Was “crossbow control” ever a hot button issue like gun control is in the US today? Was there ever a historical weapon that caused such division?

by KantFromKambridge
kmondschein

There was absolutely weapons control. I'll give you a quick excerpt from my article with Oliver Dupuis, “Fencing, Martial Sport, and Urban Culture in Early Modern Germany: The Case of Strasbourg” in the Journal of Medieval Military History 16 (2019), pp. 237–258:

The bearing of weapons in medieval and early sixteenth century Strasbourg,especially by the lower orders of manual laborers (Dienstknechten, day-laborers, orknechten, servants), was tightly regulated both in the name of public safety and becausecarrying sidearms was an important social marker. Prohibitions against workmen andstrangers carrying weapons were reiterated many times, and innkeepers were requiredto hold the weapons of foreigners lodging there for the duration of their stays.

A regulation of 1510, preserved likely because it was in Sebastian Brandt’s hand, specified

that no one should carry non-customary weapons; only citizens could carry weapons at

night; furthermore, it was forbidden to wear bladed weapons at marriages, to dance, and

where there are women present. Valets and workmen were restricted from participation

in the culture of arms in other ways, as well: they were forbidden from participating in

military expeditions, and an ordinance of 1519 charged that workmen were not to formbands and fight in groups. Cases of wounds by bladed weapons were considered serious

enough that they had to tried by the Council.

The types of weapons were regulated, as well. It was forbidden to carry weapons

other than the “customary” ones. What “custom” dictated changed, however: in the

early fifteenth century, knives had to be a handspan or less, but a regulation of 1501

specifies that the langes messer could be as long as an ellen or aune (forearm-length), or

.5395 meters. That weapon, the use of which was shown in contemporary Fechtbücher

(“fight books,” written records of martial-arts teachings), was essentially a machete,

differing from a falchion only in that the handle was constructed with scales and rivets

and not a peened tang through a pommel.

On the other hand, sales of arms were not restricted: a regulation of 1525 specifies that commerce in bladed weapons of all sorts had been allowed since time immemorial.

Firearms were, interestingly, less regulated than were white arms, though we can find

regulations on range safety and on competitions mentioned as far back as the fifteenth

century (for instance, the council forbade playing dice during the shooting competition that closed the fair in 1454). In fact, the only decrees regulating firearms use that the

present authors can find are two Imperial prohibitions against certain types of firearms

and repeated warnings not to discharge weapons inside or within a league of the city (one late fifteenth-century example specifies this is so as not to frighten pregnant women). Since Strasbourg was located in wetlands, the many water birds must have presented tempting targets for those on their way to the target range outside the walls.

Various_Buyer1970

In a way as they were but for very different reasons. A previous thread discusses the Vaticans ban on crossbow use by Christians against Christians which did have some support primarily because crossbows significantly increased the risk to armored troops (ie the nobility). However it’s not really analogous to modern firearm usage as crossbows were weapons of war to be used by militaries and we’re not obtainable or desired by the average person. A more analogous comparison might be the international treaties banning the usage of chemical weapons.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3iityp/ive_heard_that_one_of_the_popes_issued_a_ban_on/