"Common sense" is generally a thought ending cliche or platitude. It doesn't mean much.

Good thing I gave specific examples.

No. Trying to institute assault weapons bans and other gun bans is what gets them labeled like that. Trying to implement UBCs like it is still the 80's gets them labeled like that. They quite deservedly get those labels.

Again good thing I'm not talking about any of those.

Just so you are aware slippery slopes arguments are not automatically fallacies. If you can show a historical pattern and a logical progression of how the slope will slip then it is perfectly valid. States like California, New York, and Connecticut are examples of the slippery slope happening. The federal assault weapons ban, which is still part of the Democratic party platform, is an example.

Even if they are technically not fallacies they are still based on the idea of not arguing for what is proposed, but for something you assume will be proposed. That to me is not a logical argument but an emotional scare tactic.

Have you tried to understand it, instead of reducing it down to a caricature?

Yes and I've tried to argue for things I believe to be common sense. Like I've mentioned here and the response is exactly like yours. No matter what I believe might help both sides of the gun argument, people like yourself boil the argument down to confiscation as you have done. I know you are trying to disprove my point, but all you've done is prove it. I never mentioned assault weapons bans, yet your immediately steer it in that direction. So like I said, common sense approach will never work because gun rights activist see everything as confiscation.