Feral Jundi

Saturday, October 25, 2008

Maritime Security: HollowPoint Protective Services Enters the Game

     I have never heard of these guys, and the website gives me the impression that it is one of those companies that are trying to compete with the big dogs in the industry.  I will not endorse this group, but I did want to put out there what the company was doing and what the CEO had to say.  I hope he does secure work over there, but I have to say that they are competing with some pretty big companies right now for the same kinds of services.  We’ll see, and if any of the readership has anything more to add about this company, feel free to make a comment. –Head Jundi

—————————————————————— 

“SHIPS NEED ARMED GUARDS,” SAYS SECURITY FIRM CHIEF

Monday, 20 October 2008

 

THE CEO of a US-based private security company providing armed protection to merchant ships has hit out at the widespread opposition to the practice within the shipping industry and from maritime administrations. And he claims that pirates and others intent on attacking ships know which flags allow armed guards and factor that into their targeting.

John Harris, CEO of HollowPoint Protective Services was slightly coy when asked by Anderimar Shipping News whether his company is currently providing, or has recently provided, armed guards for vessels in the Gulf of Aden region. He said: “We are currently able to provide security support for vessels operating all over the world. HPPS is in contract negotiations with several shipping companies to provide armed asset protection and security to protect their crews, vessels, and cargo.” He added that the firm is “currently in negotiations to provide our asset protection and security services to shipping companies operating in the Gulf of Aden region”.

When asked: “Have your teams successfully repulsed an attack?”, Mr Harris replied: “All of our agents are well trained, highly experienced law enforcement and military operators. Our agents have specific backgrounds dealing with a variety of threats. Due to security demands and operational integrity we are not at liberty to discuss specifics of said attacks. Maritime piracy is a hot issue at this time and we are more than prepared to deal with a variety of security situations. Suffice it to say that our longevity in the protection and security industry is due to our success at what we do.”

The massive US-based private security firm Blackwater has been subject to severe criticism for some of its operations in Iraq. Mr Harris was asked whether he saw similar problems arising if his teams got involved in fire-fights? He replied: “No. Our purpose is singular in nature. We provide protection for vessels, their crews and cargo. Unlike the situation in Iraq where Blackwater is involved in both peacekeeping and protection activities, we only respond to attacks on the vessels we protect. Our agents are highly trained to repel attacks with the utmost regard for the safety and security of the vessels and crews.”

It was pointed out that some countries are opposed to private companies providing armed protection. Mr Harris was asked whether he knew which countries allow private firms to provide armed security. He answered: “Yes, we have established which countries allow private armed agents on their vessels. Again security considerations and mission integrity mean that I will forego discussing too much detail in this area. I can unequivocally state that HPPS does know which countries are restrictive in their policies regarding armed agents aboard their vessels. I might add that the pirates and saboteurs also know exactly which countries are restrictive in these policies. Out intelligence indicates that this is a big consideration in the planning and execution of many attacks.”

Anderimar Shipping News contacted LISCR, the US-based company administering the Liberian register. A spokesman said “Our policy is to discourage arming merchant ships. The industry and IMO view has been consistent on this. Liberian law does not prohibit it and we will not do more than try to discourage it. In the meantime, we are working hard to establish international solutions.”

Two weeks ago, soon after a senior UK officer was quoted as apparently suggesting merchant ships should have private armed security, a senior UK security official assured Anderimar Shipping News that the officer’s quoted advice was directly contrary to UK policy. The UK’s very strict gun laws, banning private ownership of handguns and limiting possession of other firearms to shotguns and sporting rifles, apply on UK-flag ships. That suggestion that ships should have armed guards did however provoke a strong reaction from the shipping industry representative bodies. The Round Table presented a statement to IMO including the following: “Since 9/11, the international shipping industry has spent billions of dollars to comply with stringent new security requirements, agreed by the international community to address concerns about terrorism. Yet when merchant ships – which carry 90% of world trade and keep the world economy moving – are subject to attack by violent pirates, the response of many governments is that it is not their problem and that ships should hire mercenaries to protect themselves.”

Mr Harris commented: “Lack of protection of merchant ships is exactly why HPPS is now providing security services to merchant ships worldwide. Vessels travelling in hostile waters require one on one protection. The seas are much too vast for governments both foreign and domestic to protect every ship that travels. Let me state for the record that our agents are not mercenaries! We utilise well trained, highly experienced law enforcement and military operators.”

He continued: “Unfortunately at this time armed pirates are interrupting the shipping industry. Armed conflicts such as this are increasing as they are becoming more successful in hijacking vessels. The shipping industry is incurring much more loss as result of these acts of piracy. Research indicates that the attitude toward armed agents on commercial shipping is changing as incidents of piracy become more common. We fully expect this trend to continue as piracy increases. We feel that armed security aboard these vessels is the best way to successfully get these assets to their destination safely.”

Piracy on the high seas evolved, Mr Harris argued, from what was previously mostly an economically motivated crime into crimes which now include motives fuelled by fanaticism, religious intolerance, and politics of envy. He stressed that: merchant ships are vital to the world economy, slow them and the world economy slows, stop them and the world economy collapses. “This,” he said, “cannot be tolerated.”

Regarding the attitude of his own country’s government to HollowPoint’s operations, Mr Harris said: “My company has been in contact with the US and other embassies to keep open lines of communication regarding our operation. The US Government officially regards HPPS as independent contractors working to provide necessary services to clients requiring those services. We are taxed on income just as any other business would be in a similar geographical location. Unofficially the US Government, United Nations, and civilized nation-states are generally supportive to any and all reasonable activities which decrease incidents of piracy, sabotage, and terrorist activity on the high seas. This is especially true in commercial shipping lanes which provide the lifeblood of free trade between the United States and other civilized nation-states. Our ultimate goal is to protect and insure the safe arrival of all assets at their destination.”

Mr Harris also asked about the practical problems of transporting protection teams to vessels and then getting them off again after protecting a vessel transiting a high risk area? He said: “Safety for our personnel and crew members of the vessels we protect is our number one priority. Our agents are highly skilled operatives who can adapt and work in numerous environments which allow HPPS great flexibility in how its operatives transport to and from vessels.” 

Story Here

Hollowpoint Protective Services

3 Comments

  1. I don't think John Harris has anywhere near the kind of background that someone who is thinking about putting armed guards on ships in international waters should have. That web site is fancy looking, but what it doesn't have says lots more than what it does have.

    No current or former clients, no personnel listed other than Harris (whose background doesn't inspire) and no brick and mortar facility, all point to one thing, a wanna be with a good webmaster.

    Comment by John Grever — Tuesday, November 25, 2008 @ 9:47 AM

  2. I read the above comment and wanted to throw my two sense in. I was sub-contracted by HollowPoint back in September to provide security for a well to do family on their luxury yacht. I have spoken to Mr. Harris many times at length and I would not have taken the job if I did not believe that he knew what he was doing and ran a good operation. Mr. Harris told me when I had some questions that he is a medium sized company who picks and chooses his battles. He said he had no desire to compete on a large scale. He further told me that a company is only as good as his employees. I just wanted to throw this out there, that I did work for his company and he seems to have his business together and is running a successful operation. If his company is awarded a contract with a shipping company, I would sincerely hope that he I will have a chance to assist again.

    Comment by Jeffery Miller — Wednesday, November 26, 2008 @ 5:29 PM

  3. Hey guys, thanks for the input. I hope Mr. Harris gets some work for his guys, and the maritime security industry is able to fill the current needs out there. Like I said, I cannot endorse his company at this time, but I certainly wish him all the luck.

    Comment by headjundi — Wednesday, November 26, 2008 @ 5:53 PM

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress