Biggest problem with messaging is the fact this revolves around guns. That's were the biggest hurdle comes from. We have to likely drop any previously used analogies and attack this from the root issue standpoint if we want effective messaging.
The root issue here is power grab/over reach/unilateral rule without regard to the other two branches of government, etc.
Your analogy perfectly explains this, but the guns/car comparison has been beaten to death, it will instantly clam people up and shut them down. I think a better approach is find a civil right they like and attack that one.
If you're talking to a pro-choice dem: "What if a republican AG made all abortions illegal like this, except the plan B pill?"
If you're talking to a Real Estate Agent: "What if she get's slighted in a land deal and decides to get her revenge by forcing you to have a new license to sell commercial and all commercial sales in the last 20 years are now voidable"
If you're talking to a loud and staunch LQBT supporter "After things like DOMA & the results in NC & CA that were over turned, aren't you a wee bit weary of a single politician being able to decide which rights you have and when? No everyone can afford to take a case to SCOTUS."
If you're talking to a "gun owner" who approves of AWB's "We both know people will keep shooting each other, what do you think will be banned next? Likely Bolt actions, which will be called "sniper rifles". After that? Shotguns obviously no civilian needs that much power, a 12 gauge is a hell of a gun. Even though you may not like Modern Sporting Rifles, giving up this ground isn't going to make your fight, when they get to the guns you like, any easier."
If we want to make gains in messaging we need to be a-political. (That means no Trump signs, no slurs on her sexuality and no "blue lives matter" or any of that.) We need to be above the fray and on message.
This is about civil rights, today in MA. Not which POTUS candidate will possibly help rights more, not about cops & good or bad shoots and certainly not about personal attacks on the person trampling our rights not relevant to the issue. (I mean calling her a petty tyrant is hyperbole, but much different than attacks on her sexuality, marriage status or looks.)
I'm not trying to tell people what to say, or what to think. I'm just making the case for what's going to be effective in getting our voices heard and what isn't.
