The British Nanny State: No Guns Allowed

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.

William Grice | August 28, 2026

A Study in Disarmament

“I have my old service revolver and a few cartridges.”

“You had better clean it and load it. He will be a desperate man, and though I shall take him unawares, it is as well to be ready for anything.”

I went to my bedroom and followed his advice. When I returned with the pistol, the table had been cleared, and Holmes was engaged in his favourite occupation of scraping upon his violin.

— Arthur Conan Doyle, A Study in Scarlet (1887)

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.

Speaking on The Joe Rogan Experience, 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.” 

Cue much shock and horror from the chattering classes and mainstream media.

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:........

© American Thinker