Originally Posted by Saddlebag
John was the only one who got my point, and that is to be very careful about declaring a horse as a rescue because it isn't always a rescue and the previous owner might get irate enough to take legal action. We hear the term "abused" all to often when in many cases the horses were quick to figure out that the new owners didn't have a lot of experience, and pretty much took over. Absolutely nothing to do with how someone else treated them.
Actually, I think I may have mentioned something to that effect as well, along with other things. I don't know if I mentioned legal action, but neither did you in the first post. Maybe would have helped more people see the point you were trying to make, but I think the discussion that did come along was productive nonetheless.
And, Nikelodeon, people can sue for whatever they want. I'm not going to walk around with my head down either, but I'm also not looking for ways to get into trouble. Lots of other people try to avoid legal issues as well, even if no consequences would end up befalling them from these issues. Lots of people also probably don't even think about the fact that the previous owner would take issue with throwing around the "abuse" term, nor do they ever think about a previous owner stumbling across a forum with a picture of their "abused" former horse. Seems like a heads up isn't inappropriate.