« Article on the militia and communitarianism | Main | John Lott on "gun show loophole" »
British turning to crossbows for self-defense
Here's the story.
"Could we be seeing the first signs of a militant middle class which has had enough and is beginning to arm itself? Perhaps.
For those who cling to the notion that an Englishman's home is his castle, a new weapon will soon be available to help deter intruders. Designed by BowTech in Oregon, USA, the Stryker (left) will be on sale in Europe by mid-January."
Look forward to a drive to ban crossbows. Well, not the first over there. Henry VIII tried it, too, in order to force everyone to train with longbows.
· non-US
5 Comments | Leave a comment
Actually, it was not so much as that the cross bow could bring down a knight because a long bow could also as much as a long bow could be fired and "re-loaded" much faster. Also to be honest it was not the height of technology and so could be made much cheaper.
The long bow had a greater range and could be fired faster than a crossbow.
A crossbowman could be trained to be effective much more quickly than the years of training it took to become a good longbowman.
And actually a good yew longbow was much more expensive than a crossbow. The longbows which Henry V's longbowmen used at Agincourt were made by professionals using yew staves cut in Spain and Portugal, carefully aged and selected. Some of them, still stored in the Tower of London, are still usable!
And Henry VIII was only one monarch over a 200 year span who tried to get his subjects to practice with the longbow. It bothered Edward III before Crecy (1346) and bothered James 1 of Great Britain when he became King in 1603!.
James tried to ban golf....
That 175 lb draw compound crossbow could dish out some serious hurt!
I'll simply stick to my H&K 45 and my 870 wing master.
I believe the problem Henry had with crossbows is that a relatively unskilled peasant could take down an armored knight.
Things never change.