CO Apt. Complex Bans Guns.

[steve4102]

A Colorado Apt complex has told it's residents to get rid of the guns or get out. This of course will do nothing but leave these people defenseless sitting ducks.

It looks like there are those that still believe dis-arming citizens is some how going to protect them and their neighbors. Didn't they learn anything from the massacres in other Gun-Free-Zones? Obviously not!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-they-have-to-get-rid-of-their-guns-or-leave/

 

[Queen_of_Thunder]

Easiest thing to do is remind the apt. complex if thats the path they choose they better offer 24hr security.

 

[Arbo]

The company can be contacted here:

http://www.ross-management.com/contact/

Feel free to politely let them know how you feel.

 

[WardenWolf]

Good luck getting that to stand in court. When you rent out part of your property, you give up certain rights to it. And Constitutional rights are generally protected regardless.

 

[230RN]

KUSA legal analyst Scott Robinson said courts have generally supported landlords’ rights to impose “reasonable regulations” on their tenants.

There's that "reasonable" again.

Mannnnnnn, how I hate that word.

Terry

 

[dab102999]

It is not just a ban on guns. it is a ban on guns and weapons. (Define weapons). Also noted at bottom of paper written in handwritting is will not allow concealed carry either. I sure hope this is challenged and just not go to the wayside. The right of a private property is stepping on the rights of a constitution and bill of rights.

 

[Midwest]

I smell a class action lawsuit

 

[Claude Clay]

i could understand ( just barely) restricting re-loading as you are working with gun powder; a product the uneducated equate to explosive. but a query to the fire department would shoot that reason for a ban down.

this is yet another example of micro managing based on what they ( them in power) 'think' is good for others. 'think' cause they seldom bother to verify their 'gee, i think this will be a good thing to do' with real world facts.

 

[Bovice]

That's pretty much unenforceable, guys.

Here's what you do. You tell the owner that all the guns are gone. If they insist on an inspection, relocate them for a few hours, let Whoopi in to check it out, then cart them back in. Problem solved and they go away happy, thinking you listened to their liberal gibberish.

What they don't know won't hurt them in this case.

 

[oneounceload]

It is private property, they can make any rule they want. You are free NOT to live there

The right of a private property is stepping on the rights of a constitution and bill of rights.

Those apply to the government regarding you

Good luck getting that to stand in court. When you rent out part of your property, you give up certain rights to it. And Constitutional rights are generally protected regardless.

Have any court decisions and citations for these remarks?

 

[oneounceload]

Here's what you do. You tell the owner that all the guns are gone. If they insist on an inspection, relocate them for a few hours, let Whoopi in to check it out, then cart them back in. Problem solved and they go away happy, thinking you listened to their liberal gibberish.

What they don't know won't hurt them in this case.

Except they have access to your place 24/7 without a need to inform.......

 

[dab102999]

It is private property, they can make any rule they want. You are free NOT to live there

I understand that. But is there any leg to stand on for those that already live there and have a signed lease that has different rules on them until 8/1/2013.

Also with the lease apearing to be typed out in is it valid to have a handwirtten note on the bottom that states hearsay of what a manager says?

 

[MErl]

Except they have access to your place 24/7 without a need to inform.......

Only in case of an emergency. At least that was the case last time I rented in CO.

 

[Deus Machina]

This is a tough one IMO.
The landlords have the right to restrict certain things in their property, as long as it's in the lease. I do uphold that they have no right to change that after, at least until it comes up for renewal.
But citizens have the right to own guns in their home. Even if it's not their property, they're paying and this is their home.
IMO, landlords can restrict whatever they feel like--as long as it doesn't infringe into constitutional rights.

 

[oneounceload]

Except they have access to your place 24/7 without a need to inform.......
Only in case of an emergency. At least that was the case last time I rented in CO.

You having a gun, or if they think you do, will constitute an emergency in their minds

Besides, would you REALLY want to live in a complex full of antis who are now prime targets for robbers and rapists? I wouldn't.

But is there any leg to stand on for those that already live there and have a signed lease that has different rules on them until 8/1/2013.

Also with the lease apearing to be typed out in is it valid to have a handwirtten note on the bottom that states hearsay of what a manager says?

If you acknowledged the handwritten adder via initials or signature, then you have agreed to the standard pre-printed form being modified. Did you mean 8/1/2014?

 

[Ryanxia]

The company can be contacted here:

http://www.ross-management.com/contact/

Feel free to politely let them know how you feel.

I tried contacting them but their 'proof you're human' interface wouldn't let me pass. Never seen that one before.

I was trying to submit this:

I've just learned of your anti-American policy to restrict law abiding citizens in your apartments from owning firearms (as guaranteed by the Constitution).

I am letting you know that I will tell all friends, family and coworkers what a shady company you are and to never do business with or purchase/rent from you until these policies are changed.

 

[dogtown tom]

oneounceload It is private property, they can make any rule they want. You are free NOT to live there

This.

A property OWNER has every right to decide what is and is not allowed on his property as long as he does not violate federal law (No pets, no smoking, no loud music is fine, no minorities or catholics is not).

People get wound up over a supposed violation of their Second Amendment rights and start bellowing about class action lawsuits and other nonsense:
The Bill of Rights protects us from GOVERNMENT, not private business.

I do question the legality of a lease or rental agreement that can add a "no firearms" prohibition without the consent of the lessee/renter.

 

[gym]

I sent them a letter, If someone gets killed, it's on them.

 

[Trung Si]

Just don't advertise that you have any, it's just that simple!

 

[steve4102]

It is private property, they can make any rule they want.

Maybe, maybe not. What if this complex is Section 8 and accepts Govt subsidies? Does this bring the Constitution into play as they are no longer "Totally" private?

 

[dab102999]

Oneounceload it said in the commentary that residents were issued new revision on august first. So that is why I dated it that way.

 

[gym]

When I lived in an apartment for a year when I moved to FL in the 90's, they wanted a key, "demanded it". I brought them a letter drawn up by an attorney, stating that they were going to take full responsibility for my belongings, including my dog, "who is trained to bite anyone entering, if I am not home", and any weapons Jewelry or cash I had in the house. Along with my alarm system.
That was the last time they bothered me about the key, I got the old "we will ask legal" and never was bothered again.
I also screwed all of the windows and sliders down, so that no one could open them from outside, and screened in the terrace. The best way to handle these things is to make someone responsible for your property, "they want nothing to do with that".
So if you keep your concealed guns concealed, and don't give them the key, "because they won't sign a legally binding letter" you pretty much don't have to do much else unless you need to shoot someone breaking in, in which case you were just on the way back to drop your guns off at your sisters house, after a day at the range.

 

[oneounceload]

dab - so if I understand you correctly, folks with current leases are now having their leases modified whether they agree to it or not? That would be breaking a valid contract on the part of the lessor. If a tenant was to break a lease, there are usually penalties - loss of deposit, etc. There might be the reverser in this regard - it would be best to contact a local attorney to see if some form of remuneration is in order.

New tenants, going forward, will be under the new regulations

 

[oneounceload]

Maybe, maybe not. What if this complex is Section 8 and accepts Govt subsidies? Does this bring the Constitution into play as they are no longer "Totally" private?

I do not believe so, as the Constitution applies to you being protected from your gov't's infringement on your rights (a lot of good it seems nowadays). It is still private property and even if some folks are having their rent subsidized by us via the Federal government, that doesn't change the ownership

 

[Ryanxia]

While someone's private property is their own, to companies that rent/lease property it could be a slippery slope. What if the next time the government bails out the banks (illegal already, oh well) they say, first you need to remove guns from all houses you hold the deed to (every homeowner who has a mortgage)? While it is the bank's property I see a slippery slope (don't we always see one? ).