No. And I find the notion weird that if guns are banned by law, that crazy maniacs who care nothing of other people's lives or the law will then somehow be deterred from illegally obtaining a gun.

Well if we're talking about the UK it's worth noting that shootings have INCREASED since the gun ban.  I mean, to repeat the graphic.

Again.... not saying it's related but it's pretty disengenious to suggest that the gun ban have ANYTHING to do with it.  Since well... it's worse there.

As for rampages.... You know who doesn't have mass school shootings at all?  Mexico, the malaligned country complained about in this thread.

I'd argue that impressions are deceiving.

However, though it makes me wonder... why you assume there is a problem in the US then.  If the ways crimes are reported is a worry.

That graph doesn't prove your point too well, ORIGINALLY homicides increased from the gun ban in 1997 but clearly peaked in 2003 (18 per million) and have since FALLEN back to the levels seen in the early 1990's (12 per million) and even lower in 2010 to 2012. Murders will happen regardless of the laws in place and even though we have a gun ban in place, shootings themselves are very low. Murder is carried out by other means. In America, a far higher portion of homicides are by a gun.

In the US – population 311.5 million  – there were an estimated 13,756 murders in 2009, a rate of about 5.0 per 100,000 . Of these 9,203 were carried out with a firearm. 67% of homicides carried out with a gun.

In the UK – population 56.1 million  – there were an estimated 550 murders in 2011-12, a rate of about 1.4 per 100,000. Of these 39 were carried out with a firearm. Only 7% of homicides carried out with a gun.

From~http://fleshisgrass.wordpress.com/2012/07/24/us-and-uk-murder-rate-and-weapon-updated/

and gun bans don't work? This shows the opposite. Not only is the murder per 100,000 lower but the use of guns to kill the victims is far lower in the UK. We aren't immune to this crime obviously, but we must be doing something right if crime has been falling every year since 2003. The stats for 2012 show just over half as many homicides when compared to 2003. Also, I just don't believe i would feel safer if i could own a gun.   

^^^

I assume that the violent crime rate would be high in the US than the countries I mentioned because of what I've seen in the media and what I've heard from people who've been there. I'd also expect the violent crime rate to be somewhat proportional to the high homicide rate.

Your Murder rate went up... and is now exactly around the level it was before the gun ban.  In what way does that sound like it worked to you?   You can't point to the gun ban having any effect on UK homicides.

As for the US murder rate... lets compare it's shift compaired to the UK rate.

They're... also at early 1990's levels.  Weird that huh?  It's nearly the same trend... which means it's highly likely the handgun ban which the UK has and the US doesn't... has had zero effect.

Claiming the handgun ban works because you have less murders then the US does is like me Claiming that my all cheesecake and milkshake diet works because I was less then Seth Rogan.  He weight liked 100 pounds more then me before i started.

You mistunderstand.  Homicide is like Violent Crime.  It's something that puts together multiple crimes into one specific crime.  In the US it includes among other things Murder, manslaughter, wrongful deaths, self defense killings and deaths who can't been conclusivly solved as deaths.

Therefore, any reporting fears you have one should be the same for the other.  Which would leave you with nothing but anectdote to base your opinion on.

Your new graph compares the last 50 years rather than the last 20, which is a big difference. Other than that, the trend is similar, i agree. But don't you understand why governments act on arms and decide to limit them? In the UK, there was a major school shooting in 1996, comparable to the one in Connecticut last October and our government and the public didn't want an event like that again. A gun ban policy made sense and nearly worked, since there's been only one major massacre since then, which was in 2008 i think.

And i pointed out the crime rate ended up being the same after 20 years to show you that a gun ban only increases the crime rate in the short term and then drops off afterwards (it's still falling now, 10 per million in 2012). But surely if guns aren't readily available, then murder is at least given a 2nd though by the criminal, since most would have to kill with other weapons, instead, like a knife. 

And finally, the comparision between the US and UK was only possible because it was per 100,000 people. US murder rate is still 3x higher than the UK's at the end of it all, the American law must be missing something. Either that, or the economic system is the cause of the problem there. 

Why would it be the law? It's not as if the crimerate is evenly distributed. There were four murders by guns in my county last year. A county of 300,000. That's a gun homcide rate of 1.333~, including the 2 or 3 other homicdes, it would be about 2. It is purely 1. cultural and/or 2. economic. One just has to compare New Hampshire (which has some of the freest gun laws in the country) to New York State(which has the most restrictive.)