Give ’em what they want, and wait for the Marines. At least, that seems to be it.
Of the nonmilitary options, including allowing sailors to defend themselves, the US is bowing to “unions, insurers, and foreign ports”.
Am I to presume we’re bowing to the idea that our ships in foreign ports are foreign soil?
And since unions apparently can’t figure out how to make shooting ability rise with seniority, they can’t justify, even in their own minds, pay for actual performance. If we could somehow ensure the 10-year guy shoots better than the 5-year guy, maybe they’d wise up.
And insurers are afraid they’d have to pay out for a lunatic lawsuit that says all firearms manufacturers are guilty if in the process of repelling a boarding, a pirate got killed and now they’re being sued?
For a nation that thinks we should “punish” North Korea or Iran for acting in what it presumes to be its best interests, we certainly are proving ourselves a bunch of wimps.
Hand the sailors firearms if they have proven to be non-violent, law-abiding citizens (and why are we hiring them if they aren’t?), declare US ships to be US soil, require sailors to follow the rules, and see the piracy of US ships abate.
Leave a Reply