Bart Senior wrote:
An interesting bit of history.


It is interesting. I'd actually seen this before, but I don't know if
any of the Founding Fathers knew about it. Remember, they didn't even
have encyclopedias, much less the internet. Knowledge was much harder to
come by and the Puckle Gun would have been an obscure footnote.

They certainly would have known about other improvements in gun
technology, and IMHO the 2nd Amendment is intended both as law and as a
statement of principle. Times change but the principle doesn't; one
wonders why they didn't restrict citizens from owning spring guns,
barrel guns, grenades, or cannons, if they would have wanted to restrict
ownership of machine guns. Instead they wrote a quite simple and plain
sentence: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of
a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not
be infringed."


One weapon, intended for use against Christian enemies, fired
conventional round bullets, while the second variant, designed
to be used against the Muslim Turks, fired square bullets,
which were believed to cause more severe and painful wounds
than spherical projectiles.

I think the square bullets were for non-Protestants, not just Turks.
Maybe not, remember that in 1718 the Turks siege of Vienna was pretty
recent and fear of the Turks (more precisely, the Ottomans and their
Jannissaries) was as or more prevalent as fear of terrorists today. The
Turks had the most advanced land artillery of the times.

I also wonder what type of lobbying effort Puckle undertook.

Regards
Doug King