Dealing with pirates

Discussion in 'All Things Boats & Boating' started by dave L, Nov 22, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mackid068
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 857
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: CT, USA

    mackid068 Semi-Newbie Posts Often

    No they won't, but a well placed flare shot can kill or cause fire/explosion and is 100% legal to have on you.
     
  2. Wynand N
    Joined: Oct 2004
    Posts: 1,260
    Likes: 148, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 1806
    Location: South Africa

    Wynand N Retired Steelboatbuilder

    Fair enough, I'll buy that.
     
  3. tom28571
    Joined: Dec 2001
    Posts: 2,474
    Likes: 116, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1728
    Location: Oriental, NC

    tom28571 Senior Member


    Damm, Sean,

    Now you done gone and pissed me off. You may not have meant this to offend but, believe me, it did. It is just the kind of crap we don't need. I can usually take your wandering jibes as humor but this kind of blanket diatribe angries up my blood.

    We do have our sins to answer for south of the border but I am still proud to be an American and there are surely lots of others glad to get in. I've traveled the entire breadth of your country and like Canadians also, even if a lot of them don't like each other.

    The surest way to avoid criticism is to do nothing or pretend problems don't exist. A little navel viewing might help about here.
     
  4. Sean Herron
    Joined: May 2004
    Posts: 1,520
    Likes: 32, Points: 58, Legacy Rep: 417
    Location: Richmond, BC, CA.

    Sean Herron Senior Member

    Oh well...

    Hello..

    I have to duck a few hits now and then...

    I could have subbed in British - French - Dutch - Spanish - Portugese - or any other colonial nation but I had to go American...

    The above have evolved into the EU...

    Trouble is you don't have the experience of the above - but that will come as history winds its way...

    Time to go kill some crows for a pie...

    Duck - crow...

    SH.
     
  5. tom28571
    Joined: Dec 2001
    Posts: 2,474
    Likes: 116, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1728
    Location: Oriental, NC

    tom28571 Senior Member

    Don't forget to take a long look at the navel but watch where the gun is pointed while doing that.

    Enjoy. :p
     
  6. mackid068
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 857
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: CT, USA

    mackid068 Semi-Newbie Posts Often

    Chances are that'll get you killed because of the pervasive hatred for americans throughout the world.
     
  7. Mikey
    Joined: Sep 2004
    Posts: 368
    Likes: 7, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 75
    Location: Bangkok, Thailand

    Mikey Senior Member

    And so died a very interesting thread...

    Guys, that was unnecessary, OK?

    I'll give it a try to get it started again.

    2 assumptions, 1) both I and the boat are well insured and 2) I have a "legal" re-chambered WWII flare pistol that shoots more than flares on-board.

    The big question is when I should use my weaponry and when not.
    I think that we all agree on that IF the pirates are armed, then it is likely that I will be both Out-Gunned and Out-Manned. I think that we all also can agree on that I should expect a more violent response from armed pirates if I start the shooting. Doesn't sound like good odds to me.

    Say that I am chased by a fishing boat outside Colombia’s coast. A shot in front of the bridge windows would make the “fishermen” realise that I am armed and prepared to protect myself. I’d say most of them would back off and all is well. But if they don’t, then I have put myself in a more serious position by firing at them. They for some reason still think that they can beat me (out-gunned and out-manned?) and I have pissed them off. Bad odds again.

    Chased by Fishing Boat In Asia
    Should I shoot or should I not? In Asian waters, I would not simply because I do not believe that they would want to kill or hurt me, they just want my things – and I have insurance anyway. Why take the risk of escalating things? They probably won’t even want my boat, unless it can be used as a fishing boat.

    If I do fire in front of the bridge windows of an Indonesian fishing boat, I bet they would back off, regardless of if they had some arms on board or not. They are just dirt poor fishing men who tried to get “some extra income”, doesn’t mean that they will attack an armed boat. Thief by opportunity or pirate?

    But they are still humans and they will get angry when they are shot at, we all do, don’t we? What is there stopping them from taking revenge by reporting this to the local authorities – “they have never seen a westerner in their life and they just approached to say Hello when they got shot at”. If they have a bullet hole in the bridge window, then authorities may very well take action and you would be thrown in jail, temporarily of course. No offence anyone, but showing an American flag in Indonesian waters may very well provoke such a response (provoke –seen from an Indonesians’ perspective, not mine). A gun can easily be planted on board and you are the one proving that it’s not yours and that you did not fire it.

    Sad fact, but I would not want to show an American flag in Indonesian waters at all. The same goes for the Muslim parts of The Philippines (the south).

    Chased by Speed Boat
    I would most likely not start firing at a speed boat approaching me in the Malaccan Straight, same thing, they would most likely not hurt me if they just get what they want. Or what I have if I don’t have what they want. I am sounding like a parrot by now – and I have insurance anyway. But these guys may very well want my boat too, not only my things so it’s “most likely” this time. If I can be reasonably certain that they are unarmed, or that odds are fairly even, then I might fire first. And thinking of it, I would carry 2 re-chambered WWII flare pistols, 2 shots fired within a second of each other may make them re-thing and choose an easier target instead. Once they have opened fire, then I would never shoot back not trying to kill, that’s pointless.

    For Sure - If a speed boat full with pirates shooting wildly approach, then I’d fire back with everything I had, got nothing to lose, sort of. Now please help me, what should I do if a speed boat full with pirates approaches me outside Colombia’s or Puerto Rico’s coast and what about my "Colombian fishermen being the same as Asian fishermen" assumption?

    Mikey
     
  8. dionysis
    Joined: Jan 2003
    Posts: 258
    Likes: 3, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 44
    Location: Tasmania, Australia

    dionysis Senior Member

    You analysis is a pretty fair Mikey, and I for one think thise thread needs to be worked out further.

    My response further up the page, was to simply avoid those areas that have a concerted history of piracy. Go around the area - just don't go there. I still stand by that.

    In the first instance, I know this seems to avoid the issue in an easy sort of way. Perhaps if I were by myself at sea, I may take a chance, but if I have my wife and daughter as well, what should I do then?

    You must admit it does away with the whole problem of what to do. Problem solved.

    Nevertheless, in what situation will shooting be the right thing to do?

    There are three classes of pirates as you have shown:

    1. Poor oppotunistic pirates who have no arms.
    2. Pirates who have the arms but have not got the stomach to trade lives for money or electronics.
    3. Pirates who are prepared to kill if it suits them.

    In all these cases the best course, (leaving aside the ideal avoidance strategy) is to carry a heavy calibre automatic machine gun. One that is sure to do damage to the hull of any resonable pirates boat. Let alone it's occupants. Why?

    If you fire, you better be able to back it up. You cannot predict how many guns will be aimed at you, so you may as well have a gun that can be equivalent to ten armed pirates. Furthermore if such a gun is fired across the bows first. Everbody will know what they are in for.

    This is the "cold war" deterance option.

    But are you able to carry such a gun? It's ridiculous. Furthermore, if push comes to shove, you would need to have a kevlar reinforced cockpit. So like I say: go around.

    What is wrong with the avoidance strategy anyway?
     
  9. woodboat
    Joined: Nov 2003
    Posts: 312
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 14
    Location: Baltimore MD, USA

    woodboat Senior Member

    I totally agree that areas should be avoided. If a hurricaine were approaching why would one charge into it? With that said I also think one should be prepared for the worst. So, say you have avoided known pirate areas but they have moved their operations and are now in your waters. If going on a long cruise do you prepare for the worst? Do you have it in your mind that you are going to give up to the first person trying to board your vessel? Do you repel boarders?
     
  10. Skippy
    Joined: Nov 2004
    Posts: 568
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 12
    Location: cornfields

    Skippy Senior Member

    I agree completely with Mikey's approach. Risk management is crucial. Any one-size-fits-all approach will be vastly inferior to a knowledge of what different kinds of attackers are out there, where they are, how common they are, and what are the best ways of dealing with them.
     
  11. woodboat
    Joined: Nov 2003
    Posts: 312
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 14
    Location: Baltimore MD, USA

    woodboat Senior Member

  12. =D=
    Joined: Nov 2004
    Posts: 20
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: orion belt

    =D= Junior Member

    is it a problem to use some defence rules.

    1) if they shooting to you then you shooting to them

    2) if they just beg for some goodies then you giving something to them if you
    can

    I know that I've simplify a little the problem. The reality is little more complicated. But when somethink is hapening, you must react somehow anyway.
     
  13. mackid068
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 857
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: CT, USA

    mackid068 Semi-Newbie Posts Often

    John Lott is a noted conservative, and is obviously biased. I'd like to see a report b an impartial academic that bases everything purely on numbers. (For example: 37% more likely to kill family member than to kill criminal!)
     
  14. woodboat
    Joined: Nov 2003
    Posts: 312
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 14
    Location: Baltimore MD, USA

    woodboat Senior Member

    First off why would be a conservative make one Biased? Most major media are liberal yet claim to be unbiased. Secondly that is the second time you wrote that astonishing sounding statistic. What does it mean? Certainly not that 37% of the 70 million US gun owners will kill a relative :) This website http://www.kimdutoit.com/guns/KdtA5.htm indicates that 2.75% or 774 people were killed accidently (at the time the article was written). A little blurb for those not interested enough to read :)
    Leading causes of death:

    Heart Disease: 710,760
    Cancer: 553,091
    Stroke: 167,661
    Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 122,009
    Accidents: 97,900
    Diabetes: 69,301
    Influenza and pneumonia: 65,313
    Alzheimer's Disease: 49,558
    Kidney diseases: 37,251
    Septicemia: 31,224
    Suicide: 29,350
    Liver disease: 26,552
    Hypertension/renal disease: 18,073
    Homicide (all causes): 16,765
    Pneumonitis: 16,636
    All other combined: 391,904

    Total deaths by gunshot: 28,663

    Circumstances of gunshot deaths:

    1. Suicide: 16,596 (53%)
    2. Homicide: 10,806 (38%)
    3. Accident: 774 (2.7%)
    4. Police: 258 (0.9%)
    5. Unknown: 229 (0.8%)

    As a percentage of the total U.S. population:

    -- Gunshot homicide deaths (10,806) : 0.0036%

    And for comparison purposes:

    -- Death by alcohol (19,358): 0.0062% [excl. alcohol-related accidents]

    How would you feel if people starting espousing the virtues of repealing the first amendment?
     

  15. Mikey
    Joined: Sep 2004
    Posts: 368
    Likes: 7, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 75
    Location: Bangkok, Thailand

    Mikey Senior Member

    There is nothing wrong with the avoidance strategy Dionysis and I would use it anywhere I could. But it is simply not possible to fulfill my ultimate goal, a circumnavigation, without getting into some danger areas.

    Thinking of it, with my wife and 3 month old daughter on board, I would NOT go south from Singapore. But I would still go-round-the-world (dream on Mikey, you don't have the money anyway...).

    I think I and my family are safe this route - please question my assumptions and fill in with more information.

    Starting in the Caribbean, I'd stay well clear of Colombian and Venezuelan waters when going for the Panama Canal. What about threats from the north closing in on Panama?

    Once in the Pacific, I have many things to worry about, but not pirates. I want to go to Australia and that is also fine but I must avoid south Indonesia at all costs. That means that Torres Straight is out of the question, so is the south of the Philippines. My only safe route except rounding Australia (which I don't want) is to go east of Indonesia and south Philippines. I think I can take the San Bernadino Straight and then steer north west, don't have take the Luzon Straight and avoid the Philippines totally. Besides, the Philippines is a paradise that I don't want to miss.

    I stay clear of Vietnamese, Cambodian and Indonesian waters and head for Singapore. From Singapore, I head north up the Malaccan Straight toward Thailand. This stretch is not 100% safe but this is the only way there is. I decide to stay close to Malaysia's coast and only move daytime. From what I have heard, I should be fine doing it this way.

    I will visit the Burmese archipelago for a week or two, must go in to the Burmese border town just north of Ranong in Thailand and "fetch a customs officer" (must be onboard all the time if the boat is not Burmese flagged). There is an acceptable fee and a bribe (a bottle of western Whiskey will do fine) involved but it is worth it.

    Now I have a problem. Should I take the Suez canal or round Africa??? Look, I don't want to round Africa. Help! Advice please...

    If I still want to take the Suez canal, what's the safest way to do it? Is there a safe way...

    It was good dreaming...
    Mikey
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.