You mean....like comparing the bird deaths as the result of wind farms as opposed to feral cats?
the problem with your argument here is that the strawman is really about the main use of cars vs. the principle use of guns. The fact is, more people....a great many more people, are killed by cars than by guns. If the reaction of those who claim to value human life over freedom is 'Ok, but we need cars to get to places, and you are taking my car away from me over my cold dead body!" then I cry hypocrisy.
But it isn't hypocrisy, because your argument fails to acknowledge the ratio of uses to deaths. And people DO get upset about deaths by car, and regulations ARE often put in place when deaths are caused by them. Cars serve a specific non-killing function that they achieve without killing or hurting anybody millions of times a day for a sizeable chunk of the human population. To say "they cause more deaths, so there should be more outrage" is pure false equivalence, because the RATE isn't even remotely the same. Again, to compare the two is absurd.
Actually, I rather like how cars are "regulated." in order to drive a car, someone has to get a license, and prove that s/he is capable of driving. If a health issue comes up that might impact the ability to drive, that license is suspended or outright revoked. If the driver doesn't have insurance, his/her license might be revoked. Many things could impact a driver's license. The rules for what a car must have to operate safely on 'the street,' are pretty strict.
Just applying driver's license rules to gun ownership would be a really good idea.
And I would say that's extremely reasonable.
That's my opinion anyway, but here the claim of 'strawman' just doesn't apply.
But it does, because nobody is arguing that it is purely the
number of deaths that is significant enough to justify gun control, it's the rate at which they happen relative to other methods, coupled with the regularity with which they are used for mass murder. To say that gun control advocates are arguing based purely on the numbers killed, regardless of context or rates, is a strawman.
I was addressing hypocrisy here, not attempting to justify gun ownership by car ownership.
But it's not hypocritical, because I'm fairly certain gun control advocates are also supporters of car regulation. Where is the hypocrisy?