Thanks for your response, but my car analogy is just that. Some analogies limp a bit. And as a professor told me, some have muscular distrophy. The restrictions I propose seem to be "common sense laws" (ack! I hate that phrase gun control advocates use!) similar to (analogy alert!) those used for other potentially dangerous items like drugs. In the book I recommended on another post, "Gunfight," the author outlines how gun possession was *required* post independence for fear of a British comeback, if I remember correctly, but guns were also strictly prohibited in many frontier towns, with visitors at times required to check them at the livery with their horses upon arrival. See the OK Corral fight, which was about gun control. But the bett analogy is with other countries, who seem to remain free under gun control and have far lower homicide rates. That analogy limps as well, since those countries don't have the income disparity we do and have more social services.
As I have said, the most us advocates can do,is to try to limit that carnage, slowing ownership or keeping guns away from those who shouldn't have them.