Once upon a time (Robin Hood days or so), the right to hunt deer would not have existed in England because the deer would have, by law, belonged to the Crown. I don’t know when that changed. I don’t ever recall hearing in history class that the kings of England asserting ownership or reserving the right the hunt the deer in North America. I did learn in the last years that the swans on the Thames River (at least) belong solely to the Crown, and the Crown isn’t the government, which is why the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man are tax havens.
Supposedly that’s why the English bowmen were the best; they were allowed to—expected to—have their bows at home and practice everyday, which they did, so much so that when they raised the “Mary Rose” archeologist could identify the archers by the kink in their spines. And longbows were armor piercing.
Once upon a time (Robin Hood days or so), the right to hunt deer would not have existed in England because the deer would have, by law, belonged to the Crown. I don’t know when that changed. I don’t ever recall hearing in history class that the kings of England asserting ownership or reserving the right the hunt the deer in North America. I did learn in the last years that the swans on the Thames River (at least) belong solely to the Crown, and the Crown isn’t the government, which is why the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man are tax havens.
The thing is that even 230 years ago governments understood the value of gun control.
Supposedly that’s why the English bowmen were the best; they were allowed to—expected to—have their bows at home and practice everyday, which they did, so much so that when they raised the “Mary Rose” archeologist could identify the archers by the kink in their spines. And longbows were armor piercing.