You live in a city that has a law against planting non-native trees. There is also an ordinance against planting trees on public lands, and another against planting trees next to roads. You have a dozen palm trees in your yard.
One of your neighbors plants a dozen palm trees right next to the highway. There is no shoulder on the road, and he plants on public lands.
A couple years later, a car runs into one of the highway palms, and the driver is killed.
In reaction to this tragic death, a progressive suggests that every tree in your yard should be chain-sawed. After all, these are the same kind of non-native palms that claimed the life of someone on the highway.
Does this make any sense at all? Obviously not, and I understand that this is a convoluted argument. This story has all of the same elements of the gun-control story, though. Broken laws, tragic death, and then demands that everyone should lose their rights, as a result of the irresponsible actions of a few.