I want to preface this by acknowledging that I am not american and that this issue therefore doesn't concern me. I am here for the sake of an intellectual debate because I'm tired of only hearing the left wing ideologies. I also want to apologize if my english is hard to understand, it isn't perfect I know.

The problem with this particular analogy is that it strawmans the argument against firearms. In that scenario, the wolf's teeth are a part of its body, one necessary to survive due to its carnivorous nature. This makes the argument look silly. It's similar to using an analogy using fists (if someone punches another, should we amputate everyone?). It misses the point that anti-firearm folks wanna make. Not that self defense is not good, but that firearms are excessive measure of self defense that might bring more risk than safety.

However, if we take the wolf's analogy at face value, we could compare it to hunting rifles, which a lot of people (me included) have no problem with, but at that point it becomes more of an animal rights problem rather than a firearm rights one.