UK Navy captures Somali pirates

[Sandyman]

Leave it - good news doesn't sell.
MANW PAO only gets questions when there are rumours we've killed some pirates.

And the average forumite on here only remembers 2 stories about the navy: the Chandlers & the RIB in Iran.

I must be above average then

I wont mention the Chandlers. As to the Cornwall's RIB........I blame the WAFU's

You are of course right Guapa, good news does not sell. Far better giving civvis the mushroom
treatment.

 

[Koeketiene]

It will be interesting to see how the newly armed merchantmen perform. Having met a few ex service personnel who have done work overseas in a private capacity, I doubt they will show as much restraint if attacked.

To all intents and purposes, having armed security teams on board has soured the milk. No ship with one of these teams on board has ever been pirated.
The practise has become more prevalent over the last 18 months.
This combined with an increasingly 'robust posture' of the naval forces in the area has made a significant impact.

In 2010, we 'lost' 14 ships to Somali pirates - in 2011 we only 'lost' 4. Only a handful of ships are currently being held in Somalia. The number of hostages held has been more than halved in the last year.

The tide has turned. We may well still be there for a while, but the final outcome is no longer in doubt.

 

[Sandyman]

I have no criticism whatsoever for the navy or the crews or the work they do. It's the rules of engagement which are beyond their control which seem to be the problem in many cases.

It will be interesting to see how the newly armed merchantmen perform. Having met a few ex service personnel who have done work overseas in a private capacity, I doubt they will show as much restraint if attacked.

They will still be under such rules. There purpose is as a deterrent. Whatever action they do take you will never hear about. Control of the release of info will still be under MOD control.

Wanna job

 

[Reverend Ludd]

To all intents and purposes, having armed security teams on board has soured the milk. No ship with one of these teams on board has ever been pirated.
The practise has become more prevalent over the last 18 months.
This combined with an increasingly 'robust posture' of the naval forces in the area has made a significant impact.

In 2010, we 'lost' 14 ships to Somali pirates - in 2011 we only 'lost' 4. Only a handful of ships are currently being held in Somalia. The number of hostages held has been more than halved in the last year.

The tide has turned. We may well still be there for a while, but the final outcome is no longer in doubt.

It seems that if your vessel has weapons onboard and you are prepared to use them you will deter attack. That's how I read it anyway. that makes perfect sense to me.

So why is it when you propose arming yourself on a yacht or indeed a house does everyone start screaming that you will attract trouble.

 

[Baggywrinkle]

It seems that if your vessel has weapons onboard and you are prepared to use them you will deter attack. That's how I read it anyway. that makes perfect sense to me.

So why is it when you propose arming yourself on a yacht or indeed a house does everyone start screaming that you will attract trouble.

I'm sorry, I don't see many parallels at all.

Pirates in small skiffs approaching a large ship with a 'professional' security team on board. Not only do the pirates have to get close, they have to get on board and overcome the security personel and the crew. In an open ocean, in a skiff they are quite vulnerable. Come under effective enemy fire and they're not going to want to hang around, let alone go for an assault, the odds are 100% in favour of the ship, and the pirates can't afford the investment required to significantly change this.

From the ships point of view there will be a 24hr lookout and a set of operating procedures for engaging pirates. This is all about deterance and denying them a payoff. The ship is going to carry on to it's port and security team shouldn't waste more ammo than necessary to protect the ship. It's a business decision, and it's better that the pirates live and learn than having to continually teach the replacements.

On to arming householders .....

One thing our criminal justice system is excellent at is educating criminals. Every time the make a mistake, they go inside for a refresher course. If only industry had the same system.

As changes happen due to technology or behavioural changes brought in to reduce crime, so the criminals adapt over time to find ways of countering the changes, or to find new ways of stealing or ripping people off. They don't throw their arms in the air and give up.

If homeowners start using firearms to ensure their safety, then initially a few really dumb criminals are going to get shot, but the rest will learn. They too will start carrying firearms to ensure their own safety. They are certainly not going to stop thieving. Who knows what they're chosen modus operandi for dealing with armed householders will be? Stealth and first strike to neutralise the occupants?, one gang member on point duty covering the bedrooms? hostage taking?

The days of the single cat burglar may be numbered but the crime will not go away, and the stakes will be much higher for all involved.

I would thoroughly recommend paintballing, laserquest, trying out an online first person shooter game or joining the TA and doing some FIBUA training. It will become rapidly apparent that the survival of any single participant can only be assured if they don't play in the first place. It takes a well trained armed team to guarantee clearing a house of opponents, and casualties are expected. Try doing the same thing alone and it's a lottery with long odds.

These people don't make appointments, they sneak in, they will come in groups, and they will have a strategy for dealing with armed occupants. The stakes are raised and the likelihood of it all going pear shaped are very high.

I'd really rather not relax the gun laws.