The only good pirate ...

... is a dead one.

That doesn't stop the reflexive cowardice of the media and/or "officials", which is evident in the opening line of the story:

The death comes amid fears that increasingly aggressive pirates and the growing use of armed private security contractors onboard vessels could fuel increased violence on the high seas.

Mr. or Mrs. AP writer, you are an invertebrate.

Anyway, back to our celebration over dead pirates:

In the first killing of its kind, private security contractors shot dead a Somali pirate in a clash that left two skiffs riddled with bullet holes, officials said Wednesday.

Now, the notion that the skiffs were "riddled" with bullet holes would make me giddy, except that the nancies at the AP consider more than one bullet hole to qualify as "riddled", so I have my doubts.

The article goes on to "ask questions" - in nearly every paragraph - about having armed guards on ships. Never mind the obvious:

An EU Naval Force frigate was dispatched to the scene and launched a helicopter that located the pirates. Seven pirates were found, including one who died from small-caliber gunshot wounds, indicating he had been shot by the detachment onboard the Almezaan, and not by the helicopter gunship, said Cmdr. John Harbour, the EU Naval Force spokesman.

Translation: The EU showed up long after the matter had been resolved. (That's your cue to act shocked...)

Anyway, the AP writer and those he/she interviews - in one article about a dead pirate - goes to great lengths to: raise concerns about "increased violence on the high seas"; questions "jurisdiction", "regulation", "guidelines", "standards", the "quality of the individuals" who guard the ships, "oversight"; questions "who is responsible for investigating the incident".

In a dazzling display of bias, the author - after noting the rise in shooting incidents by pirates in the region in the past year - expresses "fears that the use of armed security contractors could encourage pirates to be more violent in their approach..." and then immediately points out that, "Pirate attacks have not declined despite patrols by dozens of warships off the Somali coast. The amount of ocean to patrol is too vast to protect every ship and pirates have responded to the increased naval presence by moving attacks farther out to sea."

The use of "security contractors" and civilian gun ownership seems to bring about the same predictable nonsense. Goodness, they say, only the authorities should have guns, otherwise there might be violence ... and they'll repeat that excrement no matter how much violence the disarmed suffer.

Here's a clue: If the 'authorities' could prevent the violence, perhaps there wouldn't be a call or a need for the unwashed proletariat to be armed. But - as the brilliant AP writer pointed out above - the 'authorities' tend to show up only after everything has gone down. There remains a market for "security contractors" for a similar reason ... If the "warships" of the "legitimate" governments/UN/EU or whoever were up to the task, there would be no need for contractors.

Additionally, the writer neglects to point out the obvious: the armed security contractors killed a pirate and saved the ship. For God's sake ... the contractors were successful! We can't have that, now can we?!?!?

The now infamous Blackwater suffered from a similar bipolar view. As far as I know, Blackwater had a 100% success rate in their EP missions in Iraq and Afghanistan ... and the public is encouraged to hate them because ... why? They make more money than average soldiers? They filled a niche, they did their job well. Blackwater was in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina ... why? Because the N.O.P.D. either abandoned the city or was too busy looting the local Wal Mart to protect the people, maybe? Don't hate the player, hate the game (as the kids would say...) If armies and/or police could get the job done, you wouldn't need ... or probably wouldn't even have ever had ... Blackwater.

So, maybe it would be more constructive to address the factors that drive citizens - or cargo ships - to seek to be armed, rather than to criticize them for addressing their need for defense. Otherwise, shut up and let them keep their guns.

Actually, if somebody has to give up their guns ... maybe it should be the Somalis first. That might make the world a safer place.

In any event ... let the dead pirates pile up.