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.