Rifles > Historical

The Hession Rifle (Page 2)

With the London Olympics now over, it’s time for a little history lesson on British disarmament. It is a tale told best by one very special rifle.

Hession, who was then working for Winchester Arms, decided to make a statement. He sent his prized Springfield Model 1903 to the American Committee for Defense of British Homes. Before he did he had two plates attached to its stock. The one on the rifle’s butt read: “This rifle was used by Major John W. Hession” and was used “in winning Olympics Bisley England 1908 – Grand Aggregate Camp Perry 1908 – Worlds 800 YD. Record Camp Perry 1909 … .” A plate placed on the rifle’s fore-end read: “FOR OBVIOUS REASONS THE RETURN OF THIS RIFLE AFTER GERMANY IS DEFEATED WOULD BE DEEPLY APPRECIATED.”

Hession’s rifle was shipped to England. Before the end of the war the NRA alone sent more than 7,000 private firearms to England. The U.S. government, of course, sent many more. Congress passed the Lend-Lease Act in March 1941. Almost immediately, quantities of “U.S. Rifle, Cal. .30, M1” and others were headed across the Atlantic.

Winston Churchill was appreciative. He wrote in Their Finest Hour: “When the ships from America approached our shores with their priceless arms, special trains were waiting in all ports to receive their cargoes. The Home Guard in every county, in every village, sat up through the night to receive them ... . By the end of July we were an armed nation ... . Anyhow, if we had to go down fighting … a lot of our men and some women had weapons in their hands … .”

England, of course, was victorious after American troops entered the war and made the difference. And wonderfully, after the war Hession’s rifle found its way back from England to Hession. It can now be seen in the NRA’s National Firearms Museum in Fairfax, Va.

Flash Forward to the 2012 Olympics
By this time Grey had finished his whiskey and soda and was staring at the melting ice at the bottom of his glass. Even though he was dry, I wasn’t going to let him off without bayoneting the last of his anti-gun point of view. So I said, “Perhaps it is too obvious at this point to use the old axiom ‘those who don’t know their history are bound to repeat it,’ nevertheless today, sadly, Britain is again a disarmed nation.”

So disarmed, I pointed out, that law-abiding residents were helpless when Tottenham’s gangster youth decided to loot stores, mug residents and vandalize automobiles in August 2011 after police had shot and killed a person following a car chase.

Tottenham’s High Road was ground zero for the riots, which have an interesting tie-in to the history outlined here. The “Tottenham Outrage” of 1909—yes, the same “Tottenham” where the 2011 riots took place—was a famous gunfight that exhibited a very different English character.

Two men in Tottenham, armed with semi-automatic handguns, attempted to rob a payroll truck, but when the guards fought back the robbers fled on foot. The chase lasted two hours and covered about six miles as officers and armed civilians pursued the robbers. In the end one of the thieves committed suicide and the other later died in surgery. One officer and one civilian were also killed. The bravery of the officers and civilians prompted the creation of the Kings Police Medal and the funeral processions for the slain officer and the civilian passed through streets lined with mournful Londoners.

Yes, a lot has changed since the English people gave up their right to bear arms.

These days, to obtain a firearm certificate in England the police must be convinced that a person has “good reason” to own a firearm, and that he can be trusted with it “without danger to the public safety or to the peace.” English firearms licenses are only issued if a person has legitimate sporting, collecting or work-related reasons for ownership. And no, since 1946, self-defense has not been considered a valid reason to own a firearm—nor has national defense. So those armed civilians who helped the police in the Tottenham Outrage would, at best, only be bystanders today and at worst be victims.

Indeed, England’s Firearms Act of 1997 banned the private ownership of handguns almost completely. The ban is so restrictive that even England’s Olympic pistol team had to go abroad to practice. That became such a national embarrassment that the English government passed a special dispensation to allow the shooting events to be held in England during the 2012 games.

It’s also worth noting that at the opening ceremonies for the 1908 Olympics held in England—the one Hession had competed in—the USA team noticed there was no American flag among the national flags flying in the stadium. As a result, team USA’s captain and flag-bearer, Martin Sheridan, refused to dip the Stars and Stripes as he passed King Edward VII’s box during the parade of athletes. “This flag dips to no earthly king,” Sheridan later explained.

After relating all of this history to Grey, I ended with the moral of the story: “Now don’t you fret Grey, if your people ever need to protect their freedom again from threats domestic or foreign, thanks to the NRA, Americans will be there to help rearm your populace all over again.”

He didn’t even attempt a retreating volley.

<< PREV   1   2  

Share |

Comments

ADD YOUR COMMENT

Enter your comments below, they will appear within 24 hours


Your Name


Your Email


Your Comment

15 Responses to The Hession Rifle (Page 2)

James Macklin, NRA Life 1966 wrote:
November 25, 2013

Besides civilian disarmament as described in the article it should be noted that after THE WAR TO END ALL WARS, England dumped most of the WWI weapons in the Channel. These were the arms that should ahve been available to the 'home guard' [[]aka unorganized militia] buy surplus purchase or issue in an emergency. The United States has turn most education over to a group that does not truly support the entire Constitution or Bill of Rights. Thus 'the right to keep...arms' and the right to bear arms have been forgotten by many if ever known. The 1939 Miller Court pretty clearly said that so-called :assault weapons' are exactly the kind of arm protected. Butthe truth about Miller is unknown to many, including NRAmembers. The Court DID NOT rule on the case, rather it was remanded for trial in Arkansas. The Court said the laws could remain in effect pending that trial when there would be actual evidence 'within judicial notice' [[]a trial transcript and submissions]. The USA is one vote away from an Obama Court overturning HELLER and McDonald and destroying the Bill of Rights and the Constitution itself.

Sandy Elliot wrote:
January 13, 2013

Bravo for most convicting point of article -- gun-control harms women first and foremost. In order to protect ourselves and family we must have fire power. The very political party -Democrats - who claim to best represent us, has become 'The Enemy'. When they disarm their body guards, as for Ambassador Stevens, I might again believe they have my best interests at heart.

KEN BORGIE wrote:
October 24, 2012

What a wonderful article about the difference between British and American citizens. Americans are still citizens, while British people are subjects subjected to government control while robber barons run free with guns killing innocents - even unarmed Bobbies. Admiral Yamamoto made the statement why Japan never invaded America - "Because there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass pointed at the Japanese invaders." Just remember that - you U.N. Blue-Helmeted troops that are ready to invade American cities.

Russell Middleton wrote:
September 22, 2012

An indication of just how committed the British authorities are to keeping their country disarmed. Less than 12 hours after two unarmed female police officers were ambushed and killed, Chief Constable Sir Peter Fahy of the Greater Manchester Police said, his force believed "passionately" that police should remain unarmed, despite the tragedy.

Richard W. Hughes wrote:
September 07, 2012

Hession was most fortunate. The others who sent guns to England were thanked by having their guns destroyed after the War. And kudos to Martin Sheridan. Would that our current President had such love and respect for the Flag. History repeats itself. I'll keep my guns here, where they will do the most good.

John E Hamman wrote:
September 04, 2012

I don't know if the author is on staff, but I wanted to congratulate him on an excellent article. Great history presented. Unfortunately much of the legal justification criteria mentioned for England sounds very similar to what we have here in CA for CCW permits. Thanks for a great article.

TexAxe wrote:
September 02, 2012

Just an outstanding, simple story illustrating such a simple principle, it's amazing we have to continually fight to keep our Second Amendment from being further eroded. Irrational phobias being what they are, I know some people are unreachable, but I am distributing this link to everyone I know who may still have an open mind, and to those who I know agree and will distribute further. Sincere thanks to AR for this gem!

Hal Vinson wrote:
August 31, 2012

Great article. Our club has a 22 rifle which was engraved and sent to Britain and was returned a number of years ago by Val Forgett of Navy Arms.

Martin wrote:
August 29, 2012

Jeez, we have a similar problem in New Zealand, though not as bad. At least, once you pass a firearms competency test and can have a firearms license, you can buy any rifle or shotgun you like - just not the military style ones. To own a pistol is very expensive and time consuming. You have to be a member of a pistol club for a year, buy a special safe, apply for an extension to your license, and only ever transport your pistol to the firing range. But drug dealers and gang bangers seem to own whatever they like… Mind you, we are fairly safe from casual violence, but the inner cities are best avoided after dark.

Savvas Toufexis wrote:
August 28, 2012

Just to let you know ,shotguns went on licence in 1968 and not 1937.

alfie wrote:
August 28, 2012

WWII hit an ill-armed Australia too. My Dad trained initially without a rifle and they used broom handles. This is true.

Jason wrote:
August 27, 2012

I beg to differ. Gray should fret, and deeply. Another old adage is, 'fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.' You, Gray, and your fellows have made your beds. Now you can lay in them. When you are besieged and inevitable overwhelmed by the next, great threat to your way of life you can console yourselves with the knowledge that you were subjugated like good, civilized citizens of the world.

ConcernedUSCitizen wrote:
August 26, 2012

In olden days, the difference between a slave and a free person was that a free person could own weapons and property. The two things standing between a utopian one world government and freedom are the Swiss populace and the American populace, armed with small arms. These useful idiot journalists who are being used to create a positive mindset for diarmanent of law abiding free people, will be the first to be led to the new labor camps. Let's hope it never comes to that.

Jake Smart wrote:
August 26, 2012

REGARDING THE HESSION RIFLE AND THE BRITISH POSITION ON GUN CONTROL We really shouldn’t give our British friends too much flack because they want to keep their citizens from owning firearms. We must remember they learned a very nasty lesson back in the 1770’s about what can happen when the citizens have the means to “forcibly protest” the governments mis-treatment.

Peter Halliday wrote:
August 25, 2012

Excellent Article and all so true. I am British and a legal resident alien in the USA. I own seven handguns and target shoot regularly. I am sensible and responsible and had a concealed carry permit when I lived in Georgia. One of the reasons I choose to emigrate to the USA is the fact that the majority of the US population understands that people are the problem and not guns. Thankfully the NRA have shared statistics that show that crime has dropped as gun ownership has risen. God Bless America.