Join Date: Mar 2006
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Rep Power: 11
I have no plans to visit foreign waters in the near future, but weighing the remote possiblity of a "ballistic emergency" against the certainty of having to check into whatever foreign country you visit, I'd err on the side of of the law, even if I disagree with them. Based on the experinences of others, it seems you're far more likely to be vicimized by goverment officials for having a means of self defense, than you are to need the means of self defense. It sux either way, but the odds of having a problem with the law are higher in my estimation and the consequences may be as bad or worse than being robbed.
Its interesting that I've never felt the need to have any of my many firearms aboard the boat. In fact the only reason I might ever have one on board is because I do often carry when traveling and I wouldn't want to leave a firearm in the car. I've traveled the US pretty widely on my Harley and carried a 9mm Khar K9 or .45 cal 1911 every inch of the way, including in juristictions that would throw me under the jail for having the audacity to posses a means of self defense. However, I always felt far more exposed on the bike than I do when on the boat and felt the risk of running afoul of the law was less than the risk of an encounter with some nefarious sort in that case. Everyone that believes in the right of self defense will have to do their own calculus to weigh the risks and take their chances. I believe the laws should not deny the right of self defense but the fact is they do in large measure and carry or not you are taking on a level of risk.
Just a final note about shooting into the water, its a dangerous activity because bullets can skip and travel long distances. There have been cases of people on shore being killed by a ricochet from someone shooting rifles at targets in the water. I can't see much of a reason to be shooting at fish or other targets on the water.
s/v Palmetto Moon
1991 Catalina 36