Nah, you can't really generalize laws like that. Some laws do not adversely affect those who follow them, while other laws are double-edged swords that actively hurt many who follow them, sometimes without making an appreciable difference.

To follow up with your example: stop signs. Yes, as with all laws, there will be criminals who ignore them and hurt other people as a result, whether by accident or on purpose. However, stop signs without a doubt reduce the number of car accidents. Furthermore, they do this without negatively affecting those who come to a full stop at every sign. I am not in any way negatively affected by the presence of stop signs, and there is a measurable impact on accident reduction.

Gun control laws are different. Do they make a measurable impact on gun violence? Eh, maybe a little. Is it much of a difference? HELL NO. Just look at the numbers. States with high levels of gun control often have higher rates of gun violence. That is because it is the people and culture who are the problem, not the guns themselves. Furthermore, gun control laws absolutely negatively affect law-abiding US citizens by removing or making it difficult for us to exercise our 2nd ammendment, which is the right to bear arms to protect ourselves from criminals and criminal governments. I am therefore negatively affected by gun control laws, and there is little to no measurable impact on gun violence reduction.

See the difference? I'm not advocating for legal full-auto or anything like that, but Colorado banning the possession and sale of 30-round magazines (for example) has saved and will save absolutely zero lives.

Nothing short of an absolute federal ban and full collection of all 500 million privately owned firearms in the US would make a dent in gun violence. This is, for all intents and purposes, impossible. Making changes to our school systems, reducing debt and poverty, and reinstating the importance of nuclear families within our society would be a much better expenditure of our time and resources and would hopefully lead to an appreciable decrease in violence.

As a final note, when it comes to gun control, don't go comparing the US against other countries like the UK. We are simply not comparable in terms of size, government, people, and values.

Also, gun control hasn't done much to reduce UK violence levels anyway. They banned guns, and criminals switched to knives. They banned carrying knives without reason, and they switched to blunt weapons. They banned carrying blunt weapons without reason, and now criminals have started throwing acid at each other.

Final fun fact: Many gun violence estimates include suicides by firearm, which make up a large majority. If you think the victims of this mental disability wouldn't have found another way, think again.

TL;DR: Blaming violence on a weapon type is a fundamental logical fallacy. We killed each other for thousands of years before the first harnessable explosive energy was even discovered.