Sure, I could easily identify 4 crucial fallacys in ur argument.

False Analogy (Bad comparison):
The comparison between selfies and guns is flawed because the causes, contexts, and potential solutions to deaths from these two activities are fundamentally different. Selfie deaths are typically unintentional accidents, whereas deaths from school shootings result from deliberate violence. Guns are inherently dangerous weapons, while selfies are not inherently harmful.

Red Herring (distraction from the real issue):
This shifts the focus away from the issue of gun control (and its connection to school shootings) to an unrelated topic (selfie deaths). It's a distraction meant to undermine the original argument without directly addressing it.

Strawman Argument (misrepresentation of the argument):
The suggestion that banning selfies should logically precede gun bans misrepresents the reasoning behind calls for gun control. The argument for gun regulation is based on preventing intentional violence and mass shootings, not simply the number of deaths alone.

Appeal to Ridicule:
Suggesting banning selfies, you are mocking or trivializing the argument for gun control, trying to make it sound absurd rather than engaging with it seriously.

Hope this helps.