Pirates - Again

[biltong]

BBC News - Nato warship destroys pirate boats in Somali Basin
news.bbc.co.uk

[GordMay]

'Pirate' dies as ship's guards repel attack off Somalia

A suspected pirate has been shot dead as private guards repelled an attack on a cargo ship off Somalia, in what may have been the first such incident.

Pirates have targeted the MV “Almezaan” 3 times in the past year
➥ BBC News - 'Pirate' dies as ship's guards repel attack off Somalia


'Pirate' death puts spotlight on 'guns for hire'

The death of a suspected pirate off the coast of Somalia has drawn attention to the use of armed private security contractors on board merchant vessels.

➥ BBC News - 'Pirate' death puts spotlight on 'guns for hire'

[MarkJ]

"While we understand that owners want to protect their ships, we don't agree in principle with putting armed security on ships," IMB director Capt Pottengal Mukundan told the BBC News website.
"Ships are not an ideal place for a gun battle."

What an infantile argument by a fool who has never had a gun fired at him not been taken hostage.

Of course ships are not an ideal place for a gun battle.

[fishwife]

This is old news, the reports are from the 24th March 2010

P.

[biltong]

The original BBC report refers to an incident off Tanzania on 14th May 2010

[osirissail]

Old news or not, repelling pirates by gunfire and cannons goes all the way back in naval history to its beginnings. The use of arms on freighters to defend the ship and crew is also very old and an ongoing standard practice in the small freighter business especially those that trade in 3rd World countries. Ocean Navigator magazine has published narratives about this decades ago. Nothing new.
- - Only on major large shipping (freighters and tankers) has the practice of having weapons on board been discontinued. Probably because the crews of such vessels are from 3rd World countries and normally an assortment of different countries. Each crew person operates on their own contract from the shipping company and rarely crew the same ship more than once per year. Also these ship operates will minimal crew as most of the operations are computerized or automatic. Adding a separate contingent of people trained and willing to act as a defensive force is expensive and the supply of such "security crews" has yet to develop fully.
- - I have relatives who work as crew on major very large freighters and tankers. The shipping companies are finding it very difficult to hire normal crew for any ship transiting the Red Sea/Somalia area. Because the normal crew is made up of "contract" people from the Captain on down, training them for defensive security is not an option. The same people (crew) are rarely on the same vessel twice in a year.
- - Due to the pirates the shipping companies are having to hire less and less qualified crew from more economically distressed areas of the world. Top qualified crew are just not willing to work on vessels transiting these areas and are even refusing offered "bonuses" to take the job.
- - So it seems the shipping companies are going to have to revert back to the historical methods of thwarting pirates just like the navies of the olden days did by having contingents of "Marines" assigned to vessels.

[Southern Star]

Osirissail is, of course, historically correct and the current circumstances in areas such as the coast off Somalia make a very strong case for a return to private security forces. Regardless of one's attitudes towards the rule of law and the portential for abuse by private security, the Somali government will not/cannot act and the world's navies are apparently unable to protect all shipping. In what is essentially a lawless area, can there be any real concerns about taking the law into one's own hands?

Frankly, I applaud shipping companies for taking this necessary step to protect their crew and cargoes; my only worry is whether this will cause the pirates to turn even more of their attention to passing yachts and the potential for ransom of their crews, even if the 'loot' is significantly less than what is available on commercial ships.

Regardless, if all commercial shipping was armed with 'professionals' (perhaps brought in by helicoptor for only the high-risk segments of a voyage) there can be little doubt that the risks for the pirates would increase dramatically. I would also like to think that armed and trained secuirty forces on these commercial ships might respond to distress calls and assist nearby private yachts who were under attack; afterall, it is a part of the tradition of the sea and a way for commercial shipping to rid the area of pirates who may target their own vessels in the future.

Brad

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

... Of course ships are not an ideal place for a gun battle.

What an infantile argument statement/remark, by a fool who has never had a gun fired at him, and not been taken hostage.

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by GordMay

What an infantile argument statement/remark, by a fool who has never had a gun fired at him, and not been taken hostage.

Thanks Gord. Its always better to use proper grammar when defending one deck from Pirates I shall be better primed next time.

[Bash]

...where?

[sabray]

Well Bash The chesapeake for one place.
Last weekend I was minding my own rants and sails. Along comes a smaller impoverished looking vessel. Thinks me what now is this coming up in such a rush. looking upward I see I kid you not the Jolley Rodger. I pull into the wind and crank the winches behaving like I was making haste. Soon the triton is abeam but Ive got the weather. As I load my guns and ignite the cocktails I see the scoundrels Not but a few days beyond my own sons age. Think I Die scrurrvey genes and We bestow them with all we got. As they should expect flying such a flag. Later in the interogation room we discovered that Americans like flying these flags for fun. Haaahaaaa oops its act like a pirate day. Damn my soap just fell off the rope arghhh

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by Bash

and an ideal place for a gun battle would be... ...where?

The OK Coral was good on a small scale.

Flanders in France in WW1 - I think more than 1 million soldiers died there including 700,000 in the Battle of Passchendaele. Does that make it ideal?

Man has made many places ideal for a gun battle. I wonder if it's because we are intelligent? We are more resourceful than apes, more creative, more industrially talented and here we see how useful it is not being an ape. We kill each other far better, in more different ways, in more places than apes have even thought of.

Man is great!!

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

We kill each other far better, in more different ways, in more places than apes have even thought of.

Man is great!!

That's because no matter what we say about living in peace, we somehow like war and spend a great amount of resources to ensure we can do it well!

[Get-a-Life]

"Ships are not an ideal place for a gun battle"

I actually thought the destroyer I served on during the Malayan Emergency in The Straits of Malacca against insurgents was an ideal place to have a gun battle from.

A 40mm cannon beats an AK47 anytime.

[fishwife]

BBC News - Somalia criticises US for putting pirate on trial

I'm almost speechless.

P.