That is, indeed, the point of the "motte and bailey" strategy. When pressed on unreasonable demands, they'll re-frame the position as something within the Overton Window, but without actually abandoning the goal.
See my nearby citation of the guy who was heading the organization that later became the Brady Campaign:
"The first problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns being produced and sold in this country. The second is to get handguns registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition – except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors – totally illegal."
You're quoting a guy from 40 years ago (1976) and making a slippery slope argument. Here is some more information on the Brady Campaign:
"In November 2008, Brady president Helmke, a former Republican mayor of Fort Wayne, Indiana, endorsed the American Hunters and Shooters Association saying, 'I see our issues as complementary to theirs.' He said, 'The Brady Campaign is not just East Coast liberal Democrats.'"
Most people who want to see more gun control are not out to ban all guns. Many of them own guns.
I generally hear two perspectives from people:
1. the view that people should be allowed to buy guns after background checks and mandatory training.
2. the view that no checks or restrictions should be put on guns at all.
I haven't heard very many other proposals.