“...It’s sad that 4 American citizens being murdered will get less coverage ...”
What’s even sadder is that those Americans were prevented by LAW from arming themselves and having a fighting chance to kill the scumbag animals BEFORE they got killed themselves.
What’s even sadder is that those Americans were prevented by law FROM HAVING THE MEANS to repel these f*cking savages while they were boarding - and instead had to wait until help arrives - just in time to draw chalk lines around their bodies. Gee...wonderful help there... A couple of 500.00 dollar used surplus AK47s or AK74s in the hands of an armed, determined crew would have RIDDLED the animals while they were climbing aboard, or shortly thereafter.
That’s what’s really sad. There was a time when Americans went armed pretty much everywhere. And made no bones about it.
What we’ve been brainwashed into letting ourselves become is pathetic...
You bring up a good point, NFHale. It is INTERNATIONAL LAW, that our collective pussy government in Washington signed on to, that prevents private individuals and companies from defending themselves at sea.
So those who want to moan and complain about “taxpayer funded rescues” should address themselves to that law. If we abrogate treaties that deny Americans their god-given constitutional rights, then maybe we wouldn’t even need the US Navy to intervene.
Two of the Americans killed were Christian missionaries. I doubt very seriously they’d hose the pirates with an AK-47.
Do you have a reference for that Federal law ? US Gun control on international waters is beyond the pale, sounds crazy. Is it really a US law?
What is interesting is when the PRChinese get captured or killed.
You should know me by now. I heard this before on FNC :
There is some confusion on this answer, because I think people might not be getting the difference in naval terminology between GUNS and SMALL ARMS.
There are laws regarding placing guns on a merchant ship, which can effectively make said ship a legal target in military operations. Essentially, a GUN is one of the deck mounted cannons you see on destroyers, cruisers, etc. SMALL ARMS, however, are a different category... and crews COULD legally be armed as such. Here's some reasons why a lot of crews AREN'T armed, however:
1) The pirates have grenade and small rocket launchers. They could potentially do a lot more damage against a crew armed with small arms
2) Merchant crews aren't generally trained in small arms combat
3) Pirates have yet to kill a single hostage, so most nations consider ransoming to be a valid alternative to a potentially lethal fight (that also makes the kill score 5:0 in our favor)
4) a significant number of freighters attacked by pirates are chemical haulers or oil tankers. If hit by an RPG or Rocket, or even by a stray bullet, those chemical or oil tanks could explode and kill the crew while causing environmental catastrophe
5) cost of comparable arms... while AK-47s are cheap, rocket launchers aren't. Not smart to bring a toothpick to a sword fight
6) Fishing trawlers are about 20 times more common than pirates in the area. Shooting up a fishing family would be VERY bad press.
7) pirates use surprise attacks with speed boats. Often the small crews of freightors don't even know the pirates are attacking until they're already climbing on board, even before that the boats can go 35 mph, which actually makes a fairly hard target to hit.
Answer : Why can't merchant ships carry weapons to defend themselves?