By David Codrea

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “In the aftermath of London attack, some Brits praise their strict gun laws,” The Washington Post “reports” approvingly. “Britain was rocked by a terrorist attack at the center of its capital Wednesday, but there was also a widespread sense that things could have been worse.”

The implication is that’s because the subjects of the Queen – including, generally, the police – don’t carry guns. And by extrapolation, reader inference is that being disarmed makes everyone safer (at least among those who believe correlation equals causation).

According to all credible measures, that’s the way most Brits like it. While there is a small segment of the UK population active in promoting the shooting sports and abolishing the Firearms Acts that banned, among other firearms, centerfire semi-automatic rifles and handguns, the sympathies of the general public are pretty much where their rulers want them to be:

“A 2010 poll from YouGov found just 4 percent of the country wanted gun control relaxed, a figure dwarfed by the 31 percent who thought all guns should be completely banned.”

That latter assumption relies on wishful thinking that complete prohibition is possible, and that things won’t quickly change. The problem is, things are changing, and quickly, as evidenced by the fact that Islamist terror attacks occur in London. And that reflects the reality of immigration policies that, rather than assimilating disparate cultures, leave groups with different values and goals occupying the same turf.

The collective memory is short, and those not directly impacted appear not to have taken seriously (or personally) the threat of Michael Adebowale, a British-born Muslim convert from the Nigerian immigrant community who butchered an off-duty soldier in 2013:

“You and your children will be next … You people will never be safe.”

That’s not quite true – some will be safer than others, for instance, per The Daily Mail, “the attacker was shot by a bodyguard of Defence Secretary Michael Fallon…”

Rather than choose the way established by the men who broke away from George III, the Brits have instead embarked on a very different path:

“The law and order solution, according to Dame Stella Rimington, the former head of MI5 who, per Mail Online affirms, ‘The enemy is everywhere,' is to recruit ‘the British people to inform security services if they suspect their neighbors maybe extremists.' “She said further terror attacks on the UK were inevitable unless the country became a ‘police state,’” the report continued. That means being able to protect themselves as government policies devolve their culture into chaos will not be an option for ordinary people, as a ‘monopoly of violence' remains the exclusive province of the state. “People there may come to regret that too late. And people here need to mind what is unfolding there as a foreshadowing of where those who would disarm us are trying to lead us.

It’s their choice, but it doesn’t have to be ours. That's provided we prevail against “progressive” gun-grabbing globalists bent on culturally terraforming the Republic to better suit their unchallenged control.

But it does make it fair to resurrect a question I’ve asked before on several occasions:

Would you?

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.

In addition to being a field editor/columnist at GUNS Magazine and associate editor for Oath Keepers, he blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.