Maritime Disarmament Makes Commercial Ship Crews Easy Prey for Pirates

By David Codrea

Any guesses how the pirates were able to board the Aris 13 and take hostages? Anyone? Bueller?

USA – -( “Somali pirates who seized an oil tanker opened fire Thursday on naval troops from the semiautonomous state of Puntland, sparking clashes between the two sides,” ABC News and other major outlets are reporting. “The European Union anti-piracy operation in the region says the pirates are holding the eight Sri Lankan crew members captive and demanding a ransom.”

Here’s what the “establishment” media is not reporting about the armed takeover of the Aris 13 — The International Maritime Organization and its “Piracy and armed robbery against ships” policies, and specifically its “Guidance to shipowners and ship operators, shipmasters and crews on preventing and suppressing acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships” warn against the most effective means of self-defense:


With respect to the carriage of firearms on board, masters, shipowners and companies should be aware that ships entering the territorial sea and/or ports of a State are subject to that State’s legislation. It should be borne in mind that importation of firearms is subject to port and coastal State regulations. It should also be borne in mind that carrying firearms may pose an even greater danger if the ship is carrying flammable cargo or similar types of dangerous goods.

Non-arming of seafarers

The carrying and use of firearms by seafarers for personal protection or for the protection of a ship is strongly discouraged. Seafarers are civilians and the use of firearms requires special training and aptitudes and the risk of accidents with firearms carried on board ship is great. Carriage of arms on board ship may encourage attackers to carry firearms or even more dangerous weapons, thereby escalating an already dangerous situation. Any firearm on board may itself become an attractive target for an attacker.

It should also be borne in mind that shooting at suspected pirates may impose a legal risk for the master, shipowner or company, such as collateral damages. In some jurisdictions, killing a national may have unforeseen consequences even for a person who believes he or she has acted in self defence. Also the differing customs or security requirements for the carriage and importation of firearms should be considered, as taking a small handgun into the territory of some countries may be considered an offence.

In other words, unless a ship is owned by a state actor or huge corporation, and its cargo is deemed profitable enough to warrant the expense of professional armed security, crew members are on their own, and relegated to using nets and hoses to repel armed attackers they can’t outrun. Policies, disarmament mandates and “law” see to that.

Besides, only a privileged hater would even refer to them as “pirates.” They’re social justice warriors now.

Al Sharpton thinks it “may be more apt” to call them “voluntary coast guard.” It’s curious to find a doctrinaire “gunsnitch” endorsing any kind of citizen militia – I wonder why that is.

And pirate chieftan Red Teeth is an environmentalist.

“The Somalis had no choice but to take revenge on foreign shipping and earn a living by ransom demands,” Bob Astles argued in Black Star News, a paper started with seed money provided by Bill Cosby (a guy who knows a thing or two about no choice). Astles was an unrepentant Idi Amin loyalist who “humiliated his fellow expats, who branded him ‘the white rat,’ by forcing them to kneel before Amin.”

Claims of “very brave seamen and navigators” fighting injustices the only way they can notwithstanding (a fit subject for another exercise in analyzing “progressive” excuse-making reminiscent of nothing so much as the lyrics to “Gee, Officer Krupke”), the ones who really have no choice here are the victims of the cutthroats, the unarmed crewmembers who endure hardship and separation from loved ones by choosing to advance themselves through honest work.

Time was, the world was shown how to deal with Barbary Pirates. At the same time, armed privateers operated under letters of marquee and reprisal, which, while still a Constitutional option, would no doubt be considered too politically incorrect to repeat here.

Still, it is ironic that proponents of open borders, at least for the West, are so mindful of sovereignty in places that have no real rule of law.  It also makes fair to ask those embedding “refugees” here, and placing them on Hillary’s “path to citizenship,” to substantiate that “rigorous” vetting they’ve assured us takes place.

Maybe Red Teeth has an HR department that keeps comprehensive personnel records.

David Codrea in his natural habitat.

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.

In addition to being a field editor/columnist at GUNS Magazine and associate editor for Oath Keepers, he blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

David Codrea
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Under Sec. Killery, and POS Obarry, they were welcomed to our shores and are amongst us today,,,driving taxis.


Seems like Maritime Disarmament Guidelines are as useful as old semen. LOL


Don’t the pirates know guns are banned on the ship? They are not allowed to have them!

Frank Clarke

A big outfit like Maersk could start the ball rolling with a simple statement of policy: “Our ships are routinely armed adequately to discourage and prevent piracy, and we expect countries where we Deliver The Goods to honor the security needs of our business. Countries that do not honor our sea-borne security needs will no longer be served by ships of the XYZ line.” My guess is that it wouldn’t take but a dozen major shippers issuing such a policy statement before defensive firearms on ships were immune to customs search and seizure. That would be the camel’s nose under… Read more »


A couple of good old 30-06’s with a thousand yard range would go a long way to discourage piracy.

Bryan St Martin

Have you ever tried to hit a moving target running 30 knots, weaving left and right, bobbing up and down at 1000 yards? While you’re moving 10 knots and bobbing about some as well.
Flame throwers on the other hand is quite the deterrent.
But I suppose a water cannon would be less inflammatory to the kind hearted liberals.


Depends on who is on the business​ end of the rifles. And a flame thrower has a very short range.


when they give the ship back the owner should shoot the pirates out of the water . Arm the ships with big bore guns . Go old school on them with burning oil or steam hoses when they try to board .


i say kill them all and stop this crap.


Literally, history repeats itself and Evil thrives when good pepul do NOTHING…………..and surely, criminals prefer unarmed victims……….especially as proposed by the enabling international maritime agency whom endorses piracy. Obviously, their “policy” was written by nice “progressives”. Mostly, GOOD RIDDANCE!
And pass the ammo. AND LOTS OF IT!

Roy F. Wilt

Every Ship[ should be Armed!

Liston Matthews

We are asked to welcome these potential pirates to our shores with open arms and closed eyes.