Simply put, talking about banning guns, increases gun sales.
You are talking about assault weapon bans.
Therefore you are contributing to increased gun sales by this activity,
and so this is contrary to your stated goal of reducing guns in your population.

...

Consider instead, advocating something that might reduce the desire for gun ownership, you mentioned the poverty issue, might that be an example?  I work with a number of charities (none of whom advocate guns and all which seek non-violent resolutions and health and well being).

More fundamentally, the use of THE LAW against others ought not be the first place one goes to resolve an issue.  Think of THE LAW as a gun, that is what backs it.  When you propose these laws, these bans, you are proposing using guns against your fellow country people in the mistaken belief that the end will justify the means, but the result is that you are going further from your own desired end.  The effort is ill-conceived, and it not only results in a worse circumstance, it does exactly what you are hoping to avoid, the use of guns to accomplish something.

Instead seek to obsolete the need for weapons, it is not only time better spent for you, the incremental steps are each rewarding such as helping the homeless and unfortunate, abused women or other charitable work.