Last Friday, I had a very interesting conversation with a war correspondent from the UK Daily Mirror. He's been embedded with the SAS in Afghanistan. He's seen his share of guns, and he's done some shooting.

Personally, he's not fond of them, but nor is he hostile. In fact, he mentioned that gun crime is on the rise in London, and he wondered aloud if England's strict gun laws might be the cause rather than the solution.

This was going to be a very interesting conversation, indeed.

News comes this week that Gun crimes in England have doubled over the last decade.

In Lancashire alone, the rate has risen by nearly 600%.  London police are breaking with age-old  tradition by sending out routine armed patrols, armed with Glock 17's and H&K MP-5's.  Previously, the only armed officers in the Metropolitan area were the CO19 tactics units.

By all accounts, the United Kingdom should be relatively unscathed by gun violence.  The English government has been abridging its citizens' rights to firearms ownership by increasing degrees since the 1903 Pistols Act.

Following the 1996 Dunblane Massacre, English gun control efforts came to their peak.  The Firearms Act of 1997 outlawed nearly all functional firearms in civilian hands, and English citizens were left with no choice but to turn in their guns.  The result was the largest peacetime confiscation of firearms I can recall, and it resulted in the complete annihilation of what was once a thriving gun culture.

The ostensible aim was to reduce violent crime.  As shown this week, the measurable result was failure.

So, what went wrong?