Should British Police Officers Be Armed With Guns?
More than 90 percent of British police do not carry guns, a policy felt acutely during the recent terror attack in London and the earlier March attack outside the Parliament.
The first two officers arrived at London Bridge within two minutes of the emergency call and being unarmed with guns, tackled the killers. However, the terrorists were able to escape and continue stabbing civilians until being gunned down by other armed officers.
This is a common scenario, lamented an anonymous police officer in an op-ed, who said he had changed his mind over his twenty years as a police officer to supporting firearms for law enforcement.
Britain's law enforcement rely mostly on handcuffs, mace, stun-guns, batons, and similar tools to fight crime.
The rationale behind the scarcity of guns is that armed police would send a violent message to communities and would cause problems, not solve them.
Britain's intelligence agency had warned in 2014, long before this year's March attack, that a terrorist attack in the United Kingdom was "highly likely."
"Self-defense shouldn't be limited by culture," NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch commented on "Varney & Co.," referring to Britain's ingrained history of unarmed police.
"I never want to see anyone ever, ever go through the experience of not being able to defend themselves," Loesch said. 'It's one of the reasons I'm so passionate in what I do. It's why NRA Carry Guard was founded, to help people be able to better defend themselves."
She argued that defensive gun use vastly outweighs criminal use and abuse of firearms.
Watch more above.