From Seasteading
Revision as of 08:00, 12 January 2015 by 12B10B6 (talk | contribs) (Lethal Weapon Considerationa: new section)
Jump to: navigation, search

6.5 Inch Grendel round

Why this round in particular? It would be more cost effective to use the 5.56 round or any mass produced round instead. For many seasteaders, budgeting is going to be a necessity, and spending money on expensive ammo for a marginal advantage in maritime combat seems superfluous.

Edited link.

Removed the link to concentration camps. It's often best to include no information in a wiki, rather than bad information/reasoning.

Bad wiki page.

While this page has some merits, I believe it seriously needs redoing completely.

It simply does not relate well with the project.

I could volunteer to do this in a month or so after a months vacation.

- NoDachi

I concurr to an extent. I would argue that for seasteading to eventually produce viable independent micro-nations, methods for enforcing property rights must be discussed. However, I would argue that there's far too much in this article, and a lot of it is very specific. I would suggest the creation of a Defense category, that the Defense article summarise the different types of threats seasteads may face and a general discussion of the issues. Discussion of specific threats and specific solutions be moved to separate articles. There's a lot of work here, but it's important because unless seasteads can have ownership enforced, they can never be commercially viable. --Sconzey 02:11, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

  • Defense is not a major thing being discussed in the community right now, but of course it is of major importance so any information is more than welcome. I'd say there are two or three things we'd need defense against: people on Seasteads (thieves, hijackers, etc), pirates and possibly governments (against the latter, IMHO any weapon would fail except for public opinion). These would make nice seperate articles I think. For none of them I can find a lot of information on the Internet but there are lots of questions to be answered, especially in the legal area. What kind of security measures are taken on cruiseships? Does US or Panamese law allow security to carry a gun? What rights do stowaways have? Can you just shoot pirates? I'd love to see someone answering questions like these. Joep 03:24, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
    • A lot of the law stuff is covered on wikipedia[1]. From a five-minute skim it'd seem that pirates are considered "enemies of humanity" and any state that encounters them is entitled to try them by that state's own law, without the intervention of another state. --Sconzey 15:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Ah yes, the UN convention on the High Seas is very explicit in the matter[2]. Start at Article 14 and read away. The only problem lies in the nature of statehood, as considered by the UN and signatories to the aforementioned convention. This is unlikely to be able to be circumvented through the use of flags of convenience due to Article 21 which states that a ship has to be explicitly authorised by it's Flag State before it can effect piracy-related arrests or seizures. --Sconzey 16:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Lethal Weapon Considerationa

Legacy political districts may interfere less with seasteaders whom arm themselves with weapons which aren't obviously military looking. This may be critical in the early stages of seasteading when political recognition is less than forthcoming. A .357 revolver and lever action. 30-30 would be easier to explain as anti piracy weapons to nervous statists whom you may encounter. This would be even more serious near a jurisdiction where the authorities are actively paranoid of regime change advocates with kalashnikovs and RPG's. The weapons I propose would not be any less effective against pirates when fired from the inherently unstable platform a seastead is likely to provide. Keep in mind that revolvers and lever rifles have historically been quite formidable in the hands of trained users. My opinion shining through here but, anyone seriously imagining armed self defense really has a moral duty to themselves, and those they protect, to seek out some professional training.