If gun control measures worked by themselves, Chicago would have 0 deaths due to firearms last year. Until all the Chicago gangsters throw their guns into Lake Michigan and go back to school or get jobs, and take their kids to church, don't hold your breath.
Now seeing as talking about Canada, Australia or the UK will probably blow your mind, I'll stay in the US. Chicago, in the 1980's, had a homicide rate of 34 per 100 000. It now stands at 15.4. So, we can attribute the higher homicide rate to the fact that urban centers naturally have higher homicide rates.
Now it is true, their is more than one avenue to solving the gun control problem. Washington DC found it in urban renewal and improved youth programs, going from 52 per 100 000 to 29 per 100 000. New York's answer was better regulation and enforcement, going from 52 per 100 000 to 6.2 per 100 000 (and hit an all time low in 2004). But I'm assuming you are against both options.
Numbers are meaningless without something to compare them to.
I was comparing Chicago to the rest of the nation, not some carefully selected countries is far too narrow if we want to talk about a global comparison. Mexico has a very high restriction on guns, yet you hear almost every day about a mass grave or drug cartel violence.
Overall if you compare the amount of legislation for gun to the murder rate, you would find more control leads to more violence.
Of course you have to carefully select countries when comparing stats. Culture, law, history, standard of living, police spending and competence, and drugs are all important when comparing countries. So, when comparing homicide and gun homicide rates, you can only really talk about other first world democracies. So, Canada, Australia, UK, Belgium, France, Germany, Sweden, Finland, Norway, the Neatherlands etc, are the only countries that you can compare. Mexico, Uganda and the Dominican Republic are irrelevant. With that in mind Switzerland is the only foreign country that supports the pro-gun position, but every other country, including the US, has stats that support the anti-gun position.
Hardly, my stats just disproved that. As regulations were put in place in those three cities, Chicago, New York and Washington DC, rates when down. We also have to considered two other important factors. A: Urban centers tend to have higher crime rates, B: it is very hard for a single city or state to have effective gun control, it is far easier on a national level, because it is very easy to move weapons between states, much less cities.
UK is leading the USA in terms of homicide by edged weapons though. The garden variety crooks there can't get guns easily, but knives and swords are more readily available. It's the mentality, not the tool used that's the problem.