Update to the Pirate Solution...GUNS FTW

So I made a thread about an easy way to combat pirates back in 2009, which was arming the crew or even hiring private security with rifles.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=140631



It has been 4 or 5 years since that thread, so I thought I would post a little update to it, and show that yes, I was correct that rifles would successfully stop pirates in their tracks. But first, let's go back and take a look at some of the posts from the doubters of my theory (All quotes are from the above thread).



This first quote by geni suggests that it would be near impossible to hit the pirates in their boats:

Quote:

Originally Posted by geni (Post 4635044) Which also makes them pretty much imposible to hit unless you are trained to western militry standards. Egypt was playing around with the idea of small boats back in the 70s? Found the things nearly impossible to hit.

This video shows him to be incorrect.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5e2_1333668975

While these guys were private security contractors with training, it really didn't take too much aim to make the pirates abandon their attempts at taking the boat. As I said before, the boats offer no protection and it is impossible to board a ship with bullets raining down on your head. Once the little boat was close, they just spray down on them. Pirates have zero chance.



The next quote is about how the cost would be supposedly too high.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seismosaurus (Post 4635084) Whenever the question "but why don't thy..." is asked, 99% of the time the answer is the same. "money".

Well as it turns out, hiring guys with rifles is much, much more cost effective than other means:

Quote:

According to the private intelligence company Stratfor, the cost for a typical four-man team on a normal 40-day rotation would be $56,000-64,000 plus whatever the security company needs to make a profit from the trip. Bypassing the Gulf of Aden, adding three thousand miles and from two to three weeks to voyages, incurring additional fuel costs of $3.5 million per year for tankers and $74.4 million per year for the liner trades Pay higher insurance premiums, which have increased from only five hundred dollars in 2007 to approximately20,000 per ship per voyage, excluding injury, liability, and ransom coverage Paying ransoms, totaling between $30 million and $150 million in 2008. Ransoms paid to pirates operating off the coast of Somalia have increased from 2004 to 2009 -- from about500,000 per vessel to upwards of $5.5 million. Sustaining a multinational naval presence in the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean, at a cost of between $250 million and $400 million per year.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-...b_1548523.html



The next claim was that the pirates would not stop because someone was shooting at them:

Quote:

Originally Posted by arthwollipot (Post 4635568) Perhaps because the solution to some problems is not simply to throw more guns at it? Somali piracy is a complex societal problem, not a problem about who has more firepower. You won't stop the pirates just by shooting them. I mean, look at how well that has worked in Iraq. Anyway, with all these pirates about, we don't have to worry so much about global warming. :rolleyes:

Again, incorrect. See the above video, and also:

Quote:

To date, no ship with armed security has been successfully hijacked.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-...b_1548523.html



Another claim made was that it would be very difficult to put bullets on target against a smaller faster moving ship:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ranb (Post 4635896) Just because a person is armed with a rifle, shotgun or machine gun does not mean they can put the bullets on target while shooting down from a moving ship. Ranb

Again this video shows that not only is it not that terribly difficult, but the bullets don't necessarily have to hit their targets. Being a small, unprotected boat and having to scale the side of a ship while bullets are flying in your direction is an impossible task

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5e2_1333668975



Then finally this gem from poster Dan.O, which he says that such macho antics would get everyone killed:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan O. (Post 4636098) Your macho antics are just going to get you and the rest of the crew killed. AK47 effective range: 800m RPG7 used as anti-personell weapon range at self detonation: 920m Whereas, if you just surrender to the pirates and wait for the company to pay the ransom, you get treated well, get to relax as the pirates take over your shipboard duties and even earn an overtime bonus. The time for armed assault against the pirates is when you have overwhelming firepower and trained troops. Not when it's a crew of 20 or less against at least that many pirates.

His suggestion is to just surrender and leave your life to the will of the pirates. But as it turns out, using weapons to defend a ship is the most successful and cost effective means of defense, and the industry is growing by the month. Again, no ship has ever been taken by pirates with armed security on board.

via JREF Forum http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=268060&goto=newpost