctly, it sounds like the liability insurance suggestion might be an unrealistic nonstarter that gun control proponents would use as a place from which they can "bargain down"...???

That's fine, but there also need to be voices (such as mine) explicitly arguing for this "middle ground" -- so that, once it comes time for negotiations to end, there's a visible place for people who support heavy gun control and people who oppose most forms of gun control to actually meet in the middle.

I support the concept of an assault weapons ban; I just want it to be narrowly-defined, so they can't suddenly categorize standard handguns as "assault weapons" in the literal sense (as one example of the slippery slope that gunowners fear).

Otherwise -- yes, I'm onboard with your proposed solutions!