Alcohol and guns are a bit different. I would bet that more people drink than own guns, especially assault rifles. Weapons are not something that is consumed and in need of replacing. While the ammunition certainly is, the times you would use up that ammunition would is much lower than the amount of times someone drinks. Banning assault rifles is nothing new, states have successfully done so and i havent heard of any sort of rise in crime related to it. Granted, i havent dug up the stats to say that with any degree of certainty. It would be interesting to see the comparison between states that do ban it and those that dont.
Even now we ban explosive devices. Why? Because when they are used incorrectly they can cause large amounts of casualties. Even with that ban in place i havent heard of a rise in explosive devices used during criminal activity...despite the fact that they can be easier to acquire than assault rifles.
I will agree that banning handguns would just lead to an even worse black market. Practically speaking, handguns would be much easier to distribute due to the ease in which one can conceal them. Even with handguns being legal we have difficulty tracking them. I was just posting about Junior Seau's suicide the other day. Despite it happening in May, police still have no earthly idea where or when he acquired the handgun.
And cant say ive read Tao Te Ching.
If it's something that an overwhelming percentage of the population is in favor of you won't have many problems prohibiting certain things. However, when there's a big enough demand, the supply will be met, one way or another. If there's a big enough market for handguns & they're outlawed as the above poster suggested, you'll always have people who would be willing to traffic those weapons for the inflated profits that are a direct result of said prohibition.