Approves

...the Royal Navy are is...

RagingLeonard: ...the Royal Navy is are ...

In England, using are in this case is the correct form.

Zoinks!: RagingLeonard: ...the Royal Navy is are ...

In England, using are in this case is the correct form.

And on the high seas near Somalia, arrrr is the correct form.

/ducks

But they still have rum, sodomy, and the lash, right?

Whew! Thank goodness.


And the pirates will always have safe asylum at:

I don't understand. How can simply claiming asylum give one asylum? Wouldn't the host government have to, oh I don't know, approve the farking claim?

/ farking legal thought process

Denial_of_Death: But they still have rum, sodomy, and the lash, right?

Whew! Thank goodness.


And the pirates will always have safe asylum at:

I lol'd. nice.

Currently browsing there, myself...

I hope I don't get banned for this:

Pirates Peanut! (new window)

When I got to the word "piracy" in the headline, I thought, Holy Christ! They're killing people for copying DVD's!? Then I read the rest. Hmph.

/Fail

So rather than capture them, they just kill them in situ?

I don't quite grasp it.

Rum, the Lash, and Sodomy eH?

/knows he didn't actually say that, but still funny.
//Hey, they are in international waters. Why not have a simple "Accidental weapons release"

MBA Whore: I don't understand. How can simply claiming asylum give one asylum? Wouldn't the host government have to, oh I don't know, approve the farking claim?

A decision by the government to reject asylum may undergo scrutiny in the courts under the process of judicial review. And then it can go through a process of appeal. It can take a long time and throughout it the asylum-seeker is permitted to remain in the country. The Australians have camps for asylum-seekers, I don't know if the Brits do or not or if the just grant them temporary visas.

So don't capture them. When they encounter pirates at sea, they can just destroy their equipment and otherwise leave them alone. In particular, they need to make sure that the pirate's ship is destroyed. What happens to the pirates after this is not the navy's concern.

Use enough weapons, you won't need to capture them.

No prisoners.

A Foreign Office spokesman said: "There are issues about human rights and what might happen in these circumstances. The main thing is to ensure any incident is resolved peacefully."

Didn't England already try appeasement with failtacular results? Seriously, kill pirates at sea. At the moment you fire a weapon at an innocent civilian, you have forfeited your interest in remaining alive and your quick dispatch serves the interests of all humanity.

Arrr!! The Royal Navy be leavin' us alone now me hearties. Now we knows where t' be workin' our trade!
Avast, ye lubbers and set sail for England!

Mitrovarr: So don't capture them. When they encounter pirates at sea, they can just destroy their equipment and otherwise leave them alone. In particular, they need to make sure that the pirate's ship is destroyed. What happens to the pirates after this is not the navy's concern.

Pretty much what I was thinking. "Sorry about that sir, did seem a bit barbaric, but you *did* say we couldn't capture them.

See you in September...

Arrrrr, avast ye matey! (new window)

FTA: A Foreign Office spokesman said: "There are issues about human rights and what might happen in these circumstances. The main thing is to ensure any incident is resolved peacefully."

So what exactly does a peaceful resolution look like with pirates? Instead of firing upon them do you just call them over under false pretenses, then secretly have friends and family members waiting to spring an intervention? Then, when they've promised never again to participate in piracy, you let them go free to live a life of love and generosity. That should work just fine, I think.

40oz_A_Knight: A Foreign Office spokesman said: "There are issues about human rights and what might happen in these circumstances. The main thing is to ensure any incident is resolved peacefully."

Didn't England already try appeasement with failtacular results? Seriously, kill pirates at sea. At the moment you fire a weapon at an innocent civilian, you have forfeited your interest in remaining alive and your quick dispatch serves the interests of all humanity.

I didn't read closely, but I don't recall many recent incidents of piracy involving murder. Usually they just capture the ship, loot it, and leave. I'm sure they shoot the heroes, but outright shooting people at 'innocents civilians' is probably a low they don't sink to very often.

I win!

Nos_Felix: 40oz_A_Knight: A Foreign Office spokesman said: "There are issues about human rights and what might happen in these circumstances. The main thing is to ensure any incident is resolved peacefully."

Didn't England already try appeasement with failtacular results? Seriously, kill pirates at sea. At the moment you fire a weapon at an innocent civilian, you have forfeited your interest in remaining alive and your quick dispatch serves the interests of all humanity.

I didn't read closely, but I don't recall many recent incidents of piracy involving murder. Usually they just capture the ship, loot it, and leave. I'm sure they shoot the heroes, but outright shooting people at 'innocents civilians' is probably a low they don't sink to very often.

So they should be allowed to roam the sea taking what ever they want so long as they don't kill very often. Makes sense, or its the victims fault for being out on the open sea.

FABULOU....I mean "GAAARRHHHH"!

Nos_Felix: I didn't read closely, but I don't recall many recent incidents of piracy involving murder. Usually they just capture the ship, loot it, and leave. I'm sure they shoot the heroes, but outright shooting people at 'innocents civilians' is probably a low they don't sink to very often.

It is their whole modus operandi. If they didn't kill innocent civilians, nobody would be afraid of them.

See? England is more eco-conscious than the US.

40oz_A_Knight: It is their whole modus operandi. If they didn't kill innocent civilians, nobody would be afraid of them.

There is a Kaiser Soze(sp?) quote in their somewhere...

Solution:

Merltech: Solution:

Hmmmm...i think only the MK-48 has any capability against ships...rest are for subs IIRC.

/allow me...ahem: NEERRRRRD!

I'm in a bit of a moral quandary on this one.
On the one hand, I don't believe in capital punishment. I'm totally against it; no one has the right to take the life of another unless in self-defence.

On the other hand, these pirates are not the saber-wielding, rum-drinking eye-patched scurvy dogs of yesteryear (and Jack Sparrow aside, they weren't all that nice either).
They're the machete-wielding, crack-taking machine-gun toting rapist scum of the lesser-patrolled areas of international waters, praying on rich (stupid) westerners in their holiday yachts full of cash and luxury items, and these scum do need dealt with.

So what do you do with them? Turn them over to their country of origin (where you know they'll be tortured/executed), bring them back to blighty where they'll claim asylum and be rewarded for their crimes by allowing them to enter the criminal classes in a western country?
Only thing I can think to do initially is either fight them at sea as we are doing but any that survive leave in their boats, or my preferred option is to bring them to the UK, imprison them for piracy on the high seas, then repatriate them to a country of their choosing.
Except of course said country will turn around and say "nope, we don't want them", which leaves us to pick up the tab for their lifelong care. Not exactly brilliant either.
The only thing I can really think to do then is to have a judge on board the boat/somewhere that's not the UK (e.g naval bases), then try them for piracy. If they're found innocent, then we don't have to worry about them applying for asylum since they're not in the UK, merely on one of our boats, and we can send them on their merry way in a dingy/their own boat. If they're found guilty, then we keep them in prison for however long the Judge says, then we dump them on a dinghy just outside the international waters of their home country with food/supplies for the length of time it'll take them to reach shore.
What they do after that point isn't our problem, since they can row for shore if they want and risk getting punished by their own country for being a pirate (even though they should be respectant of UK law in that we've already punished them), or they can row to the next country or whatever.
That way, we're not torturing them, sending them to be tortured or helping nasty regimes torture them, but at the same point, we're not just letting the sub-human scum that form modern pirates away with piracy; we are taking a stance.

It's difficult what to do if you're against the death penalty. I might even (some part of me) wish we could just shoot/hang them all, but if you allow the death penalty for them, then why not such&such, then before you know it you're killing people for adultery, chopping their hands off for theft or piracy and stoning women for wearing bikinis.
And then where would we be, hmmmm?

Pirates should be treated now as they were in the old days, a dangerous menace on the high seas, the destruction of which serves only to benefit humanity and keep the oceans safe for innocent travel.

/ninja

So when are ninjas going to be deployed?

black_knight: So when are ninjas going to be deployed?

Whenever you least suspect them.

Simple solution:
shoot said pirate in head, dump body overboard. Problem solved.

I appreciate that England, long a land that believed in farking up everyone who looked different than them, have done their best to become more tolerant and enlightened. However, the pendulum has swung too much to one side. They should blow the farking pirates out of the water like Nelson would have, gd it.

smokinfoo: Simple solution:
shoot said pirate in head, dump body overboard. Problem solved.

What problem?

InfernoBreeze: I hope I don't get banned for this:

Pirates Peanut! (new window)

I hope you do.

I generally oppose the death penalty, but piracy on the sea should still be a hanging from the yard arm.

Well... that's it, no more prisoners.

Shoot to kill, leave the survivors for the sharks.

Of course! They will all explain that they are orphans, and are all noblemen that have gone wrong....

Merltech: Solution:

Solution ready, Captain.

RagingLeonard: ...the Royal Navy are is...

To the British, the Navy is viewed as a group of people so they use are. To Americans, the Navy is viewed as a single entity so they use is.

But... but... but... Pirates!

/Got nothing.

RagingLeonard: ...the Royal Navy are is...

So for example...

Freddie Mercury, Roger Taylor, Brian May, and John Deacon are good. (Americans and British agree are this.)

Queen are/is good. (the British see this example as no different from the first so they say are and Americans see the group as being a different singular whole so they use is.)

andrew131: Merltech: Solution:

Solution ready, Captain.

Match bearings and FIRE!!

They should just seize the ship and everything of value on it, or just the valuables if the ship isn't worth selling. Then take all valuables from the individual pirates as well. Then put the pirates ashore in the nearest port. What they do from there is their problem.

the more liberal you get, the more bleeding-heart and delusional you become

what happened to you, britian? you used to be the world's biggest badass and now your the world's biggest pussies

Meh. Keep the law removing capital punishment for privacy off the books. Make it a life sentence on bread and water instead. Or, alternatively, British cooking.

abb3w: Meh. Keep the law removing capital punishment for privacy off the books. Make it a life sentence on bread and water instead. Or, alternatively, British cooking.

British cooking would be cruel and unusual punishment, I bet most would opt for a swift death.