No, we’re objecting to conflating categories which demonstrably exhibit radically different behaviors and outcomes.

To overstate the point: You can’t conflate “bought a black market gun, keeps it illegally, has no training, and engages in felonious behavior on a regular basis” with “endured numerous comprehensive background checks, bought high value guns (some specialized) at retail, took hundreds of hours of training from prominent instructors, keeps them for sport and defense, obeys all applicable laws, is a practical expert in said laws, and has committed no crimes”, then when the former happens to kill someone illegally, proceed to average the two and use that to assert “see? owning guns is bad”.

No, you can. Owning a gun for self defense is an individual decision, so individual responsibility must be considered.

You can’t say that the Americans who want guns for self defense are better off without them because statistically, across the population, they increase danger.

Why can't you say that? Every decision you make is an individual decision. Whether or not to vaccinate yourself is an individual decision, owning a gun, driving a car, looking both ways. All can have consequences for others besides yourself.

I don't understand your response. Are you arguing that vaccinations, cars and being a responsible pedestrian should also be banned?