Pirates getting shot at by contractors.

[Texas Dan Mosby]

From the article:

No ship with armed guards aboard has been hijacked by Somali pirates...

That about sums it up.

Pirates that don't try to pirate don't have to worry about "excessive force".

[ClarkLZeuss]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-0 ... tain.story

The gunfire exchange highlights a lack of rules governing the use of weapons on the high seas amid questions over how much force is legal and necessary to fight Somali piracy attacks, which targeted a record 237 ships last year. The video, presented at a shipping conference in December and leaked on the internet last month, has fueled debate over when is it acceptable to open fire -- and to keep shooting.

Sorry, but this article is the typical liberal anti-gun garbage. "Some" people use excessive force. (And not much data to back this up). This "might" lead to "wild west" situations. Blahblahblah hand wringing.

[philip964]

Wow, read the article and listen to what those idiots from the UK have to say about "proportional" use of force....their "rate of fire" was not acceptable.....too fast apparently. To be really fair the guards should only shoot one of the pirates after one of the guards is shot, and not shoot any more of the pirates than the pirates shoot of the guards. And if the pirates are bad shots, it's not fair to have guards that are good shots. The liberal cancer has apparently destroyed the UK. It's a good thing these liberal idiots weren't around back when the Nazis were preparing to invade England....no doubt the "rate of fire" of the defending British forces would have been unacceptable to these loons.

I could not have said it better.

[Heartland Patriot]

Wow, read the article and listen to what those idiots from the UK have to say about "proportional" use of force....their "rate of fire" was not acceptable.....too fast apparently. To be really fair the guards should only shoot one of the pirates after one of the guards is shot, and not shoot any more of the pirates than the pirates shoot of the guards. And if the pirates are bad shots, it's not fair to have guards that are good shots. The liberal cancer has apparently destroyed the UK. It's a good thing these liberal idiots weren't around back when the Nazis were preparing to invade England....no doubt the "rate of fire" of the defending British forces would have been unacceptable to these loons.

Actually, they were around initially. His name was Neville Chamberlain..."PEACE FOR OUR TIME"...I'm sure he had plenty of backers. Funny how reality caught up with them eventually...God Bless Winston Churchill.

[VMI77]

Wow, read the article and listen to what those idiots from the UK have to say about "proportional" use of force....their "rate of fire" was not acceptable.....too fast apparently. To be really fair the guards should only shoot one of the pirates after one of the guards is shot, and not shoot any more of the pirates than the pirates shoot of the guards. And if the pirates are bad shots, it's not fair to have guards that are good shots. The liberal cancer has apparently destroyed the UK. It's a good thing these liberal idiots weren't around back when the Nazis were preparing to invade England....no doubt the "rate of fire" of the defending British forces would have been unacceptable to these loons.

Actually, they were around initially. His name was Neville Chamberlain..."PEACE FOR OUR TIME"...I'm sure he had plenty of backers. Funny how reality caught up with them eventually...God Bless Winston Churchill.

And a lot of the British upper class actually supported the Nazis..at least before they began preparations to invade England. But I'm suggesting the difference between then and now is not that there weren't people like this in the WWII era, but that they didn't comprise the majority of the population, or even the majority of the ruling elites, as they apparently do now.

[Heartland Patriot]

Wow, read the article and listen to what those idiots from the UK have to say about "proportional" use of force....their "rate of fire" was not acceptable.....too fast apparently. To be really fair the guards should only shoot one of the pirates after one of the guards is shot, and not shoot any more of the pirates than the pirates shoot of the guards. And if the pirates are bad shots, it's not fair to have guards that are good shots. The liberal cancer has apparently destroyed the UK. It's a good thing these liberal idiots weren't around back when the Nazis were preparing to invade England....no doubt the "rate of fire" of the defending British forces would have been unacceptable to these loons.

Actually, they were around initially. His name was Neville Chamberlain..."PEACE FOR OUR TIME"...I'm sure he had plenty of backers. Funny how reality caught up with them eventually...God Bless Winston Churchill.

And a lot of the British upper class actually supported the Nazis..at least before they began preparations to invade England. But I'm suggesting the difference between then and now is not that there weren't people like this in the WWII era, but that they didn't comprise the majority of the population, or even the majority of the ruling elites, as they apparently do now.

Understood, thanks for the clarification.

[Jumping Frog]

I am not surprised that the whining and hand-wringing came from the bliss-ninnies over in Little Britain.

Never heard any self doubt or regrets from the Russians about how their handled the Somali pirates.

[youtube][/youtube]