History, know it or repeat it
In 1346 A.D. at the battle of Crecy in Northern France, The English army defeated an army more than three times it size. The French army had chased the invading English back towards the coastline of Normandy. Before the French committed their armored calvary to the batttle they sent their 5000 mercenary crossbowmen to the front to "soften" the English up a little.
Before the crossbowmen got into range they fell prey to the arrows from 6000 English long bows. The crossbowmen were decimated. Shortly afterwards the armored French calvary attacked only to meet the same fate. It is estimated that 50,000 deadly arrows fell every minute during peak "action". It is also estimated that over 1500 armed and armored French Knights died on that battlefield. The point of this little history lesson isn't that long bows are superior to crossbows. That argument still has adamant adherants to both sides. The point is, the reason the English won is because of the bowmen. English lords were expected to keep their subjects stocked with bows, arrows, strings and quivers so the people could stay in practice. Bowmen were paid 3 times what infantry were paid and sometimes got to ride ponies instead of walking. The French, having had several peasant rebellions were leery of arming the lower classes. Instead they invested heavily in the aristocratic armored calvary (Knights). Unfortunately for them the armed masses of the English is what defeated them at Crecy and again in 1415 at Agincourt.
Our (USAs') founding fathers seemed to understand that, thus the second ammendment to the constitution. As late as 1903 congress and President Theodore Roosevelt understood that it was in the nations best interest to have a large body of the population thoroughly trained in the use of firearms, thus they authorized the "National Matches" a firearms competition held annually open to civilian and military shooters. Remember Teddy fought in the Spanish-American War and saw how the masses, enlistees of the day, handled firearms.
It is sad that congress and other of our nations leaders have forgotten the importance of having an armed and skilled populace.
If only al-Quaida or some other terrorist group could be brought to justice at the hands (and arms) of "Armed Citizens" like my fellow THR members. But, unlike congress, they are too well informed to make such a grave mistake. Obviously, merely defending your home, family and or place of business (see "Don't rob Joe's pawnshop in Oklahoma" this forum Sat.2-24-2007) isn't a good enough reason for us, the simple masses, to keep arms and stay proficient in their use.
Be vigilant,
Wheeler44
p.s I'm sorry if this post is too long or too far off thread.
In 1346 A.D. at the battle of Crecy in Northern France, The English army defeated an army more than three times it size. The French army had chased the invading English back towards the coastline of Normandy. Before the French committed their armored calvary to the batttle they sent their 5000 mercenary crossbowmen to the front to "soften" the English up a little.
Before the crossbowmen got into range they fell prey to the arrows from 6000 English long bows. The crossbowmen were decimated. Shortly afterwards the armored French calvary attacked only to meet the same fate. It is estimated that 50,000 deadly arrows fell every minute during peak "action". It is also estimated that over 1500 armed and armored French Knights died on that battlefield. The point of this little history lesson isn't that long bows are superior to crossbows. That argument still has adamant adherants to both sides. The point is, the reason the English won is because of the bowmen. English lords were expected to keep their subjects stocked with bows, arrows, strings and quivers so the people could stay in practice. Bowmen were paid 3 times what infantry were paid and sometimes got to ride ponies instead of walking. The French, having had several peasant rebellions were leery of arming the lower classes. Instead they invested heavily in the aristocratic armored calvary (Knights). Unfortunately for them the armed masses of the English is what defeated them at Crecy and again in 1415 at Agincourt.
Our (USAs') founding fathers seemed to understand that, thus the second ammendment to the constitution. As late as 1903 congress and President Theodore Roosevelt understood that it was in the nations best interest to have a large body of the population thoroughly trained in the use of firearms, thus they authorized the "National Matches" a firearms competition held annually open to civilian and military shooters. Remember Teddy fought in the Spanish-American War and saw how the masses, enlistees of the day, handled firearms.
It is sad that congress and other of our nations leaders have forgotten the importance of having an armed and skilled populace.
If only al-Quaida or some other terrorist group could be brought to justice at the hands (and arms) of "Armed Citizens" like my fellow THR members. But, unlike congress, they are too well informed to make such a grave mistake. Obviously, merely defending your home, family and or place of business (see "Don't rob Joe's pawnshop in Oklahoma" this forum Sat.2-24-2007) isn't a good enough reason for us, the simple masses, to keep arms and stay proficient in their use.
Be vigilant,
Wheeler44
p.s I'm sorry if this post is too long or too far off thread.
Last edited:
