Gun Control on the High Seasby John VellecoAmericans received a special gift this Easter Sunday with the rescueof Capt. Richard Phillips, who had been held hostage for several daysafter his ship, the Maersk Alabama, was raided by pirates.The raiding of the Maersk created an international crisis and anaround the clock media sensation. People around the globe wereriveted to their TVs, praying and hoping for Capt. Phillips' safetyas the U.S. Navy moved massive vessels into the area. In the end, thebrave Captain freed himself and well-trained U.S. snipers took outthree of the four pirates.The obvious question that was seldom asked during the tense standoffwas, "How could so few terrorists (another word for pirates)overtake a vessel crewed by five times as many people?"After all, couldn't the crew have just shot the invaders as theytried to board the ship? Maybe they could have if they had firearms onboard, but containerships like the Maersk are generally prohibited from carrying firearmsbecause of gun laws in the countries of various ports of departure andentry. Shipping companies and crews don't dare violate these gunbans because the penalties can be severe. For example, in Kenya, where the Maersk was headed, the government isexpected to soon make possession of an unlicensed firearm a capitaloffense. Currently the offense carries a long prison sentence. And for those who might think a foreign government would neverpenalize a ship that was obviously armed to repel pirate attacks,consider the case of Australian businessman and yachtsman ChrisPacker. In 2004, Packer was in the midst of an around-the-world tour when hisyacht was boarded by government officials at a port in Bali,Indonesia. On board were two pump-action shotguns, a rifle, twopistols and an inoperable antique firearm.Indonesian authorities contemplated the charge of "gun running,"a capital offense. Packer's firearms, which he declared at otherIndonesian ports, were purchased specifically for defense againstpirates. Packer's friend and former America's Cup winner, Sir Peter Blake,was shot and killed by pirates who boarded his vessel at the mouth ofthe Amazon River in 2001. After that incident, Packer delayed his ownplanned trip to South America in order to obtain arms for protection.Packer's vessel was twice boarded by pirates, and he believes hewould certainly be dead were he not armed.Packer spent about three months in jail in Bali, never sure he wouldescape the firing squad. Eventually, authorities in Bali convictedPacker on the lesser charge of not declaring his firearms uponentering the port and released him with time served.Commercial shipping companies simply can't risk violating thedraconian gun laws of other countries, so they instead run the riskof being defenseless against pirates in hostile waters.The outrageous but predicable result of laws that are intended todisarm criminals is that gigantic commercial vessels like the Maerskare vulnerable to attack from small groups of thugs in littlemotorboats. The arguments for self-defense firearms possession are the same onthe sea as they are on land -- only at sea the need is even greater.When a criminal attack occurs, almost always the only people presentare the thugs and the victims. On land, police are usually minutesaway. On the sea, help can be hours or even days away. Thesea-terrorists know this, and they know that mariners are normallyunarmed.Ships that are able to employ armed guards have been able to repelpirates. Captain Kelly Sweeney of Washington State told FOX News thatarmed guards thwarted a pirate attack on a vessel he was on in theDominican Republic. Capt. Sweeney's recipe for self-defense at sea? Either hire armedguards to protect the ship, or else arm the crew members. Anti-gunners will make the same arguments about arming maritime crewmembers as they do about arming anyone on land. "Oh, the ships willbe more dangerous with all those guns on board." But, as we'velearned the hard way on both land and sea, "gun free zones"simply make easy targets for criminals. When Capt. Phillips was in the water with an attacker ready to shoothim, how was he saved? By people armed with rifles. These peoplehappened to be on a Navy ship. If there were no military vessels inthe area, the outcome could have been tragically different. As isoften the case, the criminal attack ended when armed assailants weremet with armed resistance.While we can't change the extreme anti-gun laws of other countries,the American government should insist that American-controlled vesselswill not be unilaterally disarmed and that crew members will bepermitted to carry firearms onboard for their own protection.