Posted on 08/08/2013 10:08:33 AM PDT by yoe
If you really believe in the benefits of gun ownership, wouldn’t you be happy to move from this future gun free zone? I would expect breaking and entering and other such crimes to jump after the owner publicly disarms the people oops now victims in waiting living there.
If it’s ‘federally rent controlled’, then it’s not legal for them to ban guns.
Why would anybody give the management their gun info anyway? It’s none of their damned business.
Someone should sue them, and become the owner of that rental property!
Since the apartment complex is government owned the State exemption law for guns trumps this rule.
“Private property is private property. “
Except this isn’t private property, it is government owned.
and a contract is a contract and a contitutional right is s constitutional right. I am a landlord btw. If I can’t discriminate against someone who is black, mexican, Jewish, Muslim, a single unwed mother, or a homosexual, I damn sure shouldn’t be able to discriminate against a law abiding firearm owner and surely would not.
This kind of stuff should happen each and every week, ‘cuz we usually win.
Despite the victories, this constant BS attacks against the 2A still chips away at the foundation, bullet after bullet (pun intended).
The map at the top of this thread may put your mind at ease a bit: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3052461/posts
The tenants overruled the owner, so I would presume there are no precedents for gun bans in housing rental contracts, ostensibly for the reason I stated.
Signs should say:
Public Safety Warning
"Criminal Free-Fire Zone."
"Self-Defense Not Permitted at Oakwood Apartments."
The tenants overruled the “owner,” not because of the reasons you stated, but because this is NOT private property, which I mistakenly believed.
There may or may not be a precedent for banning guns in rental agreements, but that would be irrelevant. I’m sure there is no precedent for banning people with unattractive fingernails from rental agreements, but that would still be the unalienable right of the private property owner.
Given our USCON is....a d*** piece of paper all too often, it's subject to the whims of EOs of a Commie-Fascist and Admin in charge of creating all False Flag events, a compliant propagandist media, and a fickle, corrupt, cowardly, bribed intimidated Congress.
I'm not saying the 2A support isn'r rock solid, but in the case of Martial Law and and a gub that just bought 300 million rounds of hollow pt ammo, nothing's a gimme. Just sayin'.
Sure owners have the right to ban just about anything, but is that in their business interest? No, and thus such hypotheticals become irrelevant.
Thanks....
Colorado: Castle Rock apartment’s controversial policy banning firearms is thrown out
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3052479/posts
Sure it’s legal. It’s private property owner so it’s not a second amendment issue (Bill of Rights is a restriction on government activity not private activity) and gun owners are not a protected class so there is no equal protection violation. It does sound like a pretty good business opportunity though. If I owned an apartment building in the area I would happily advertise, “We welcome gun owners.” Not only would they get plenty of renters, but it would probably be the safest place to live in the whole state.
Oops, after reading the thread I see that there’s a government component, in which case the ban would not be legal.
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.