Ever wanted to trot 15 hands high? Give today's deal a thumbs-up: $45 gets you two private hour-long horseback riding lessons ...
RT @Beautydotcom: @examinercom thanks for coming backstage @Lela_Rose! Great to see you! #nyfw
MTV, BET schedule specials, tributes for Whitney Houston t.co/wA9R899Z
Grammys 2012: CBS show host LL Cool J talks changes for Whitney Houston tribute t.co/tkdy8foI
Examiner.com is the inside source for everything local. We are powered by Examiners, the largest pool of passionate contributors in the world.
Examiners provide unique and original content to enhance life in your local city wherever that may be. Examiners come from all walks of life and contribute original content to entertain, inform, and inspire.
Comments
Restrictions on gun ownership are unconstitutional to begin with, and I wouldn't trust the UN as far as I can throw them.
you dont know what you are talking abot
And we're supposed to believe that the Maersk Alabama just happened to cruise by Somalia and 'pirates' tried to attack the same ship?
How many of these ships have been outiftted to be like the 'raiders' of WWII that the Germans sent on the high seas?
The raiders looked like cargo ships until an enemy flagged vessel approached, then they dropped the disguise and started shelling away.
Was the Alabama dropping some more toxic waste into the sea off Somalia's coast, like thousands of other ships have?
I imagine Somalians don't care for people's toxic slop and radioactive waste dropped into their front yard.
typical ethnocentric crap! Lets plunder their fish, dump our toxic waste on their shores, shoot em up if they dare to resist, dismiss their complaints and to top it off ... lets blame their misfortune on them! The piracy issue is caused by many factors that your simple mind can not appreciate, even the failed state argument implicates the same countries sending their armadas to Somalia. What's at stake here is more than just a "few dead pirates" so please educate yourdelf before you spew your ignorance.
American prisons are full of people who are convinced they are the victims. The true difference between a victim and a thug is that thugs justify using violence against others who have done nothing to them, because somebody who looks like the victim allegedly did something to you before. Now THAT’s ethnocentric crap!
I believe that toxic waste story is a fiction aimed at somehow justifying piracy and kidnapping. Where is the proof? I'm not going to take a pirate's word for anything. Nor would I take the word of defenders of piracy.
.
The UN statement was "The concern is that bringing guns aboard ship will encourage violence." Actually being defenseless is what encourages violence. I think that their concern is actually that the violence would be directed at the pirates and that it would demonstrate that firearms in private hands can be useful in self-defense. If crews were armed, it is unlikely that they would be attacked--no violence...
.
If the pirates attack a ship, what's wrong with killing them? Treat them like the vermin they are. I think that every crew member with a clean criminal record and some minimal training should have the option of being armed. I would rather bet my life on my ability to defend myself than to be taken hostage.
I have no problem with defending one's country against dumping toxic sludge and predatory fishing, but where's the proof? Was Maersk doing either?
Greg Bacon writes:
"I imagine Somalians don't care for people's toxic slop and radioactive waste dropped into their front yard."
They surely seem to be attracted to the takings of piracy and luxury cars though! :)
Typical criminals using the "I steal because I'm just" argument.
Prisons are full of them, and rightly so!
There is only one way to deal with pirates - Not To Take Prisoners!
KILL @@@@S and feed them to fish
1 of the commenters here mentioned having no problem with crewmembers being armed if they are trained and have no criminal record. You know if someones got a criminal record so what. After a person has completed his sentence then its over. It is moraly wrong to deny such a person the best option for self defense based on a past conviction. Especially if said conviction is of the non violent type. There are so many rules and restrictions in this world. Most aren't worth a damn anyway and as to this subject all such a restriction would do is to decrease the risk to the armed pirates. Lower volume of return fire from the targeted ship. Why fear someone with a criminal record? U.S. citizens have such a rules rules, laws and more laws mindset. Well guess what? They don't change a thing for the better and are tools of oppression.
C. Bruce Richardson Jr. - there's plenty of proof of the toxic waste dumping although the powers that be don't want you to know. Environmentalists/scientists did go to investigate after containers of toxic waste washed up on the Somali coast after the tsumami and hundreds of ppl fell ill.. as usual they claim the place is too unstable 4 us to study it etc.... and the dumping continues.
I am not claiming that ALL pirates are in it for the greater good of their country.. but we must admit that it initially started as a form of self defence.
Don't believe me .. just ask the Kenyans how their fishermen have benefitted now that the Somali pirates have scared away all those asians who have been stealing Africa's marine resources. google: Channel 4 + the benefits of Somalia's pirates
who said you could save everyone Zainab?
If given the choice while working aboard a merchant ship, I personally would go armed. I'd have a holstered sidearm on me almost everywhere I went, and a suitable rifle somewhere aboard ship. However, I would also accept that the chances of success for armed merchant sailors repelling a force of pirates is going to depend almost exclusively upon whether ya catch 'em in the water or only after they get aboard.
If the pirates make it aboard, then I suspect only a hardened SOF team is gonna repel 'em. Catch 'em in the water, and it's almost like shooting fish in a barrel--albeit fish that can shoot back.
There's probably a market for some techie nerd to figure out a way to detect the presence of human intruders with a blade held in their teeth scaling the cargo nets or grappling hooks being thrown over the topsides.
Howard will probably brand me a sycophant for Sarah Brady over this, but here goes.
I have concerns and doubts over how effective armed crews aboard ships can really ever hope to be. There's a world of difference between merchant sailors picking up arms [even if they are graduates of LFI-IV] and a dedicated armed vessel protection detachment. The former is fairly cheap and perhaps not optimally effective while the latter has proven to be very effective though likely not cheap.
The illegal fishing and waste dumping which has contributed to piracy in Somalia isn't mythology.
tinyurl.com/yhx394a
Ken: The issues reported here don’t cover the truth or fiction of environmental concerns. I address the victims and the attackers, what happened and why.
The url you mentioned discusses “much irregular fishing from European and Asian countries” and “European and Asian companies are dumping toxic and nuclear waste off the Somali coastline.”
This gives the lie to the idea that the pirates are environmental activists. They attacked the non-perp American cargo ship Maersk for ransom money. And the British couple hijacked in their private yacht? $7M ransom.
Criminals often justify their violence by blaming others’ actions and claiming THEY are the victims. That’s the difference between criminals and reasonable people.
Also in the referenced articles: The Maersk has a security team comprised of ex-military personnel. Considering the situation in that area, hiring professionals is a worthwhile investment. This is a combat situation, not weekend target practice for working folk.
Colleagues? Pirates have COLLEAGUES???! Wouldn't 'henchmen' be more appropriate?
Kudos to the armed security team aboard Maersk Alabama. May your aim always be true.
Although I don't condemn anyone for defending themselves against pirates, the result of this is going to be pirates getting a bit more sophisticated and aggressive.
Even if 1-in-10 ships were to start getting hijacked, it's still more cost-effective to pay ransom than it is to have enough armed security forces on all these ships, as well as pay the added insurance for having the teams.
From a purely actuarial point of view, it makes no sense to go with armed guards. Makes for a dramatic headline and possibly movie of the week, but it's a bad business idea for the industry as a whole.
USS Iowa off the coast of Somalia! "See that big ship out there? Everytime some of your countrymen take a ship hostage we use one of your towns for target practice! We'll keep it up until either your people stop or there's nothing left to shoot at!" Or option two; Diego Garcias' not that far away, just carpet bomb the whole damn place out of existance.
Considering the USS Iowa was decommissioned in 1990 and is currently moored up some muddy channel in the San Francisco Bay then threatening the pirates might only cause death by laughter. Also most prtates, except for the era of the privateers in the 17th and 18th centuries, were fisherman hoping to get the boodle from sunken ships before they were sunk. Caesar was kidnapped by pirates and he described them as scum but mainly as fisherman who when he returned were given the choice to de executed or become farmers.
So...Sean: Do you have some data to back up your claim that it's more cost-effective to pay ransom? And why didn't the US just do that with the Barbary pirates.
How many trips with a security team will $3.5M buy?
And your logic that armed cargo ships will only "increase the violence." Do you have some data to back up that claim? So far, the only thing documented to increase the violence is to disarm and be prey, which encourages more predation.
Remember that cargo ships carry products you buy. Business expenses get passed on as higher prices. That means that YOU pay the ransom. Do you like being robbed? If so, that kind of undercuts your credibility, don't you think?
Much of the Times article covers events from the pirates’ "perspective."
Professional courtesy...
Mr, Bacon,
I suspect that the Alabama was engaged in commerce unrelated to illegal dumping and fishing operations in Somali waters until proven so. Thus, your comment is irrelevant.
If you were traveling in one of the more dangerous places on our planet and kidnapped, would you excuse your captors because some of your countrymen had committed misdeads in their country? I personally wouldn't hold it against you if you hired armed bodyguards or armed yourself to discourage crims. Especially concealed arms, to create a "public good".
Crime is crime. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Howard,
I wasn't asserting the pirates were environmental activists. However, only the daft would ignore the cause and effect relationship between illegal dumping/fishing and piracy in Somalia. To be sure, there are other factors such as the lack of any effective government and the clan-based Somali society. Good luck changing that what with the War in Afghanistan now in it's ninth year.
It is the only effective deterrent to piracy for merchant vessels, but it remains to be seen for how long armed detachments aboard merchant vessels is cost effective.
Quoting Johann Hari from the Independent in January 2009, "Did we expect starving Somalians to stand passively on their beaches, paddling in our toxic waste, and watch us snatch their fish to eat in restaurants in London and Paris and Rome?"
tinyurl.com/9h7cq9
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!