First, DOJ prosecution of elected officials who violate our civil rights with unreasonable regulations like magazine limits, feature restrictions, bans, licensing hurdles and fees.

Second, federal law codifying the above, setting criminal penalties for elected and appointed officials who do so, and enablement of civil litigation by their victims. Said officials to be personally liable for damages.

Third, restoration of local control by county throughout the state by some means to balance the power of the cities to dominate the state by legislation.

Fourth, CCW reciprocity with all states.

Fifth, the HPA.

Sixth, ending federal and state restrictions on barrel and overall firearm lengths.

Any additions?

Make gun bans illegal.

Accountability for law enforcement as well as politicians.   Including personal liability.

For number 1, exactly what are you going to cite to support prosecution of elected officials for violation of our civil rights?  As I wrote in another thread, there is NO COURT DECISION that can currently be cited that says these bans are unconstitutional.  SAFE was upheld by the Second Circus.  DOJ has nothing to work with.  Even the Sullivan Law, which should be unconstitutional under strict interpretation of the 2A, is constitutional in case law.  The Heller and MacDonald decisions left so much open to interpretation that we have even more draconian gun laws now here and in other states (CA, MD, CT, MA) than we did when those decisions were made and they have been upheld by the courts.  While I hope that someday SCOTUS will overturn various gun bans and restrictions, I have no doubt the decision will be so vague as to allow state interference just short of a ban (storage requirements, licensing, registration, safety classes, references, waiting periods, etc.).  Look at what DC has done.  It is next to impossible to CCW there because of their myriad of laws that were basically a big FU to SCOTUS.  They are still fighting to overturn those restrictive laws and Marco Rubio has recently introduced federal legislation to repeal DC's restrictive laws (it is a nice idea but I think it would be better to have the courts fix it as that would create case law for others to cite).  Sadly that cannot be done to states.  Chicago followed the DC model on restrictions but just got slapped the other day for its restrictions on gun ranges.

 For number 3, I am not exactly sure what the feds could do on this.  It kind of flies in the face of the 10th Amendment, which a lot of states cherish more than the 2nd.