Does using guns on pirates reduce their numbers?

Garold

Well-Known Member
Joined
24 Jan 2010
Messages
1,319
Location
St Albans
Visit site
I just had an email forwarded to me. The contents expressed a clear opinion about carrying guns. However, my attention was drawn to the opinion of the author that it's the best (and maybe only) way to reduce piracy.

So, cut and pasted from the email...........

I would like to talk about Guns On Board. Do they allow you to keep guns on board in the Virgin Islands? I assumed that the US Virgins would (since it's a US Territory), but what about the BVI?

I've heard that most of the Windward Islands only have criminals with guns, not sailors. After all, wouldn't want any thieving criminals to get shot stealing from and beating up sailors. Did you see the article on the 60+ year old sailor half beaten to death and robbed of all electronics anchored off St. Maarten last month? Wish he would have had a gun!

This subject is a BIG reason I haven't gone to the Windward Islands yet. I have a 4 year old daughter and wife that I like to keep safe and defended. But I read that armed self defense is illegal there.

In the Bahamas, I declare my guns and ammo and keep the guns on board - no muss no fuss. Last year they asked me - politely - why I carry a 50 caliper Desert Eagle (among other guns)? I told the Bahamian Customs official that I carry that gun so that I don't have to shoot people, but rather use it to shoot engines. She looked puzzled. I explained that any boat wanting to board me at sea, gets waved off and told to meet me in port. If they persist, they get a warning shot off their bow. Push me to full on confrontation and I fill your engine with 50 caliper slugs and then your water line. Now you don't have an operable engine and you're sinking. Shoot back at me and out comes the 45 caliper UZI and Saga 12 (12 gauge shot gun, with 20 round banana clips).

I HAVE NO GUNS ON BOARD OR LEFT ON BOARD, UNLESS I'M LIVING ON BOARD. Guns are removed and locked up when we're not on board.

No one wants to get into a gun battle, not me nor most criminals. They're looking for easy prey, not a gun fight. Some how, as a typical American with lots of guns, I reject being easy prey. I know that most Europeans don't think this way. Maybe they trust their Government to protect them or haven't been robbed yet. Once you have been robbed, your attitude changes.

Interesting Article I read in the Wall Street Journal, written by a maritime attorney regarding the history of piracy:

Piracy was out of control in the 1700's, so England, France and Spain got together and authorized all merchant ships to carry arms and shot to kill pirates, no need to jail them for a trial. Piracy was pretty much wiped out!

Piracy diminished up until around 1950's when the world powers got together and outlawed guns on merchant ships, which was followed by most ports. We all know what a mistake that has been, look at Somalia. A ship with $100 million in cargo and NO self defense? What were they thinking? Now the pendulum might be swinging back to the right to defend yourself as merchant ships are now hiring armed guards. What happens to the armed guards guns when they check into St. Lucia? Will the Government Officials steal their guns too?

Given the state of the world economy, the need for self protection is going to increase, not go away.



And there you have it. One person's solution to piracy. Not sure really. But I did smile when he said that if it all escalated, he could always rely on his UZI!

Cheers

Garold
 
Sounds to much like Miami Vice to me.
Last thing we want is everyone sailing the world armed to the teeth with the intention
of shooting anyone who seems suspicious.
I do not believe to do so would deter any pirate. On a large merchant ship, well maybe, but on a yacht I dont think so
As has been said before, if you carry a gun then not only do you need to know how to use it, but you must be prepared to use it with all the consequences that may bring.
 
I fully understand his point of view and I am sure he is correct that gun protection reduces piracy, as was illustrated in the 1700's.
 
I fully understand his point of view and I am sure he is correct that gun protection reduces piracy, as was illustrated in the 1700's.

Possibly true, but that was in the 1700;s. Today's pirates have just as sophisticated weapons as the good guy.
The good guys know this because they sold them the weapons in the first place.
 
Garold's Rambo has an arsenal on board capable of over throwing a small island state, one that he will no doubt quite happily use with impunity, yet he is scared of going for a cruise in the Windward Islands........
Maybe just as well that he doesnt come down this way - if he shoots a friendly local fishing boat to smithereens as they come nearby to see if he wants to buy any lobster, thinking they are pirates then he will be ending up in the local clink.

He is probably the sort who will happily live in the roughest areas of a city like Noo Yawk, yet is petrified of the Caribbean because of a few well publicised incidents that have happened.
I have been sailing through the islands off and on over the past 30 years, and have never had any problems - it is luck of the draw, same as life in the big city.
Except I would always feel much safer anchored in a quiet bay down here than living in the rat race further north.
 
As others have pointed out, if this approach were to be taken widely, the mostly likely way to get shot will be from another boat owner, not a pirate.
Be very cautious going over on an evening to borrow cofee or invite over for a drink, as some paranoid (yank) is liable to shoot first and enquire later
 
Possibly true, but that was in the 1700;s. Today's pirates have just as sophisticated weapons as the good guy.
The good guys know this because they sold them the weapons in the first place.

Presumably the pirates of the 1700's were smart enough to understand the usefulness of the most sophistaced weapons of their day!!! So the updating of the weaponry by both the pirate and the targets cancel each other out today, just as they did in the 1700's.
 
No it doesn't. Just because you carry a gun doesn't mean the bad guys will run and hide. They won't.

I would say that guns on board are a bad idea. For a number of reasons:

1. If the bad guys think you have a gun, they will be more likely to use theirs on you. If you don't have a gun you might get a beating, if you do have a gun you'll probably be shot.

2. If you have a gun on board, or they think you have a gun on board then this may make your boat more of a target for thieves.

3. They're damn dangerous. Unless you have had proper training (more than an afternoon on a firing range) then you are much more likely to shoot yourself or somebody else than any robber.

4. It will start an arms race. The bad guys bring a pistol, you bring a pistol so then they upgrade to a machine gun. You upgrade to a machine gun, they bring along a grenade launcher.

Guns are not the answer to the problems of pirates and robbers.
 
Is there any evidence to support that theory??? Did gun use increase among pirates in the 1700's when the targets were now also armed? Why did piracy disappear that time. It appears the carrying of guns meant far less piracy, as opposed to the outcome you suggest.

And in connection with your 3rd point, how many americans have you heard of that have shot themselves or one of their crew when they intended to shoot the pirate, due to their poor gun handling skills

Did it start an arms race between pirates and americans in american waters where many boat owners are armed???

The example of the 1700's would appear to contradict your claim that guns don't solve piracy. It did solve it back then.

Out of interest, what would be your suggestion to anyone sailing near the Somalian coastline who is worried about encountering armed pirates??? Would it involve the use of arms to defend or overpower the pirates??? If not the use of arms then how would you remove the piracy?

1. If the bad guys think you have a gun, they will be more likely to use theirs on you. If you don't have a gun you might get a beating, if you do have a gun you'll probably be shot.

2. If you have a gun on board, or they think you have a gun on board then this may make your boat more of a target for thieves.

3. you are much more likely to shoot yourself or somebody else than any robber.

4. It will start an arms race. The bad guys bring a pistol, you bring a pistol so then they upgrade to a machine gun. You upgrade to a machine gun, they bring along a grenade launcher.

Guns are not the answer to the problems of pirates and robbers.
 
It's simple really. Guns and leisure boats don't mix. Anyone who thinks they need that sort of armaments is probably unhinged and not fit to have them.

I know what guns can do and how easy it is to shoot the wrong person.

The Windwards are not the Wild West.
 
Garold's Rambo has an arsenal on board capable of over throwing a small island state, one that he will no doubt quite happily use with impunity, yet he is scared of going for a cruise in the Windward Islands........
Maybe just as well that he doesnt come down this way - if he shoots a friendly local fishing boat to smithereens as they come nearby to see if he wants to buy any lobster, thinking they are pirates then he will be ending up in the local clink.

He is probably the sort who will happily live in the roughest areas of a city like Noo Yawk, yet is petrified of the Caribbean because of a few well publicised incidents that have happened.
I have been sailing through the islands off and on over the past 30 years, and have never had any problems - it is luck of the draw, same as life in the big city.
Except I would always feel much safer anchored in a quiet bay down here than living in the rat race further north.

Just because he's paranoid, doesn't mean the pirates aren't out to get him. :D
I'm with you all the way, Bajansailor. Sadly this seems to be typical American thinking. A constitution that enshrines your right to carry a weapon, rather than protecting you from weapons. We in Britain have less gun crime in our entire country than in one decent-sized American city. So who's got it right?
 
Last edited:
Peter Blake who lived in Emsworth was attacked by pirates, and as far as I understand had a gun on board, which he had when he was killed. Blake was just 53 when he was shot dead doing the job at which he excelled, skippering an ocean-going yacht. He had switched his attentions to the study and protection of the environment, and had been leading an expedition to explore the Amazon with his company, blakexpeditions, when his vessel, Seamaster, was ambushed by pirates.
At the end of the day you are dealing with desparate and un-reasonable people who don't have a lot to lose and everything to gain, and won't hesitate to use their guns if you threaten them with yours.

drmvaletingservices@o2.co.uk
 
He had switched his attentions to the study and protection of the environment, and had been leading an expedition to explore the Amazon with his company, blakexpeditions, when his vessel, Seamaster, was ambushed by pirates.
At the end of the day you are dealing with desparate and un-reasonable people who don't have a lot to lose and everything to gain, and won't hesitate to use their guns if you threaten them with yours.

drmvaletingservices@o2.co.uk

Sorry to hear about Mr Blake, but that story doesn't prove anything and you don't even appear to be sure if he was armed or not. The pirates who killed him were presumably targeting his boat whether he was armed or not. There are loads of victims of shootings who are not themselves armed, and in most cases many of them would have prefered to be armed to defend themselves if they knew they were going to be attacked by another armed individual. I know if I was going to be attacked by armed pirates I would choose to be armed myself to protect my family, as opposed to hoping they are nice pirates who won't use the guns they are carrying if I permit them onboard and show them I an unarmed. I personally know of a few people on this side of the atlantic who were were attacked by armed individuals and they were looking of acquiring a gun ilegally to defend themselves if such an occasion arose again.

It is all very well to say Americans shouldn't have guns, either the pirates/desperados etc to use in hostility or the average citizen for defense, but the situation there does mean that whether you like it or not you will be sharing a country with many armed individuals, so it is perfectly understandable to also want to arm yourself like many others do.
 
The two-month expedition was anchored off Macapá, Brazil, at the mouth of the Amazon delta, waiting to clear customs after a trip up the Amazon river. At around 9 pm a group of six to eight armed, masked robbers wearing balaclavas and crash helmets boarded the Seamaster. As one of the robbers held a gun to the head of a crewmember, Blake sprang from the cabin wielding a rifle. He shot one of the assailants in the hand before the rifle malfunctioned; he was then fatally shot in the back by assailant Ricardo Colares Tavares. The boarders injured two other crew members with knives, and the remaining seven were unhurt.
 
leaving guns on the boat

Presumably this bloke does not take his whole arsenal ashore when he leaves the boat

so for most of the time when he is in port these guns are on his boat

once they are stolen the pirates now have some pretty good firepower

tough on the next sailor who comes into the area

Dylan
 
Garold's Rambo has an arsenal on board capable of over throwing a small island state, one that he will no doubt quite happily use with impunity, yet he is scared of going for a cruise in the Windward Islands........

Bajan, just so that we are all clear.........

I had the email forwarded to me and was just amused by the polarised/extreme views of the writer.

I don't know him, and I would have some discomfort with his extreme view. So he isn't my tame Rambo. Though I'm sure that like a guard dog, he would be handy occassionally.

However, it is a good example of someone who is out there, has made his own decisions, and can explain them. Whilst Dylan makes the point about the dire consequences if his armoury falls into the wrong hands, I guess that this is true of all dangerous weapons wherever they are kept. And fast cars that may be stolen and used dangerously, and the spade in my shed.

But his email confirms to me that the stereotype fully-armed-American-cruiser, is not mythical. And it may be the case that if the pirates/thieves confront this guy first, when they meet the rest of us, they operate on a fire-first-talk-later basis. Bit frightening really.

Cheers

Garold
 
The answer is quite simple really!

There's not many pirates round Peterhead or the Moray Firth, so I don't need a gun on board.

I have held a FAC for about 45 years, though!
 
Dont carry a gun unless you're prepared to use it.

Debate that with the pirate thats pointing it at you see how far you get if you dont have one to fire back at him.

There's less gun crime in the UK than one town in the US

Maybe but the high seas are neither so that argument is a bit irrelevant

IF you want to go to places where there are pirates take a BIG gun, dont wave it FIRE IT, fire first and shoot straight - its how the UK Navy won its battles, Might is Right - every time - thats why pirates carry guns. If you are an expensive target they will go away and find another one (if you cant shoot straight that is).

Unfortunatley this piracy thing will continue until governments come to terms with it and start using up serious amounts of ammo, have a look at how the Russians coped when the pirates took one of their craft, or the French for that matter, not much of a stand off with polite conversation as far as I can see.

But for us, life is too short to keep cleaning guns, we just dont go to places where there are armed pirates, we stay around the bars of greece and meet the unarmed ones!

have a nice day
 
Top