http://www.straightdope.com/columns/041105.html
Well I do see it is an old post, however the answer to the original question is a straight no.
Original acts came in the 19th Century I can’t remember the specifics, but the main restrictive legislation came in 1918/20 (accepting your date as to lazy to find my book) this was in direct fear of revolution and 1000’s of demobbed troops were armed mainly from war souvenirs (personal army issue arms would have mainly been returned).
zipping upto the 80’s
Prior to Dumblane there was Hungerford, around 1984 after which legislation was passed which provided that firearms had to be ‘secured’ ie. in a safe or more usually an armory at a gun club, even before that it was illegal to have a loaded firearm or shotgun when not in use. Therefore it was rare that anyone would have a firearm in a defence situation. about the same time immation firearms legislation was pasted.
The 90’s legislation was Blair trampling over minority rights. My main anoyance to this was that it was clearly the police at fault. all the weapons were registered but the prep should never have had a licence if the mental heath part of the rules had been applied also the ammount for a private person ie. not dealer was excessive to say the least. Indeed this suddenly has prompted the in myself what about the 2012 Olympics will pistol shooting events be in the games?
In general guns had had little to do with crime against individuals in the UK (except those of the IRA and Loyalists and a rash of armed bank robberies during the 70’s-80’s) however since the late 80’s with the fall of communism illegal weapon have been easy to get and relatively cheap and there has been a large rise in black on black mainly drugs related shooting, it seems to be becoming a required ‘accessory’ leading to many ‘respect’ shootings for trivial matters were ten years previous it would have been a fist fight, that said there was a double murder ten days ago less than a mile from me, the victims both were black and ‘executed’ in their home, as far as I can tell the only drugs relation to this could be that the man was active in the community and could have well been considered a ‘snitch’ by the dealers.
The law on self-defence is simply one of reasonable force, thus shooting a man as he’s running away isn’t considered reasonable, but coming at you would have been a different kettle of fish. personally I would say to anyone shut till you’ve got a lawyer, the police have a duty to investigate all incidents were they have reason to believe an offence may have occurred, the decision to prosecute is down to the Crown prosecution service.