British personal firearms use - historical

[Oracle]

Does anyone know much about or have any sources that detail the personal firearms use of the British in the 19th and early 20th centuries? I'm looking for info about personal defense arms, like handguns, and their carry and acceptance within British society during that time. Also, I believe that British police forces, when they were first formed, did carry and use handguns, does anyone have any information on this?

I know that Colt built a factory in England in the 19th century to produce handguns, I doubt they would have done so if there wasn't a market in Britain for these arms.

 

[P95Carry]

IIRC, since the 1968 Firearms Act really put the screws on .... carry would have only been illegit. Guns in use by the crooks tho would have been pretty varied selection .. lot of Eastern Block stuff always got in and distributed ... think of an example ... it'll have been out there .. even now.

Early days would have included much that could be classed ''ex war'' .... Webley MkVI's (prolly .455) ... Enfield .38S&W breaktops ... and I think quite a lot of Smith 1917's ''got around'' - those .455 and .45acp with moonclips. These just come to mind.

Hang on - I'm ignoring too - 1911 A1 .... Browning HP ... and even ''Baby'' Browning in 32 acp ...... these much more post WWII I'd say.

I don't think the Brit ''Bobby'' ever carried, en masse ... unless ''detective'' category was permitted. Mostly it was ''issued as needed'' I think.

 

[Oracle]

I did hear on the History Channel that the original British "Bobbies" did carry, of course, these were cap n' ball black powder handguns, as they were formed in the 1830's, I believe. That's what got me interested in the subject, that, and the fact that Colt built a factory there to produce handguns. Why build a factory there if there isn't demand for the product, and handguns are pretty much only used for personal defense (not a whole lot of handgun hunting going on then, I'd surmise).

 

[P95Carry]

You may very well be right ... re the earliest police (Peelers) ... guess BP weapons would have been the norm eh!!

I'm not good on deep firearms history so really just scratching the surface with the small amount that comes to mind. I am an ex pat so was sorta involved (once!).

The Colt aspect? Hmmm . nothing there I can relate to but your logic is unarguable. There many here way more knowledgable on historic stuff than I .. hope they will chip in.

not a whole lot of handgun hunting going on then, I'd surmise

Hahaha! Not legal anyways!! Not sure how far back one would have to dig to get to a point where that was ''allowable'' ..... probably pre war would be my guess and maybe a while after.

 

[Jim March]

Joyce Lee Malcolm did a history book on the progression of the English RKBA.

As of the late 19th Century, they still had "Vermont Carry".

It all started to go nuts right after WW1 (or late in the war period) and the first target was rifles. Returning grunts saw that Lenin had gotten Russia out of the war and hence Commies started to flourish...once the hammer'n'sickle was raised over the Scottish Parliment Building, the aristocrats got a healthy dose of paranoia and gun bans started immediately. Not sure if the war was still on at that point...

 

[Mk VII]

those who are sufficiently interested can go to http://www.cybershooters.org/publicat.htm
and download a .pdf version of the secret 1918 Blackwell report which was the starting point for British gun registration.
The Metropolitan Police were not originally armed (except with a night stick), although they did do cutlass drill, and some pistols were later procured, mostly for the River Division. Adams and, later, Webley revolvers were procured and issued to some extent for night patrols.
Colt had expectations of naval & military orders and thought it more likely if he could demonstrate a domestic manufacturing base (much like Beretta USA). Substantial orders were not forthcoming, though, once the Crimean War was over, and the Government ordered the Beaumont-Adams instead. Colt realised that the likely amount of business would not justify retaining a London factory.