I'd say about 2-3 of the things you listed, depending on how you interpret them. Why do you ask?

Far more than that

Which ones then? Alcohol, obesity and cigarettes are the ones I can think of. Chemicals is very vague. And even then, "exponentially" is also up for interpretation. When is something exponentially more than something else?

Saying that every one of these things is fully legal and most kill more people per year is a fact. So you can "interpret" facts however you want it doesn't matter to me, I'm not going to humor you

The following is on a yearly basis. US Gun Deaths = 33,600 http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm Traffic deaths = 33,800 (with gun deaths being higher than traffic deaths in 11 states) http://sbcoalition.org/2015/05/safer-in-your-home-with-a-firearm-or-in-your-vehicle-with-seat-belts-and-airbags/ http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm Fire deaths = 3,000 http://www.usfa.fema.gov/data/statistics/ Knives, baseball bats, blunt objects deaths in homicides = 2,400 combined (guns are used in almost 70% of all US murders) http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/baseballbats.asp Animal deaths in the US = less than 200 (with only about a quarter of those caused by pets) http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/16/chart-the-animals-that-are-most-likely-to-kill-you-this-summer/ http://wonder.cdc.gov/ "chemicals" (whatever you might mean by that) = no available data Deaths by sport in the US = no record, but even the most dangerous of sports only claim at most a few dozen a year http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/average-12-school-football-players-die-year-study-article-1.1309671 Alcohol = 88,000 deaths a year (which is a little over 2 times more than the gun deaths, hardly "exponential") http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm Please humor me, though. I can't wait to see how you're going to show me that "most of these kill exponentially more people" is an undeniable fact. Smoking (tobacco) and obesity claim a lot more lives, true, but the rest of your examples are trash. People like you who don't know what they're talking about should really not pollute actual debates with their uneducated bullshit. It's what's holding back progress and reasonable discourse coming to solutions.

Then why not ban alcohol, cigarettes and fast food before banning firearms? It all depends on the hands that are holding the firearm.

I have never advocated banning firearms. Simply strict regulations and tight control. But firearms and your other examples are still quite different. Fast food is a choice that does not directly affect other people. A morbidly obese man clogging his arteries up even more with yet another cheeseburger does not harm the health of people around him. People don't kill others with fatty foods, they kill themselves by abusing it. Smoking is somewhat different, as second hand smoking does kill. But, as I advocate with guns, cigarettes are pretty well regulated. Smoking is not allowed in many public places, it's banned in most bars, restaurants and such establishments, the packages come with warnings to health, repeatedly exposing children to second hand smoking has been considered negligence and even abuse... But again, as with fast food, the main victims of smoking are the smokers themselves. While second smoking can harm another person's health, these things take time of exposure and are often addressed. The smokers ruin their body and die years later. They don't kill or maim innocents in public with cigarettes. Alcohol is probably your best example, but it still lacks as a comparison. It is again the substance abuser who suffers the most. Also, the substance is regulated. Strict age restrictions, limits on how much you can consume in bars, regulationsabout sharing it with minors and what stores can sell it, very strict rules about what you can do while under the influence of alcohol with harsh punishments for those who still drive drunk, routine police checks with breathalysers, support groups like AA for abusers...

Now, I get what you are saying. But it also depends on the state, laws are different for other states.

That is true, but doesn't really address what I said. Things that people can (and often do) abuse in a way that is dangerous and potentially harmful to other people are and should be regulated. How and to what extent they are regulated depends on a whole lot of circumstances and characteristics of whatever object in question. Guns are incredibly lethal, easy to transport, capable of easily inflicting very serious injuries, convenient to carry and conceal, easy to use, capable of taking control of pretty much any situation and imposing one's will on others... They are extremely dangerous tools that can cause tremendous amounts of harm to many people. As such, they deserve to be regulated accordingly.

Why aren't we (the US, not you) banning all cigarettes and alcohol?

Because it wouldn't work, I'd assume.

And guns would?

Banning them just from one day to the next? Of course not. I have never advocated such a thing. Stricter gun control and safety regulations, on the other hand? Definitely would work.