More Handguns, Less Crime — or More?

Although an old article, I could find in its analysis no fault. It seems that in different times and places in the world, gun laws have a small effect on gun/overall crime, a large effect, or none at all.

My reason for posting this is one that I repeat all of the time in debates with the fearful mass of statists who will willingly give up all their rights to the government - but also will force me to give up mine as well. 

YOU as the statist are advocating aggressive violence. I am NOT. Therefore, it is YOUR job to convince all those disposed to liberty why it is a 100% certainty that X must be done and enforced by aggressive violence, and that X is the ABSOLUTE ONLY possible way that problem Y can be solved. 

From the article: 
 
“The more-guns-less-crime theory is more than plausible, and it retains the support of many academics. In the end, however, it has become a distraction. In addition to being virtually impossible to prove in a meaningful way, it has placed the burden of proof where it does not belong.
 
Gun-rights supporters shouldn’t have to prove anything. They are on the side of freedom. Gun controllers, by contrast, want to restrict freedom, and thus must prove that their policies provide benefits that are worth that freedom. Whether the topic is RTC, handgun bans, buyback programs, assault-weapon restrictions, or registries, there is simply no evidence whatsoever indicating that to be the case. That’s one thing that Lott and the debate he inspired have proven — whatever the merits of the claim that gun control actually increases crime.”