MURDER RATES ARE AT A RECORD LOW, dropping back to the levels of 40 years ago. The drop started about ten years ago.

This isn’t proof that the wave of liberalized handgun-carry laws over the same period has driven murder rates down, and I rather suspect that there are multiple factors involved, but it certainly disproves the promises of gun-control proponents that blood would run in the streets if such laws were adopted.

UPDATE: Meanwhile, interestingly, despite a near-complete handgun ban gun crime is climibing sharply in Britain:

Handgun crime has soared past levels last seen before the Dunblane massacre of 1996 and the ban on ownership of handguns introduced the year after Thomas Hamilton, an amateur shooting enthusiast, shot dead 16 schoolchildren, their teacher and himself in the Perthshire town.

It was hoped the measure would reduce the number of handguns available to criminals. Now handgun crime is at its highest since 1993.

One argument by anti-gun-control folks that I never found very persuasive was that if guns were banned people would simply manufacture illegal ones. But that’s exactly what’s happening in Britain, according to this story.

UPDATE: Andy Freeman is bemoaning my skepticism about illegal manufacture — click “More” to find out why.

ANOTHER UPDATE: “Gun Death” rates are down in Canada after stricter gun controls, though if you go all the way to the bottom of this story you’ll see that overall homicide has gone up.

Andy Freeman emails:

Why were/are you skeptical? People make lots of things, and guns are not particularly high-tech.

As you probably know, John Browning invented a wide range of modern firearms using quite primitive tools. But, he was a genius and highly skilled.

During the 90s, a group of United Airlines mechanics in San Francisco decided to take advantage of the shop’s tools and the distribution system and had a nice little business in manufacturing machine guns. But, they were highly skilled and had good tools (far beyond anything Browning ever dreamed of.)

I’m not that mechanical; I dropped auto shop to protect my high school GPA.

During the “assault weapon” hearings, I bought some simple hand tools so I could test a hypothesis. While watching Feinstein pontificate on TV, I sat on my couch and shaped metal. She got her law, but not long after, I had a quite functional semi-automatic handgun. (I went out of my way to make it semi – full-auto would have been easier. I made sure that I complied with all local, state, and federal laws.) It wasn’t particularly small, but it fit in a bookbag or large fanny pack.

But, maybe I’m motivated and had too much time on my hands.

I used to keep track of the hobbyist machine tool market. I stopped when the electronically controlled ones started to drop in price. (These tools were more sophisticated, if smaller, than what the United mechanics had.) At that point, mechanical skill was soon to become irrelevant for prospective home gun-makers willing to follow directions. I haven’t looked for, or noticed, scripts to make gun parts with such tools, but I’d be very surprised if they didn’t exist.

(Plans for many firearm designs are readily available.)

How can govt disarm me? If there’s a market, what can keep the folks who passed auto shop from supplying it?

So, why are you skeptical about illegal manufacture? Folks are clearly willing to grow illegal plants, synthesize illegal drugs, or even distill illegal spirits if there are paying customers, so it’s hard to see why there’s be a lack of suppliers.

Are you assuming a lack of paying customers?

No, it just seemed like one of those too-clever-to-win arguments, trotted out with too much glee by its proponents. Which doesn’t make it wrong, I suppose. Certainly not in this case.