British to Allow Armed Guards to Combat Sea Piracy

[KRonn]

I don't advocate just letting the crews carry weapons to provide ship security, and certainly not without any training. I'm assuming that trained armed guards will be the security, and not the crews. They'll have rules of engagement, and operate within those rules just like a military/police force. In fact, maybe some actual military, marines/sailors, could be aboard some ships, at least in some cases. Convoy ships during wartime used military personnel to man weapons, I believe.

[Ed Anger]

They have buggery training.

[Martinus]

What good are armed guards against pirates with RPGs? 

Depends how much you get on the initiative roll.

[Martinus]

Ships firing on each other was usually a good pretext for a war.

[grumbler]

I think you can tell pirates from fishermen well before they actually get aboard your ship--if nothing else, the point at which they point weapons at you vessel and demand that you allow them to board should be a clue that they aren't just fishermen.

Good luck trusting your life to that being the scenario.  I don't think you will be able to tell the pirates until they are coming over your rail.

And are the pirates really well trained?  Experienced, maybe, but being experienced at intimidating and shooting unarmed people doesn't exactly equate to well-trained.

Dunno.  Ask the person who said they were well-trained if that is what he/she actually meant. 

I said 'trained," and the person who has shot someone (even if that person was not armed) is a lot better-trained to shoot another person than someone with identical experience short of actually shooting someone.

[grumbler]

I don't advocate just letting the crews carry weapons to provide ship security, and certainly not without any training. I'm assuming that trained armed guards will be the security, and not the crews. They'll have rules of engagement, and operate within those rules just like a military/police force. In fact, maybe some actual military, marines/sailors, could be aboard some ships, at least in some cases. Convoy ships during wartime used military personnel to man weapons, I believe.

Exactly the point I was making.  Crews could be armed, and the shipowners could take responsibility for that (or not, leaving the captains on the hook), but ad hoc methods are not going to work all that well.

[Berkut]

I would think you would want trained guards, but hopefully with some skills that are useful otherwise. Kind of a lot of standing around doing nothing otherwise.

[grumbler]

I would think you would want trained guards, but hopefully with some skills that are useful otherwise. Kind of a lot of standing around doing nothing otherwise.

But you only need them when transiting a small area.  You don't need them for the whole voyage, so they could be dropped off on, and picked up from, ships entering and leaving the danger zone.  Better to have the pros at violence specialize in the violence, rather than the part-time deck ape or snipe. 

[jimmy olsen]

It's not just the matter of the captain choosing between getting fired or getting taken hostage.  If the captain allows crewmembers to bring weapons aboard, and they then use those weapons to hose down some "fishing vessal" because it gets close enough to make them fear it is full of pirates (who are identical in appearance to fishermen, by and large) then he gets fired and goes to prison for murder.

Pirates don't fly the jolly roger any more.  Defending against them while also not assaulting or murdering innocents takes more than a Hollywood script.  It takes training.

Once they are aboard, of course, telling pirates from fishermen is pretty easy, but then you have untrained guys with guns going up against trained guys with guns, and Siege can tell you how that scenario plays out.

Are you assuming the Captain ordered his men to open fire in the first scenario, or would he be responsible if they opened fire on their own?

I was under the impression that Somalia militiamen and pirates weren't actually trained. Am I incorrect?

[Ideologue]

I dunno about murder.  He'd probably get fired, but fear of piracy may constitute a pretty reasonable apprehension.

[Duque de Bragança]

I think you can tell pirates from fishermen well before they actually get aboard your ship--if nothing else, the point at which they point weapons at you vessel and demand that you allow them to board should be a clue that they aren't just fishermen.

Good luck trusting your life to that being the scenario.  I don't think you will be able to tell the pirates until they are coming over your rail.

And are the pirates really well trained?  Experienced, maybe, but being experienced at intimidating and shooting unarmed people doesn't exactly equate to well-trained.

Dunno.  Ask the person who said they were well-trained if that is what he/she actually meant. 

I said 'trained," and the person who has shot someone (even if that person was not armed) is a lot better-trained to shoot another person than someone with identical experience short of actually shooting someone.

Regarding the training of pirates and being able to tell from a distance, this incident comes to mind

http://www.eunavfor.eu/2010/04/pirates-attack-french-military-replenishment-ship-somme-–-6-pirates-captured/

During the night of 19th April 2010, 400 nautical miles from the coast of Somalia, French replenishment ship SOMME came under attack from two skiffs with six pirates on board.

FS SOMME had been engaged in a support mission for the EU NAVFOR anti piracy operation Atalanta, replenishing her supplies, when she was attacked during the night of 19th April 2010.  The pirates, mistaking the SOMME's silhouette for that of a merchant vessel, opened fire on the French ship.  FS SOMME responded with warning shots, causing the two pirate skiffs to flee.  During their flight the two pirate skiffs were separated.

Whilst chasing one of the skiffs, FS SOMME detected another boat which turned out to be the pirate mother ship, the vessel which controls and resupplies the pirate skiffs. The mother ship was captured less than half an hour later with two pirates on board, and her fuel and pirate paraphanalia (weapons and grappling lines) were seized.  The mother ship was destroyed and sank.

FS SOMME then gave chase to the skiff which was apprehended with a further 4 pirates on board. The skiff and the six pirates to now being held on board FS SOMME.
Note: FS SOMME was also attacked by pirates on 7 October 2009.  The ship's company then intercepted 5 pirates and their skiff.

EU NAVFOR Somalia – Operation ATALANTA's main tasks are to escort merchant vessels carrying humanitarian aid of the 'World Food Program' (WFP) and vessels of 'African Union Mission for Somalia' AMISOM, and to protect vulnerable ships in the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean and to deter and disrupt piracy.  EUNAVFOR also monitors fishing activity off the coast of Somalia.

To see a video on the attack of FS Somme, click on the link  http://www.corlobe.tk/article19242.html

http://www.lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2010/04/21/des-pirates-somaliens-attaquent-par-erreur-un-navire-de-guerre-francais_1340874_3212.html

http://www.rfi.fr/actuen/articles/118/article_5411.asp

Quick sum-up :

A French warship (support) got attacked TWICE in 2009 and 20010 by pirates who fled when they realized the opposition they were facing. Some were caught, be it on the spot or by following them to the mother ship.
The French ship looks like a civilian ship though.

Of course, Somali pirates might have learned since that 2010 incident.

Bonus : "Have your say"-like comments from the bobo suscribers of Lemonde.fr

As you can see, mistakes are possible, from both sides.

[KRonn]

Good going FS Somme. Maybe the navies patrolling that area should disguise a few ships as merchantmen, lure in some pirates.       I say it partly in jest but I wonder if some ships are being set up that way, or merchant ships being used by a navy with armed crews and some heavy weapons and helos aboard hidden.

[grumbler]

I dunno about murder.  He'd probably get fired, but fear of piracy may constitute a pretty reasonable apprehension.

I don't think people understand how ships work, fishing boats work, and the law of the sea works.

Fishing boats are often all around ships in transit, where the waters have fish.  Fishing boats maneuver at will, fairly randomly, seldom have radars, and in fact seldom even know that merchant ships are present at night, unless close enough to see their lights.  On the transiting merchant, your concern is to not actually hit any of them while also not getting off course too much.  Close passages are very common. If the small vessel is pirate-controlled, it will launch a coupla small craft that will sneak alongside the merchant and send pirates over the rail.

If a crew starts to shoot up every fishing vessel that gets close enough to threaten them if the vessel were to be a pirate (and pirates use the same fishing vessels the fishermen do), the captain is going to be charged with murder if someone gets killed.  The old "he was black so I was scared of him so I shot him" defense just won't fly.  Pretty much the only way to know you are under attack before you get guys over the rail is to keep a watch out for the launch of the small boats.  That is going to take more people than the crew normally has, which is why i think a rotating guard is better than training the crew or adding a small number of multipurpose guys for the whole voyage.

[Richard Hakluyt]

This BBC article has some additional information :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15510467

Notably :

"But armed guards would only be permitted while passing through dangerous waters, such as the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden"

and

"Mr Cook said many armed guards were former Royal Navy and Royal Marines personnel, and he added: "With the current redundancies it has provided them with an ideal place to go."

..........which would appear to agree with grumbler. Rightly or wrongly (IMO rightly) the British are not generally in favour of issuing arms to untrained people, believing it will simply increase the number of deaths and general carnage.

[grumbler]

This BBC article has some additional information :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15510467

Notably :

"But armed guards would only be permitted while passing through dangerous waters, such as the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden"

and

"Mr Cook said many armed guards were former Royal Navy and Royal Marines personnel, and he added: "With the current redundancies it has provided them with an ideal place to go."

..........which would appear to agree with grumbler. Rightly or wrongly (IMO rightly) the British are not generally in favour of issuing arms to untrained people, believing it will simply increase the number of deaths and general carnage.

If the BBC agrees with me, then I have to seriously reconsider my position!