I Left Europe for a Country That Trusts Me to Defend Myself

My favorite self-defense tool fits perfectly in a small handbag, matches my manicure, and comes in a chic blush-pink shade. It is completely innocuous until it dispenses 10% oleoresin capsicum, temporarily blinding an attacker and giving me enough time to sprint away in four-inch heels. It cost me less than $15 in Washington, D.C. and it gives me peace of mind when walking home at night. I lived in Scotland until recently. When I looked into buying a small can of pepper spray before traveling to London, I found out it was classified as a prohibited weapon under Britain’s Firearms Act of 1968 . My little pink canister is in the same category as a deadly firearm. My little pink canister is in the same category as a deadly firearm. If I carried this spray through the streets of London, I would be committing a crime. In a city where police record more than 28,000 sexual offenses a year , an average of 77 every single day, a woman taking a basic, nonlethal step to protect her own body classifies her as the criminal . Raised in Germany before moving to the UK, I was handed the standard girl’s guide to staying safe : Don’t walk alone at night. Don’t wear headphones. Share your live location with your friends. Avoid bad neighborhoods. We are expected to constantly shrink our lives, alter our routines, and modify our behavior. But when I considered buying a simple canister of pepper spray, it felt like the law wanted me to be defenseless. European governments view safety through a very specific lens: the state holds an absolute monopoly on protection. The implicit bargain is: Surrender your means of defense to us, and we will keep you safe. The ambient sense of safety that once characterized European cities is evaporating, and the statistics prove it’s not just in our heads. The issue is that this bargain is completely broken and unreliable. If you live in Europe today, you’ve likely felt the subtle shift in how you navigate daily life. You check the time before walking to the train station and scan the platform twice. You keep your head on a swivel as you walk home. The ambient sense of safety that once characterized European cities is evaporating, and the statistics prove it’s not just in our heads. According to recent Eurostat data, recorded sexual violence offenses in the European Union skyrocketed by 94% over a 10-year period . Police recorded over 256,000 sexual offenses in a single year alone. Women aren’t being paranoid; we are reacting to a stark shift in our living environment. Our European law enforcement and judicial systems are simply not equipped to handle the scale of what is hitting us. But instead of tackling violent perpetrators head-on, European governments have turned to their favorite coping mechanism: more regulations on the people who actually follow the rules. While U.S. “Stand Your Ground” laws protect people from being sued in civil court if they act in self-defense, European legal frameworks often require individuals to attempt a safe retreat and demand proportionality in the means used. But an attacker is almost always larger, stronger, and entirely unbothered by legal technicalities. Expecting a 120-pound woman to physically escape or overpower a grown man without a tool is a delusion, not “proportionality.” Take Germany, for instance. To combat rising knife crime , authorities expanded weapons-free zones in train stations, city centers, and public events. On paper, politicians claim this makes public spaces safer. In reality, it creates a dangerous paradox. Who actually obeys a knife-free-zone regulation? Law-abiding citizens. Normal people who don’t want a criminal record, a massive fine, or trouble with the police. A woman carrying a small Swiss Army knife in her bag will leave it at home out of fear of breaking the law. Meanwhile, a violent predator or a knife-wielding attacker does not care about a municipal sign declaring an area a “weapons-free zone.” By definition, criminals ignore weapon bans. Consequently, the state disarms law-abiding citizens while doing virtually nothing to stop lawbreakers. We are asked to sacrifice our peace of mind, our sense of security, and our basic tools for self-preservation, all to maintain the political illusion that “something is being done.” When I moved to America, the cultural shift was refreshing. Yes, gun rights dominate the Second Amendment debate, but underlying it all is the principle that your life and physical autonomy belong to you, not the government. By definition, criminals ignore weapon bans. Even in liberal D.C., I can legally carry my pink pepper spray. Eligible citizens can obtain permits for concealed carry . America trusts women to make informed decisions about their own safety. Carrying a defensive tool isn’t about being paranoid or playing cowboys but about leveling an inherently unfair playing field . A weapon, whether nonlethal spray or a firearm, bridges the biological strength gap. Critics like to paint self-defense as uncivilized or aggressively masculine. I believe true empowerment isn’t waiting for the state to rescue you or accepting street harassment as a tax on womanhood. On a night out, the only reason I should change my shoes is for comfort, not for a better chance at escape. I refuse to trade the pleasure of a pretty dress or loose hair on the metro for a false sense of safety. If being a “civilized” European means embracing helplessness as a civic virtue, count me out. Rather, I recognize that my safety is worth fighting for, and that I have every right to carry the tools to do so.