Another mark of a police state is the police routinely carrying guns (eg France).
I would respectfully disagree. While France may (or may not!) be a police state, the police carrying guns is not the deciding factor. In fact, I'd go as far as to say an armed police force is a component of a free country because the police need to defend themselves against an armed population, a small fraction of which are law breakers. That population is the ultimate disincentive for tyrants.
I think one of the first things done postwar by the spiritual forerunners of the current EU politburo was disarming the population, continent wide. This was done with the concurrence of the then occupying powers (the US and Soviet Union) because it also suited their purposes within Europe. Once that and other components were in place, let's say by 1990, and with those occupiers largely gone, I think the move towards rule by an unelected class of EU bureaucrats accelerated. Now 23 years on you can see the emerging results, with aviation as always a leading indicator: in any country, freedom in aviation seems to be a direct indication of freedom in general. National IDs are certainly another leading indicator.
Regardless, the UK has a relatively recent tradition of combating tyrants rather less naive than the current crop, and winning. To expect the UK population to accept what is happening to their 1000 year old legal tradition, without eventually doing whatever it takes to rectify the situation, seems to me very naive. My point of view only, of course.