What's interesting are the omissions. No calls for limits on magazine size or a ban on "assault weapons." I thought those were the must-have bills that were going to stop public shootings, but I suppose political expediency won out in the end.
I suspect that they might be realizing that they over reached in their initial calls for gun control. If the anti's had delivered a consistent message that they wanted universal background checks and nothing else from the get-go, they might be in a more advantageous position now. Fortunately, they shot for the moon right off the bat and tipped their hand a bit too far. In trying to "strike while the iron was hot," I think some of them may have been just a little too honest about their intentions and shown that their "common sense" gun control wasn't so reasonable after all. One disadvantage that the gun control crowd has is that they don't have a uniform voice or message. Even if one group understands that an AWB and hi-cap mag ban is too much too fast, their more radical/less patient contemporaries don't and wind up poisoning the reputation of all of them in the court of public opinion.
On our side, however, the majority of the focus has remained on the NRA. Whether you like the NRA or not, it is undeniable that having a single unified voice with a consistent message does have some significant advantages. While Wayne LaPierre may not be the best spokesman in the world, he certainly isn't the worst either and I'd much rather have him representing my interests than someone like Alex Jones. Also, while I've been somewhat critical of other 2A organizations like GOA in the past, I do think that they need to be commended for keeping their message consistent with that of the NRA and not overreaching themselves by pushing for a repeal of the NFA, nationwide constitutional carry, or something else of that nature (not that I don't support such measures, I just don't think now is the time to push for them).