Woman Shot at Barisone Farm

[Denali6298]

@trubandloki

This I 100% agree with. Do not brandish a weapon unless you plan to use it.

These two posts I do not agree with.
Lots of people carry guns all the time, or close to all the time. People you do not know are carrying a gun.
No plans to go hunting. No plans to join a gang or deal with gang members and certainly no plans to commit an armed robbery.
Having a gun does not mean you plan to use a gun.

You make it sound like if you have a gun on your person you are just waiting to pull it out and use it. Most people I know that conceal carry (legally) hope to never ever have to use that gun.

You took my quote out of context. I have never carried while I’m on my own property. My point with what you quoted was one doesn’t bring a gun to confront someone unless they intend to use it. Seeing as how he was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm my point stands within the context of this discussion.

Also, if one is not residing in one of the few open carry states, no you don’t know who is carrying. Because it’s called CONCEALED CARRY. Just saying.

Also you should never own a gun unless you are planning to use it.

[Denali6298]

@Brown Derby

I hear ya, @SonnysMom. Just more confirmation of lazy, slanted reporting. (IMO!)

It wasn’t meant to be a breaking news story. This is everything wrong today. People can’t differentiate an opinion or a fluff piece from actual news. The fact that you equate them tells me you can’t.

[TBKite]

@BigMama1

Really? That doesn’t sound normal to me. People carry weapons if they are going hunting, or of course if they are gang members, or planning to commit an armed robbery. Carrying a handgun around to own property does not seem normal - especially if there is the chance of an argument with volatile people. If that dog was that dangerous normal would be calling Animal Conteol ti have it removed.

As an (I think fellow?) Canadian I agree with you. I recently had some regional differences in gun culture highlighted for me when we took a guided tour of the mammoth caves in Kentucky. As part of the preamble before the tour, the tour guide mentioned it was illegal to bring firearms into the caves. I chuckled a bit to myself, because who brings guns on a family- friendly tour of limestone caves in a state park? Luckily I was at the back so no one saw me. Every one else was dead serious.

On the bus ride to the cave entrance our tour guide also said something in honor of veterans (not surehow that was relevant to the tour, but fine). The guy in the seat behind me actually bitched under his breath that we honour our veterans but won’t allow guns! Because I guess he should be allowed to bring a gun anywhere, even places where it’s presence could be nothing but a danger to him and everyone around him?

So yeah, the definition of “normal” varies.

[RainWeasley]

@Denali6298

Your argument lost all its weight in your last paragraph. Just stop.

I’m sorry, excuse me? How on earth did that make my argument lose all of its weight?

@TBKite

As an (I think fellow?) Canadian I agree with you. I recently had some regional differences in gun culture highlighted for me when we took a guided tour of the mammoth caves in Kentucky. As part of the preamble before the tour, the tour guide mentioned it was illegal to bring firearms into the caves. I chuckled a bit to myself, because who brings guns on a family- friendly tour of limestone caves in a state park? Luckily I was at the back so no one saw me. Every one else was dead serious.

On the bus ride to the cave entrance our tour guide also said something in honor of veterans (not surehow that was relevant to the tour, but fine). The guy in the seat behind me actually bitched under his breath that we honour our veterans but won’t allow guns! Because I guess he should be allowed to bring a gun anywhere, even places where it’s presence could be nothing but a danger to him and everyone around him?

So yeah, the definition of “normal” varies.

Yeah it is kind of the norm around here…I don’t personally like it, but when you grow up around it I guess it isn’t as surprising. Which is why I’m kind of shocked at how many people think it isn’t possible for someone to carry a gun around with absolutely no intention of using it. Again, I don’t think that’s what happened in this case. But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen all the time in different areas.

The South is kind of it’s own weird little world. I’m lucky to live in an area that is relatively different from everywhere around us (all the gun-toters I know are out in the more rural areas outside the city). But people say, do, and believe some… interesting things down here.

[trubandloki]

@Denali6298

Also, if one is not residing in one of the few open carry states, no you don’t know who is carrying. Because it’s called CONCEALED CARRY. Just saying.

???
I know what concealed carry means.
That is why I said that there are people who carry that you do not know carry.

[BigMama1]

@Denali6298

It is not normal for anyone who carries to just shoot people. At least not normal people. That’s not limited to gang members or other criminals. One does not show up with a gun unless they actually think they will use it. It’s a foolish person to brandish such a weapon as a scare tactic.

I carry but not all the time. Depends on where I’m at. Really though, if one brings a gun to a conversation most people would interpret that as intending to fire.

Most gun classes will tell you not to own a gun unless you are willing to shoot it.

The only person I know who carries all the time is my step mom who is a cop in a bad city. Even then she will pull her badge before her gun if we are just out and about. I have only actually seen her shoot/hold a gun when we are target shooting. Out and about when someone harasses us or she runs into a family member of someone she arrested, she uses her words.

Agree! And legally that may be the only thing that matters. All the mental stress and duress in the world doesn’t negate what looks like intent / pre-meditation / willingness to fire.

[x-halt-salute]

@Jealoushe

Let’s revisit his charges: https://www.insider.com/michael-bari…-charge-2019-8

He will have to also argue it was self defense to shoot TWO people, multiple rounds. And I am guessing he was doing something illegal with that gun to have the weapons charges.

It is really hard to argue self defense when there are multiple shots and victims.

I still think he will plead out. The 4 charges were laid with hopes they can nail him on 1-2 and throw the other 2 out in a plea. Just my personal speculation.

ETA the actual chargs are listed here:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2019/08/08/former-us-olympian-arrested-after-shooting-equestrian-facility/1957852001/

I also tend to think a plea is likely.

The defendant shot someone. That doesn’t seem to be in question.

The only folks who witnessed the crime and can testify to a timeline where gun was fired, then MB was attacked (vs the opposite order) appear to be pretty unreliable. Not to mention that they probably can’t count on a lot of sympathy for the victim.

I don’t see great reasons for either side to be that eager to take their chances with a jury under those circumstances, if a plea to a lesser charge can be worked out.

Still, I don’t think an attempted murder conviction would necessarily be a slam-dunk if it did go to trial, unless there’s a lot of evidence for the prosecution’s case that LK hasn’t spewed all over the internet yet. After all, MB’s defense doesn’t have to prove his innocence, it only has to cast enough doubt on the case the prosecution has made that a jury might think there’s a reasonable chance that the criteria for that charge (e.g. intent) haven’t been proven, or that what happened could have been self-defense consistent with relevant legal definitions. If the defense says that two humans and a dog attacked defendant before any shots were fired, and a gun that defendant was carrying for protection from dog was accidentally fired during the melee (not saying that’s what happened, but it’s one possible self-defense story), I don’t think it would necessarily matter that two people are involved, only whether the story was generally believable and makes a strong enough argument against intent to murder.

And although the NYT seems to think that folks on this forum largely aren’t rallying around LK because we’re all MB fangirls, in reality I don’t think the range of sentiments here is all that different from what you’d find in a general population in reaction to what has been said publicly about the whole situation.

Not sure why the weapons charges make you think MB was doing something illegal with the gun, either (other than, you know, shooting LK). If he didn’t have a permit, that’s an easy thing to add to the list to make sure something sticks no matter what.

[SonnysMom]

@Denali6298

It wasn’t meant to be a breaking news story. This is everything wrong today. People can’t differentiate an opinion or a fluff piece from actual news. The fact that you equate them tells me you can’t.

It is an article published in a major news paper. It was not identified as an opinion piece. Even if it is a fluff piece it should be accurate. It was in the ny region section of the paper not the opinion section or the social section.

Actually if it was a breaking news story I can excuse some of the mistakes as there would not be time to research the details such as her age, the Olympics details and confirm some of the statements. However when those mistakes are corrected there should be an editor’s note on what was originally reported and that it was corrected.

This journalist has put out other serious articles. It isn’t like the fashion/lifestyle writer put out an article. Quite frankly writing a fluff article about a shooting would just be in poor taste. This article was presented as factual accounting of the shooting and what lead up to it and therefore should be factual. Reporting on a local shooting should never be a fluff piece. But maybe my definition of fluff piece is different than yours.

I also have higher expectations of a major news paper such as the NY Times than the local little newspaper on getting details correct and putting out a balanced article.

Quite frankly this was just a badly written, badly researched article.

On a separate note regarding why he might be carrying a gun on his own property I personally saw the FB post by LK prior to the shooting where she mentioned something to the effect that it is a good thing that the NJ laws were so strict since she had 2 guns good thing they were in NC. At the time it came across to me as a veiled threat. Quite frankly the way it was formatted made me briefly wonder if the part that they were in NC was a lie. And that was my thought prior to the shooting.
If you are living on a property with your family, running your business there and living on the same property is a person you are actively having a conflict with you might change you mind about not carrying a gun on your own property. Especially when she mentions not being responsible for the actions of her multiple personalities and owning guns. Remember this person has horses at the farm so likely he couldn’t restrict her from coming to the barn, rings, turn-out fields as that would restrict her access to her horses. If she was just a tenant at the apartment then it would have been much easier to legally to restrict her access to his business portion of the farm.

[Denali6298]

@RainWeasley

I’m sorry, excuse me? How on earth did that make my argument lose all of its weight?

Your ex carries because it’s cool. So you stated. Any justification beyond that that you repeat is BS. I had the same ex and he’s an idiot who shouldn’t own a gun. I would never use him as an example.

[Denali6298]

@SonnysMom

It is an article published in a major news paper. It was not identified as an opinion piece. Even if it is a fluff piece it should be accurate. It was in the ny region section of the paper not the opinion section or the social section.

Actually if it was a breaking news story I can excuse some of the mistakes as there would not be time to research the details such as her age, the Olympics details and confirm some of the statements. However when those mistakes are corrected there should be an editor’s note on what was originally reported and that it was corrected.

This journalist has put out other serious articles. It isn’t like the fashion/lifestyle writer put out an article. Quite frankly writing a fluff article about a shooting would just be in poor taste. This article was presented as factual accounting of the shooting and what lead up to it and therefore should be factual. Reporting on a local shooting should never be a fluff piece. But maybe my definition of fluff piece is different than yours.

I also have higher expectations of a major news paper such as the NY Times than the local little newspaper on getting details correct and putting out a balanced article.

Quite frankly this was just a badly written, badly researched article.

On a separate note regarding why he might be carrying a gun on his own property I personally saw the FB post by LK prior to the shooting where she mentioned something to the effect that it is a good thing that the NJ laws were so strict since she had 2 guns good thing they were in NC. At the time it came across to me as a veiled threat. Quite frankly the way it was formatted made me briefly wonder if the part that they were in NC was a lie. And that was my thought prior to the shooting.
If you are living on a property with your family, running your business there and living on the same property is a person you are actively having a conflict with you might change you mind about not carrying a gun on your own property. Especially when she mentions not being responsible for the actions of her multiple personalities and owning guns. Remember this person has horses at the farm so likely he couldn’t restrict her from coming to the barn, rings, turn-out fields as that would restrict her access to her horses. If she was just a tenant at the apartment then it would have been much easier to legally to restrict her access to his business portion of the farm.

Again it’s sad people need “sections” to determine what is actual news and what is meant as not news. The article was about how most shooting victims garner sympathy despite behavior and this one doesn’t.

[Angela_Freda]

@Denali6298

Your ex carries because it’s cool. So you stated. Any justification beyond that that you repeat is BS. I had the same ex and he’s an idiot who shouldn’t own a gun. I would never use him as an example.

:lol::lol::lol:

[Denali6298]

@Angela Freda

:lol::lol::lol:

I don’t get why you keep laughing at all my posts after I suggested you ignore me. It’s a little weird. Especially since it makes zero sense. I dunno. Without the ignore function I was hoping for adult behavior. Clearly that was asking too much.

[BigMama1]

@TMares

I’ve had a weapon drawn on me on my family’s lake property. The jackass holding it was our (now deceased) neighbor. He did not recognize my vehicle in the driveway and came down in the dark to investigate. He approached me in the dark w/o a word while I was unloading my stuff. I was alone, and he scared the crap out of me when his voice and flashlight startled me and he started interrogating me about who I was and what I was doing there. I recognized his voice and finally convinced him through my answers that I was who I said I was. Only then did he get friendly…and tell me he had a gun on me. He tried to shake my hand, I told him you don’t get to trespass AND pull a weapon AND get a handshake. Go HOME, Bill, you are NOT supposed to be here (my Dad had previously expressly banned him from setting foot on the property. IOW, Dad said “You are not welcome on this property ever. Do not set foot on this property whether we’re here or not. I’ll shoot your ass if I catch you down here.”

Your normal isn’t everyone’s normal.

And THIS is how people get shot.

[eggbutt]

@x-halt-salute

The only folks who witnessed the crime and can testify to a timeline where gun was fired, then MB was attacked (vs the opposite order) appear to be pretty unreliable. Not to mention that they probably can’t count on a lot of sympathy for the victim.

I don’t see great reasons for either side to be that eager to take their chances with a jury under those circumstances, if a plea to a lesser charge can be worked out.

Still, I don’t think an attempted murder conviction would necessarily be a slam-dunk if it did go to trial, unless there’s a lot of evidence for the prosecution’s case that LK hasn’t spewed all over the internet yet. After all, MB’s defense doesn’t have to prove his innocence, it only has to cast enough doubt on the case the prosecution has made that a jury might think there’s a reasonable chance that the criteria for that charge (e.g. intent) haven’t been proven, or that what happened could have been self-defense consistent with relevant legal definitions. If the defense says that two humans and a dog attacked defendant before any shots were fired, and a gun that defendant was carrying for protection from dog was accidentally fired during the melee (not saying that’s what happened, but it’s one possible self-defense story), I don’t think it would necessarily matter that two people are involved, only whether the story was generally believable and makes a strong enough argument against intent to murder.

REASONABLE DOUBT

[Denali6298]

@BigMama1

Agree! And legally that may be the only thing that matters. All the mental stress and duress in the world doesn’t negate what looks like intent / pre-meditation / willingness to fire.

And if someone is under that much mental stress and duress they don’t need a gun. I fully support shooting the person that beats on you. I fully support shooting people who you feel threaten (legitimately) your life. I do not support shooting someone because one looses all self control.

[RainWeasley]

@Denali6298

Your ex carries because it’s cool. So you stated. Any justification beyond that that you repeat is BS. I had the same ex and he’s an idiot who shouldn’t own a gun. I would never use him as an example.

He wasn’t an example. He was the first person I thought of that carries all the time. By far not the only one, and while he isn’t the brightest I also couldn’t ever see him using it, he is too nice of a person. He just liked the whole cowboy look. And that wasn’t a justification of people carrying, just an " and then there are these dumb people that do it". But the vast majority I know carry for protection. Surprised you didn’t understand that. Guess you got too caught up on the ex bit, I shouldn’t have mentioned him at the beginning. I’m sorry that wasn’t clearer. But you can’t discount literally everything else I said because of that, he is not the majority…which should have been clear from the way I stuck it in at the end as a joking aside.

At any rate, I really don’t want to argue with you. My whole point was that just because it isn’t normal for people to carry for non-nefarious reasons where some people live, doesn’t mean it isn’t normal everywhere. I wouldn’t carry though, guns make me nervous. I don’t even really like shooting at the range.

[Denali6298]

@trubandloki

???
I know what concealed carry means.
That is why I said that there are people who carry that you do not know carry.

I guess I didn’t understand why you were telling people you don’t know who carries. Conceal carry pretty much sums that up.

[Jealoushe]

@x-halt-salute

I also tend to think a plea is likely.

The defendant shot someone. That doesn’t seem to be in question.

The only folks who witnessed the crime and can testify to a timeline where gun was fired, then MB was attacked (vs the opposite order) appear to be pretty unreliable. Not to mention that they probably can’t count on a lot of sympathy for the victim.

I don’t see great reasons for either side to be that eager to take their chances with a jury under those circumstances, if a plea to a lesser charge can be worked out.

Still, I don’t think an attempted murder conviction would necessarily be a slam-dunk if it did go to trial, unless there’s a lot of evidence for the prosecution’s case that LK hasn’t spewed all over the internet yet. After all, MB’s defense doesn’t have to prove his innocence, it only has to cast enough doubt on the case the prosecution has made that a jury might think there’s a reasonable chance that the criteria for that charge (e.g. intent) haven’t been proven, or that what happened could have been self-defense consistent with relevant legal definitions. If the defense says that two humans and a dog attacked defendant before any shots were fired, and a gun that defendant was carrying for protection from dog was accidentally fired during the melee (not saying that’s what happened, but it’s one possible self-defense story), I don’t think it would necessarily matter that two people are involved, only whether the story was generally believable and makes a strong enough argument against intent to murder.

And although the NYT seems to think that folks on this forum largely aren’t rallying around LK because we’re all MB fangirls, in reality I don’t think the range of sentiments here is all that different from what you’d find in a general population in reaction to what has been said publicly about the whole situation.

Not sure why the weapons charges make you think MB was doing something illegal with the gun, either (other than, you know, shooting LK). If he didn’t have a permit, that’s an easy thing to add to the list to make sure something sticks no matter what.

You are forgetting about a little something called “forensics”.

The location of all the evidence, especially bullet holes, casings, etc will be very helpful in confirming who was standing where and when, when this all went down. It will also show is MB had an opportunity to flee as per his self defense stance. Any lies and well…forensics will flush them out.

@eggbutt I think you should fess up on your relation to this scenario

[Denali6298]

@RainWeasley

He wasn’t an example. He was the first person I thought of that carries all the time. By far not the only one, and while he isn’t the brightest I also couldn’t ever see him using it, he is too nice of a person. He just liked the whole cowboy look. And that wasn’t a justification of people carrying, just an " and then there are these dumb people that do it". But the vast majority I know carry for protection. Surprised you didn’t understand that. Guess you got too caught up on the ex bit, I shouldn’t have mentioned him at the beginning. I’m sorry that wasn’t clearer. But you can’t discount literally everything else I said because of that, he is not the majority…which should have been clear from the way I stuck it in at the end as a joking aside.

At any rate, I really don’t want to argue with you. My whole point was that just because it isn’t normal for people to carry for non-nefarious reasons where some people live, doesn’t mean it isn’t normal everywhere. I wouldn’t carry though, guns make me nervous. I don’t even really like shooting at the range.

My apologies for misunderstanding but I still think your ex has no business carrying let alone owning a gun.

[Denali6298]

@Jealoushe there is no room for science here. Stop that!