I’ve listened to some of the talking heads who are against arming ships.
Their first argument against it is the fire hazard - who would want gunfire on a tanker? I wouldn’t want gunfire on an LNG tanker, but it wouldn’t be a great fire hazard on a dry cargo or container ship.
Another argument made is that a seaman knows nothing about firearms. How many have military experience? How many have owned firearms? Give training to those with no knowledge - they don’t have to be trained to Special Ops levels.
The argument is made that seamen would be unable to actually kill. Unless seamen have changed a lot since I worked with them I don’t think that would be an insurmountable obstacle. How many seamen are extreme pacifists? I never knew any.
The final argument made is that it would escalate the violence! Armed pirates are firing rockets and automatic weapons at the ships! How much more violent can it get?
Remember too that pirates don’t want to destroy the ship - they want to capture it.
You could stand on a LNG tank on a ship and fire an RPG into it and nothing would happen.
The LNG is a not under pressure, frozen at , at least, 100 degrees below zero slush liquid and requires the precise amount of air and gas to burn.
99.9 percent of people are uneducated and ignorant of science and physics and get their information from equally ignorant MSM.
You give the same reason the Navy dolt, fancy pants dweeb officers wouldn’t arm their ships. 22 Cole sailors paid the price. Since those deaths, beurocratic murders really, the same officer corp has done a 180.
Normally skilled tradesmen can be shown to fairly operate and use automatic weapons in a hour.