I expected this objection so I chose my words carefully.
I believe your CDC figures are per gun owners. BIG difference. When there is a "firearm accident" it is more likely to be fatal than when there is a car accident. That is just plain common sense. In other words, when a person is hit by a stray bullet they are more likely to die then they are when they are in a car accident. Make sense?
It also makes sense that there would be more accidents per car than per gun. This is because those 100,000 people spend infinitely more time riding in vehicles than they do shooting guns. Lets see some statistics that compare hours driving with hours shooting and then look at accident rates and fatalities per accident.
The is actually a good example of having emotional issues wrapped up with guns. I'm not so sure that firearms accidents are much more lethal than car accidents, but let's say for argument's sake that they in fact are. If there is a very low rate of firearms accidents overall, then shooting sports are still very safe activities. Look at the number of drownings in the U.S., for instance, to see an activity that is politically favored and therefore gets a pass, versus relatively rare gun accidents that are used as an indictment of the activity itself. Whenever someone drowns, you don't have liberals complaining about the "swimming lobby," and talking about how they went for a hike but had the experience ruined when they saw some swimmers who seemed nice enough, but, you know, if someone swims, you just never know...