Posted on 10/25/2008 5:13:54 AM PDT by marktwain
Thankfully we haven't had to sign a lease since 1976 when we were still newlyweds and everyone was 'Firearms Friendly'. I think that lease was two pages and mostly pertained to how you had to leave the apartment when you moved -- white walls, no holes from picture/fixture hangers, no carpet damage, no damage to fireplace, etc. (It was one of those (cough) 'Swinging Singles Complexes' so 'rules' were on the light side).
*** As much as I disagree with it, I think it may be a liability issue for the property managers to have tenants owning guns. After all, they're the ones who are going to get sued if an irresponsible tenant accidentally discharges a firearm into another unit. ***
"Liability". Yeah, thanks to lawyers they go after the deep pocket, not the irresponsible scum bag. But you still can't sign away your Constitutional Rights. Except if you live in a gubmint owned building, all thanks to Mayor Daley
One day he arbitrarily BANNED all otherwise legal Firearms (Rifles and Shotguns) from 'his' Public Housing buildings. This went to court, then up to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and he won. Poor people have no 2nd Amendment Rights when they opt to live in a gubmint owned building.
Ideally, yes. Unfortunately, I'm in the military and have to relocate often. Owning a home isn't really an option until I get closer to retirement.
Fortunately, my last three apartments didn't mention firearms in the leases, only "illegal activity" (I checked).
Did the tenant ever year of going to court? Landlords don’t evict, courts do, after minimal legal notice, a complaint, and a court hearing, and an additional statutory period to comply with or appeal the court’s edict.
There is no such thing as a “three-day eviction.”
A lot of states have a 3 day to respond or quit notice. That means you simply respond to the eviction notice and then they serve notice that you must move. Depends on what state you are in to how much time you have. In CA it is about 3 months after the dust settles before person is actually shown the door by a sheriff. A good lawyer can probably beat this. How about all the neighbors this guy saved from vandalism and theft of their property get together and help him?
It is legal, and I don't think it's uncommon, but such bans applies to things like target shooting. They do not apply to the discharge of firearms in bona fide self defense.
Perhaps that's why the thieves and vandals target this particular area...
Many leases contain such clauses, but there is an implicit exemption for self-defense cases (to explicitly forbid self-defense would be illegal; many contract clauses are routinely interpreted as including such exceptions as may be required by law). A clause forbidding firearm ownership might be a trickier thing to judge, legally, since there's seldom any way to prove in advance that a self-defense situation is going to arise. In this case, however, a situation did arise and the police seem to have ruled it a legitimate use of a firearm in self-defense.
The most thankless job is being on the board. You have a real complaint and it never would have happened if you were on the board.
Get involved and nip this crap in the bud. It ain’t fun but it is important and you can make a difference.
Or you can just bitch when one of these slip past you.
Sounds like BS to me too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.