2025 U.S. - Venezuela conflict

[Halifax Tar]

That’s an adorably urban thing to say.

Did you read my whole statement ?

I'm sorry your wife to endure that. 10 mins it too long to have to wait for police response, unless you are very rural.

Also, if I call 911 and its acceptable that your service responds in 10 mins, then your service needs to admit that and I need some more legal allowances for self preservation and protection.

The exception being rural as I said above.

 

[brihard]

Financial Times reporting on sentiment in the U.S. oil sector to invest capital in Venezuela:

US oil groups warn they will need guarantees to invest in Venezuela

Donald Trump to hold more talks with industry bosses as president flexes power over energy markets

www.ft.com

Non-paywall version: https://archive.is/iuTCj

A choice quote that neatly sums this up:

Earlier this week Trump said the American oil companies could be “reimbursed by us, or through revenue” if they invested in Venezuela. But executives remained cautious, with some citing the erratic policymaking.
Earlier this week Trump said the American oil companies could be “reimbursed by us, or through revenue” if they invested in Venezuela. But executives remained cautious, with some citing the erratic policymaking.

“No one wants to go in there when a random fucking tweet can change the entire foreign policy of the country,” said one private equity investor who specializes in energy.

 

[OldSolduer]

I like the "erratic policymaking" quote.

Its understated.

 

[Kirkhill]

I image that after all the foreign debts have been paid there will be nothing left for the people of Venezuela

Pace Mick Jagger, time is on their side.

Britain paid off its 1833 anti-slavery loan in 2015 along with its WW1 debt. It paid off its WW2 debts in 2006.
Come to think of it that is what probably inspired politicians to think they could borrow more in 2008 and 2020.

 

[OldSolduer]

Pace Mick Jagger, time is on their side.

Don't you mean Keith Richards??

 

[brihard]

Did you read my whole statement ?



Also, if I call 911 and its acceptable that your service responds in 10 mins, then your service needs to admit that and I need some more legal allowances for self preservation and protection.

The exception being rural as I said above.

Apologies, I didn’t read closely enough. That said I think rurality - or at least not really urban - is a factor in HB’s situationz

Our laws as written do allow for self defense. In a situation like he describes, there’s no reason his wife couldn’t arm herself with a firearm they legally have while waiting for police.

 

[Kirkhill]

Don't you mean Keith Richards??

That man enbalmed himself decades ago.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Apologies, I didn’t read closely enough. That said I think rurality - or at least not really urban - is a factor in HB’s situationz

Our laws as written do allow for self defense. In a situation like he describes, there’s no reason his wife couldn’t arm herself with a firearm they legally have while waiting for police.

If you're ok with a 10 min response to a 911 call time I want castle laws.

 

[YZT580]

Great example of this is the evolution of 1% Biker Gangs. Hells Angels never flaunt their colors anymore and clubhouses aren't publicly displayed anymore. Secrecy and operational security are the name of the game.

except for Port Dover on Friday the 13th.

 

[YZT580]

Apologies, I didn’t read closely enough. That said I think rurality - or at least not really urban - is a factor in HB’s situationz

Our laws as written do allow for self defense. In a situation like he describes, there’s no reason his wife couldn’t arm herself with a firearm they legally have while waiting for police.

except to be legal they need to be locked in the safe. Try for a quick draw with that restriction. Steel doors and window bars are a better choice

 

[Brad Sallows]

If you're ok with a 10 min response to a 911 call time I want castle laws.

No, you'd need castle constitutional rights. Anything less will be negotiated away to activists unwilling to simply impose their neuroticism only on their own communities.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Apologies, I didn’t read closely enough. That said I think rurality - or at least not really urban - is a factor in HB’s situationz

Our laws as written do allow for self defense. In a situation like he describes, there’s no reason his wife couldn’t arm herself with a firearm they legally have while waiting for police.

Unless she is unlicensed and the licensed owner is no where near. Then your getting into unsafe storage and illegal possession. Doesn’t matter if the use of force was legal in that case, they would still drag though the courts and make her pay.

Ian Thompson is the case law for that (and that is with him legally being able to possess and own).

 

[brihard]

If you're ok with a 10 min response to a 911 call time I want castle laws.

I’m not ‘ok’ with it but I recognize it as a reality outside of urban centers. If emergency services could teleport that would be great.

Our existing laws already allow self defense up to and including deadly force if a person can articulate a reasonable fear of death or grievous bodily harm, and there’s actually quite a bit of leeway for that.

Unless she is unlicensed and the licensed owner is no where near. Then your getting into unsafe storage and illegal possession. Doesn’t matter if the use of force was legal in that case, they would still drag though the courts and make her pay.

Ian Thompson is the case law for that (and that is with him legally being able to possess and own).

And as a result of the Thomson acquittal, case law is established and police and prosecutors have more knowledge on where charges should and should not be laid. He should never have been charged and it’s unfortunate that he was, given his home was literally already under attack. However that was also 13 years ago now and the fact that it’s still the relevant case brought up rather than something newer is telling. The law has been further clarified in cases like Khill that help establish the boundaries.

If someone were in their residence and the door getting kicked in and they had a reasonable fear for their safety, section 34 and to a lesser extend section 35 have a lot to say.

As it pertains to the lawfulness of her accessing a legally owned and safely stored firearm, the defence of necessity would be available, if for some reason charges were laid in the first place.

 

[HavokFour]

Meanwhile in Columbia.

Colombian Guerrillas Vow to Spend 'Last Drop of Blood Fighting the US Empire' After Attack on Venezuela

Colombia's National Liberation Army (ELN) and dissident factions of the former FARC rebel group issued defiant statements following the U.S. military operation in Venezuela.

www.latintimes.com

 

[Kirkhill]

If one is permitted the use of deadly force, and there are no credible alternatives in the form of timely rescue, then surely that would be grounds for ownership of the means of applying deadly force?

As I understand it if you have a firearm acquired for hunting or sport then you may use it in self-defence but you can't buy a firearm explicitly for self-defence.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I’m not ‘ok’ with it but I recognize it as a reality outside of urban centers. If emergency services could teleport that would be great.

Our existing laws already allow self defense up to and including deadly force if a person can articulate a reasonable fear of death or grievous bodily harm, and there’s actually quite a bit of leeway for that.



And as a result of the Thomson acquittal, case law is established and police and prosecutors have more knowledge on where charges should and should not be laid. He should never have been charged and it’s unfortunate that he was, given his home was literally already under attack. However that was also 13 years ago now and the fact that it’s still the relevant case brought up rather than something newer is telling. The law has been further clarified in cases like Khill that help establish the boundaries.

If someone were in their residence and the door getting kicked in and they had a reasonable fear for their safety, section 34 and to a lesser extend section 35 have a lot to say.

As it pertains to the lawfulness of her accessing a legally owned and safely stored firearm, the defence of necessity would be available, if for some reason charges were laid in the first place.

You will make a fine lawyer some day.

 

[OldSolduer]

That man enbalmed himself decades ago.

shar aarf bbbeb hahahahahaha - K Richards quote

Translation - "That's funny"

 

[PPCLI Guy]

You will make a fine lawyer some day.

He sounds like exactly the type of LEO that we need - one that knows the actual law.

 

[mariomike]

Meanwhile in Columbia.

Colombia, por favor.

 

[HavokFour]

Colombia, por favor.

Autocorrect claims another. I'll be in the corner of shame.