Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You're responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the Forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it--details of personal disputes may be better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts, though are not legally obligated to do so, regardless of content.

Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting. Moderators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts unless they have been alerted and have determined that a post, thread or user has violated the Forums' policies. Moderators do not regularly independently monitor the Forums for such violations.

Profanity, outright vulgarity, blatant personal insults or otherwise inappropriate statements will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Users may provide their positive or negative experiences with or opinions of companies, products, individuals, etc.; however, accounts involving allegations of criminal behavior against named individuals or companies MUST be first-hand accounts and may NOT be made anonymously.

If a situation has been reported upon by a reputable news source or addressed by law enforcement or the legal system it is open for discussion, but if an individual wants to make their own claims of criminal behavior against a named party in the course of that discussion, they too must identify themselves by first and last name and the account must be first-person.

Criminal allegations that do not satisfy these requirements, when brought to our attention, may be removed pending satisfaction of these criteria, and we reserve the right to err on the side of caution when making these determinations.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it's understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users' profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses -- Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it's related to a horse for sale, regardless of who's selling it, it doesn't belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions -- Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services -- Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products -- While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements -- Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be "bumped" excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues -- Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators' discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the �alert� button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your �Ignore� list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you'd rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user's membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 5/9/18)
See more
See less

Michael Barisone

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
    It is 100% wrong to drive to anyone's house with a gun, particularly someone with whom you are having an ongoing dispute.
    I know lots of people who pretty much always have a gun. So I personally do not find it weird that someone would drive to a house, any house, with a gun.

    Disclaimer - I in no way think that shooting LK was the right answer here. That was totally wrong.

    Comment


      Originally posted by trubandloki View Post
      I know lots of people who pretty much always have a gun. So I personally do not find it weird that someone would drive to a house, any house, with a gun.

      Disclaimer - I in no way think that shooting LK was the right answer here. That was totally wrong.
      I have no problem with people who lawfully carry. We know that was not the case here, because there are additional weapons charges.
      Let me apologize in advance.

      Comment


        Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
        Definitely several posters have made it very clear that they pity Michael Barisone, for shooting a woman twice in the chest and nearly killing her. People have been very upfront about this belief.

        And then there are those of us that think shooting a woman twice in the chest is beyond the pale, unless she is actively trying to kill you.

        I am going to say again, I personally believe it is wrong to shoot someone who is not actively trying to kill you.

        It is 100% wrong to drive to anyone's house with a gun, particularly someone with whom you are having an ongoing dispute. There are legal venues to pursue. You don't just get to supersede those and shoot people, regardless of how annoying they are.
        Either you just can't read for comprehension or you purposely have misread what others have said. Putting words in others mouths (i.e., lying about what someone else said) doesn’t make your point valid.

        No one has said that they “pity Michael Barisone, for shooting a woman twice in the chest and nearly killing her.”

        What they have said, is that they feel for him, because he was treated so horribly that he felt he had exhausted normal remedies (repeated calling cops who do nothing, for example) to the point that he believed no one was going to help him against LK, who is demonstrably a horrible person.


        “It’s up to you the voters to decide the future of our democracy. So get out and vote. ... As Abraham Lincoln said, the best way to predict the future is to choose it.” Professor Allan Lichtman

        Comment


          Originally posted by Sparrowette View Post



          What they have said, is that they feel for him, because he was treated so horribly that he felt he had exhausted normal remedies (repeated calling cops who do nothing, for example) to the point that he believed no one was going to help him against LK, who is demonstrably a horrible person.


          Please demonstrate from factual legal sources ie not opinion where Michael Barisone believed he had exhausted all legal remedies.

          Please show from factual legal sources how Lauren is demonstrably, not subjectively, a "horrible person".


          Stating things as fact does not make your opinions fact.
          Last edited by ladyj79; Jul. 13, 2020, 10:39 AM. Reason: Stray article
          Let me apologize in advance.

          Comment


            Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
            Definitely several posters have made it very clear that they pity Michael Barisone, for shooting a woman twice in the chest and nearly killing her. People have been very upfront about this belief.

            And then there are those of us that think shooting a woman twice in the chest is beyond the pale, unless she is actively trying to kill you.

            I am going to say again, I personally believe it is wrong to shoot someone who is not actively trying to kill you.

            It is 100% wrong to drive to anyone's house with a gun, particularly someone with whom you are having an ongoing dispute. There are legal venues to pursue. You don't just get to supersede those and shoot people, regardless of how annoying they are.
            Please tell me how this post is relevant regarding whether there is new information from the courts. You've repeated your opinion an nauseam. We get it. You and other love to lecture others for doing exactly what you are doing. You and Yankee Duchess seem obsessed as though you are involved or know the people involved. I don't get your fascination and obsession.

            Your posts are completely off topic and should be reported.

            See, I can throw your diatribe right back at you.

            Comment


              I am definitely obsessed with suggesting people not stalk women they dont like on the internets, spread wild accusations, and support men who shoot women in the women's front yard. Or anywhere.

              I am super obsessed with repeating that shooting people who aren't actively trying to kill you is very wrong, and that those who blindly support men shooting women who they dont like have to listen to me tell them they are awful.


              Ad nauseam. Or at least six times per day, per thread.
              Let me apologize in advance.

              Comment


                These threads really are a great example of poor reading comprehension and misinterpreting posts to fit your agenda.

                #whack

                Comment


                  Is there any new info or is this thread just for people to rehash what all of the other threads have been -i.e. “I’m not saying she deserved to get shot...” If that’s all it is, the mods need to shut this down again. The bickering is obnoxious.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by JustTheTicket View Post
                    Is there any new info or is this thread just for people to rehash what all of the other threads have been -i.e. “I’m not saying she deserved to get shot...” If that’s all it is, the mods need to shut this down again. The bickering is obnoxious.
                    Sorry to say the obvious, but you can always not read the thread if you do not like it.
                    Kind of like I do not like all the name calling and bickering in the political threads so I do not go read those - instead of insisting the mods shut them down.

                    I personally have learned all kinds of things in these threads.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
                      Definitely several posters have made it very clear that they pity Michael Barisone, for shooting a woman twice in the chest and nearly killing her. People have been very upfront about this belief.

                      And then there are those of us that think shooting a woman twice in the chest is beyond the pale, unless she is actively trying to kill you.

                      I am going to say again, I personally believe it is wrong to shoot someone who is not actively trying to kill you.

                      It is 100% wrong to drive to anyone's house with a gun, particularly someone with whom you are having an ongoing dispute. There are legal venues to pursue. You don't just get to supersede those and shoot people, regardless of how annoying they are.
                      See, the bolded right there. Most of us aren't saying it was okay to shoot her. We are saying that considering the outrageously out of control and extreme behavior coming from LK (I mean, if MB and the whole barn were bullying her....why were they the ones in the barn?) we are keeping the possibility that MB did believe he was shooting LK in self defense, or that there was some sort of accidental shooting because of a physical altercation over the gun, open in our minds until the trial.

                      MB driving over to her house with the gun doesn't necessarily mean he meant to shoot her. It doesn't prevent LK from approaching him (which she said she did) and being extremely threatening while doing it. You are not required to allow someone to physically reach you and start attacking you before you are allowed to shoot in self defense. No state requires that.

                      And again, as someone who has lived it....if LK's behavior was truly reported....it was not merely "annoying". Obviously you don't sleep in front of your horses stall with a loaded weapon unless there was a credible threat of harm to come to the horse.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Sparrowette View Post

                        Either you just can't read for comprehension or you purposely have misread what others have said. Putting words in others mouths (i.e., lying about what someone else said) doesn’t make your point valid.

                        No one has said that they “pity Michael Barisone, for shooting a woman twice in the chest and nearly killing her.”

                        What they have said, is that they feel for him, because he was treated so horribly that he felt he had exhausted normal remedies (repeated calling cops who do nothing, for example) to the point that he believed no one was going to help him against LK, who is demonstrably a horrible person.

                        From listening to the 911 calls, it looked to me that he was using the 911 service to harass and intimidate LK. Remember the one in which he makes a 911 can because his clients refuse to sign a document? Declining to sign a document is neither a crime nor an emergency.

                        On another, he says he feels threatened because she had posted something on Facebook the previous day. The dispatcher is confused, and asks, well, is anything happening now?

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Sdel View Post

                          See, the bolded right there. Most of us aren't saying it was okay to shoot her. We are saying that considering the outrageously out of control and extreme behavior coming from LK (I mean, if MB and the whole barn were bullying her....why were they the ones in the barn?) we are keeping the possibility that MB did believe he was shooting LK in self defense, or that there was some sort of accidental shooting because of a physical altercation over the gun, open in our minds until the trial.

                          MB driving over to her house with the gun doesn't necessarily mean he meant to shoot her. It doesn't prevent LK from approaching him (which she said she did) and being extremely threatening while doing it. You are not required to allow someone to physically reach you and start attacking you before you are allowed to shoot in self defense. No state requires that.

                          And again, as someone who has lived it....if LK's behavior was truly reported....it was not merely "annoying". Obviously you don't sleep in front of your horses stall with a loaded weapon unless there was a credible threat of harm to come to the horse.


                          Even if he didn’t drive over there intending to shoot her, having a gun with you to try to intimidate someone is unlawful use of a firearm, and one of the charges against him.

                          Only an irresponsible, irrational person sleeps outside her horse’s stall with a loaded gun under her pillow. Only one side was armed in this tragedy, and it wasn’t LK.
                          Last edited by YankeeDuchess; Jul. 13, 2020, 05:30 PM.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                            From listening to the 911 calls, it looked to me that he was using the 911 service to harass and intimidate LK. Remember the one in which he makes a 911 can because his clients refuse to sign a document? Declining to sign a document is neither a crime nor an emergency.

                            On another, he says he feels threatened because she had posted something on Facebook the previous day. The dispatcher is confused, and asks, well, is anything happening now?
                            A lot of people don't know how to use 911 appropriately. They just think they need the police so they call 911 instead of the non-emergency number. Heck, you've even maintained that LK's father didn't know how to use 911 appropriately when he called 911 looking for information on the shooting.

                            Comment


                              Ah, so is it putting words in someone's mouth to say that now the fan girls maintain he doesn't know how to use 911, but has exhausted all legal measures to gain redress from unspecified and unproven but repeatedly claimed "crimes"???

                              Let me apologize in advance.

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by JustTheTicket View Post
                                Is there any new info or is this thread just for people to rehash what all of the other threads have been -i.e. “I’m not saying she deserved to get shot...” If that’s all it is, the mods need to shut this down again. The bickering is obnoxious.
                                To respond to your post and stay on topic, there is no relevant new news on either case. There was a short process hearing last week that resulted in nothing to report.

                                I'm positive there is much to be said, but I can guarantee it won't be said here.

                                Comment


                                  Does the goalpost ever not move for those intent on defending violent men??
                                  Let me apologize in advance.

                                  Comment


                                    Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                                    From listening to the 911 calls, it looked to me that he was using the 911 service to harass and intimidate LK. Remember the one in which he makes a 911 can because his clients refuse to sign a document? Declining to sign a document is neither a crime nor an emergency.

                                    On another, he says he feels threatened because she had posted something on Facebook the previous day. The dispatcher is confused, and asks, well, is anything happening now?
                                    I've said it before and I'll say it again, 911 wasn't called because she refused to sign the paperwork. 911 was called because they refused to leave the barn area and were making threats. THAT'S what the 911 call was about. The threats. The paperwork was mentioned because that's what lead to the threats made by LK and RG

                                    Comment


                                      Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post



                                      Even if he didn’t drive over there intending to shoot her, having a gun with you yo try to intimidate someone is unlawful use of a firearm, and one of the charges against him.

                                      Only an irresponsible, irrational person sleeps outside her horse’s stall with a loaded gun under her pillow. Only one side was armed in this tragedy, and it wasn’t LK.
                                      How do you know she was unarmed? Hasn't she been known to use a firearm in anger?

                                      Comment


                                        Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post


                                        Please demonstrate from factual legal sources ie not opinion where Michael Barisone believed he had exhausted all legal remedies.

                                        Please show from factual legal sources how Lauren is demonstrably, not subjectively, a "horrible person".


                                        Stating things as fact does not make your opinions fact.
                                        The same thing can be said to you!
                                        You have very clearly stated you opinion, for which you believe is fact, and because others don’t take what you say as gospel, you just keep trying to cram it down everyone’s throat!
                                        The “factual legal sources” that you so desperately crave are not public yet, that will come with the trial, so you will just have to patiently wait, or not, who cares, your opinion means nothing!!

                                        Comment


                                          Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
                                          Ah, so is it putting words in someone's mouth to say that now the fan girls maintain he doesn't know how to use 911, but has exhausted all legal measures to gain redress from unspecified and unproven but repeatedly claimed "crimes"???

                                          Case in point of you putting words in other peoples mouths. You've just conflated two separate posters arguments. My thoughts, opinions, and arguments do not automatically transfer to anyone else's thoughts, opinions and arguments.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X