There’s positives to cars that far outweigh the cost of drunk driving. Gun ownership does not “far outweigh” its consequences.

I will just casually ignore your reductionist argument, I’m sure you’ll understand. Reasonable people don’t argue that way as all arguments would just … boil down to nothing.

It's hard to take your argument seriously given that (a) prisons are an intentional police state and a generally unpleasant abode, (b) people are still violently dying in them anyway (well over double non-prison homicide rate even with somewhat effective dangerous property restrictions), (c) there's no sane way to apply prison levels of property restriction to the public at large outside of prisons (and we live in a world where the ability to fabricate weapons at home grows day by day), (d) whether gun ownership outweighs its downsides is as similarly complex and judgement driven a question as whether cars do: both have complex downside and benefits with situational and unclear boundaries. That people can with a straight face "why should anyone need a gun" in a country with food deserts and regions with deer overpopulation problems while often treating "why should anyone need a Lamborghini?" as an offensive or silly question only illustrates.