Can a landlord forbid gun ownership in his apartment complex?

[davidtaylorjr]

I know people who wont rent to tattooed people.
But there is nothing in the Bill of Rights about tattoo. But there is something about owing a gun.

But there is no obligation for you to let someone on your property with a gun either..... :shrug:

 

[Jerry]

Has firearm owner been added to the list of protected classes?

Is that what Dapper Andy claimed? Because it's his point being debated at the moment.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Is that what Dapper Andy claimed? Because it's his point being debated at the moment.

afaict this is the progression

The 14th Amendment provides equal protections for individuals, from individuals. Protections such as employment and housing discrimination. You, as a private property owner, cannot refuse to rent to someone simply because they're a race you don't like.

Perhaps you should read it again
14th Amendment | U.S. Constitution | LII / Legal Information Institute

Oh you want to start being a dick now, huh, ok...
If you fire an employee just because they have brown eyes, is a woman, or is a Muslim, they are going to win a wrongful-termination claim against you and draw unemployment off of you:
******
If you remove a customer just because they have brown eyes, is a woman, or is a Muslim, you will be cited by the State for braking Public Accommodation codes.
For example:
When you open your business to the public, you have to conduct 'fair and equal treatment' to each person who voluntarily walks through your door. You cannot deny access to your business just because a customer is one of these protected classes. You cannot refuse to sell to a customer just because the customer belongs to one of these classes. You can't do that now, you wouldn't be able to do that if 'lawfully carrying a firearm' were added to the list.
These laws come from the 14th Amendment. Yes, the 14th gives protections to individuals, from individuals, in addition to protections from the government.
Please, get a clue before speaking.

Has firearm owner been added to the list of protected classes?

Is that what Dapper Andy claimed? Because it's his point being debated at the moment.

:shrug:

 

[CRUE CAB]

But there is no obligation for you to let someone on your property with a gun either..... :shrug:

The property manager is normally not the property owner of an apartment complex.

 

[Jerry]

Moral obligation to protect your family, yes. HOWEVER, there are other places you could choose to go that don't have a gun policy.

That's a pretty big ASSumption to make. Fairly broad, too. I know the last time I went apartment hunting I was under a tight time crunch due to money and a new job further limiting my availability to look for a place at all. I was also using a housing benefit I earned when I became a veteran, and that's literally a short list and they give you 30 days to select a place or you're dropped from the program.

Most people are not sitting back with a pile of cash and all the time in the world. Most people have various fact-dependent forces at work limiting their options.

And just because you aren't proven guilty does not mean you are not guilty, just means you got away with it.

The landlord shouldn't have bothered to care in the first place, as long as I get away with it, that's all that matters.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

The property manager is normally not the property owner of an apartment complex.

But they are the authorized agent of the owner and are legally capable of acting on the owner's behalf. So six of one...

 

[Captain Adverse]

On the one hand, we might say, "Absolutely. It's his property, he can do what he wants as long as he's not discriminating based on his state's or Federal civil rights laws."

On the other, we might say, "No way. Owning a gun is a Constitutional right. My home, whether rented or NOT, becomes my private property when I sign a lease."

Should a landlord be able to add a covenant in his lease that says, "Anyone renting from XYZ Property Management is prohibited from voting in national and local elections"?

Or

"Anyone renting from XYZ Property Management is prohibited from voting Republican in national and local elections"?

Aside from such a ban being difficult to enforce, I don't think it would stand scrutiny. Management can't search my property. If I don't admit to having guns in my home, what is he to do?

This is not about 2nd Amendment rights, this is about property rights. A landlord retains ownership of the property he leases, the lessee pays for the privilege of using the property temporarily for the period he is leasing. The lessee is bound by the rules of the property owner.

Think of it this way. You own your home and the property it sits on. You have friends who have CCW, but you oppose guns or don’t want other guns in your house. You can tell your friends to leave the guns in their cars or they can’t visit you. They now have the option to do so or not visit. No rights have been violated.

As the property owner the landlord can decide reasonable rules to protect his property and his other tenants. He can require that no pets are allowed, no smoking is allowed, no drug use is allowed, etc. If a tenant is presented with a new rule or requirement that does not seem reasonable he can try a civil suit. Good luck with that.

Meanwhile either party can break the lease, and thereby suffer the legal liabilities imposed by breach of contract. That means if the landlord tells a tenant to vacate the landlord is bound to give notice, usually one rental period (30 days?). Then in several states the landlord may also be required to defray moving costs and the cost of short-term housing for the tenant while they seek permanent residence elsewhere. This usually means reasonable accommodation in a motel/hotel for between 30 days and no longer than the unexpired term of the original lease.

In any case, as the true property owner, the landlord can require reasonable rules and the tenant can either comply or move elsewhere. No rights have been violated.

 

[specklebang]

A really smart landlord wouldn't take any chances. Simply put in the lease that a security deposit of $10,000 is required to have a gun on the premises.

I'm going to explore this further. The big question I have as a landlord is can I demand a larger security deposit for families with small children the bane of any landlords existence? It is specifically prohinited to "discriminate: against children, that I know for sure. But if I can increase the deposit, then I probably can do the same with guns.

I'll take a gun collection over a child collection any day. But what my landlord "rights" are I'm not really sure about. I'll report back after I consult with an attorney. It won't be my policy, I like my neughbors to be armed and I live in the same complex as my tenants. But this is an interesting question. Very interesting.

IMHO, the complex in the OP is totally out of line.

 

[Jerry]

afaict this is the progression

You left out the beginning of the progression:

You misunderstand the U.S. Constitution.


It's a document that prohibits the government from doing things; not private individuals.

The 14th Amendment provides equal protections for individuals, from individuals. Protections such as employment and housing discrimination. You, as a private property owner, cannot refuse to rent to someone simply because they're a race you don't like.

Perhaps you should read it again
14th Amendment | U.S. Constitution | LII / Legal Information Institute

Oh you want to start being a dick now, huh, ok...


If you fire an employee just because they have brown eyes, is a woman, or is a Muslim, they are going to win a wrongful-termination claim against you and draw unemployment off of you:


******
If you remove a customer just because they have brown eyes, is a woman, or is a Muslim, you will be cited by the State for braking Public Accommodation codes.


For example:


When you open your business to the public, you have to conduct 'fair and equal treatment' to each person who voluntarily walks through your door. You cannot deny access to your business just because a customer is one of these protected classes. You cannot refuse to sell to a customer just because the customer belongs to one of these classes. You can't do that now, you wouldn't be able to do that if 'lawfully carrying a firearm' were added to the list.


These laws come from the 14th Amendment. Yes, the 14th gives protections to individuals, from individuals, in addition to protections from the government.


Please, get a clue before speaking.

Has firearm owner been added to the list of protected classes?

Rather or not "firearm owner" is on the protected class list has nothing to do with the broad claim "It's a document that prohibits the government from doing things; not private individuals".

 

[MaggieD]

A really smart landlord wouldn't take any chances. Simply put in the lease that a security deposit of $10,000 is required to have a gun on the premises.

I'm going to explore this further. The big question I have as a landlord is can I demand a larger security deposit for families with small children the bane of any landlords existence? It is specifically prohinited to "discriminate: against children, that I know for sure. But if I can increase the deposit, then I probably can do the same with guns.

I'll take a gun collection over a child collection any day. But what my landlord "rights" are I'm not really sure about. I'll report back after I consult with an attorney. It won't be my policy, I like my neughbors to be armed and I live in the same complex as my tenants. But this is an interesting question. Very interesting.

IMHO, the complex in the OP is totally out of line.

Since you cannot discriminate against renters with children, you could not discriminate against those families with children by requiring a larger deposit. I think your lawyer will tell you that.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Rather or not "firearm owner" is on the protected class list has nothing to do with the broad claim "It's a document that prohibits the government from doing things; not private individuals".

Protected classes was brought by you when you were conflating the FHA with the 14th Amendment.

 

[specklebang]

What you say makes sense. However, I'm pretty sure I can require a larger deposit for pets or smoking. So, is a gun like a child or like a dog?

Since you cannot discriminate against renters with children, you could not discriminate against those families with children by requiring a larger deposit. I think your lawyer will tell you that.

 

[Gaius46]

You cannot be forced to sign a way a right.
A property management company cannont dictate what parts of the BoR they will follow.

It's not a BoR issue. As a property I would have a right to not allow an armed person into my home. In doing so I am in no way violating anything within the Constitution.

By extension a property owner should have the right to discriminate with regard who he leases his property to.


Reality is contracts that ask people to violate the law are unenforceable. Absent a state law saying otherwise the landlord has a legal (and moral in my view) right to say "no firearms allowed." Whether he can effectively enforce that is another kettle of fish

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Since you cannot discriminate against renters with children, you could not discriminate against those families with children by requiring a larger deposit. I think your lawyer will tell you that.

Perhaps one could require a per person deposit w/o regard to the person's age.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

The property manager is normally not the property owner of an apartment complex.

Even if that was the case, that means the manager speaks for the owner.

 

[MaggieD]

What you say makes sense. However, I'm pretty sure I can require a larger deposit for pets or smoking. So, is a gun like a child or like a dog?

Guns and dogs aren't protected by the Civil Rights Act.

Perhaps one could require a per person deposit w/o regard to the person's age.

If it were possible to discriminate against families in this way, the Civil Rights Act covering children/families would be worthless.

 

[Jerry]

Protected classes was brought by you.

...while I was debating Dapper Andy's very broad and not-gun-specific claim.

Neither he or I ever claimed that "firearm owner" was on the protected class list. That's just so random for you to think of.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

That's a pretty big ASSumption to make. Fairly broad, too. I know the last time I went apartment hunting I was under a tight time crunch due to money and a new job further limiting my availability to look for a place at all. I was also using a housing benefit I earned when I became a veteran, and that's literally a short list and they give you 30 days to select a place or you're dropped from the program.

Most people are not sitting back with a pile of cash and all the time in the world. Most people have various fact-dependent forces at work limiting their options.


The landlord shouldn't have bothered to care in the first place, as long as I get away with it, that's all that matters.

You actually didn't address what I said, there ARE other places and means you can look to rather than be dishonest with your land-lord.

 

[Captain Adverse]

A really smart landlord wouldn't take any chances. Simply put in the lease that a security deposit of $10,000 is required to have a gun on the premises.

I'm going to explore this further. The big question I have as a landlord is can I demand a larger security deposit for families with small children the bane of any landlords existence? It is specifically prohinited to "discriminate: against children, that I know for sure. But if I can increase the deposit, then I probably can do the same with guns.

I'll take a gun collection over a child collection any day. But what my landlord "rights" are I'm not really sure about. I'll report back after I consult with an attorney. It won't be my policy, I like my neughbors to be armed and I live in the same complex as my tenants. But this is an interesting question. Very interesting.

IMHO, the complex in the OP is totally out of line.

I would speak to a local attorney to find out, but my gut feeling is that you couldn't do that. A security deposit is limited to an amount to recoup damages to the property suffered as a result of occupancy, not an insurance policy against all harms. That means anything beyond normal wear and tear.

However, you can require renters insurance for each tenant, and you can require that gun owners provide such insurance to cover possible liability caused by a tenant's gun ownership. Ask your attorney about that option.

 

[Dapper Andy]

The 14th Amendment provides equal protections for individuals, from individuals. Protections such as employment and housing discrimination. You, as a private property owner, cannot refuse to rent to someone simply because they're a race you don't like.

You might want to read the actual text of the 14th Amendment.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

If it were possible to discriminate against families in this way, the Civil Rights Act covering children/families would be worthless.

You wouldn't be discriminating against children. It would apply equally to all people. I live in a college town. Pretty sure that there are LLs who ask for deposits from each room mate.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Neither he or I ever claimed that "firearm owner" was on the protected class list.

then we agree that the Civil Rights act doesn't offer its protection to gun owners as a group.

 

[Jerry]

You actually didn't address what I said, there ARE other places and means you can look to rather than be dishonest with your land-lord.

I had to lie about owning a pet once. A calico cat I bought for my then-fiance at the advice of a counselor to help her emotionally recover from recently adopting out a child. His name was Clay, a surprisingly clean animal, even for a cat. I bought him as a surprise for her and carried him home from the mall pet store on a cold day under my coat (we didn't own a car at the time; the last one broke down and we scrapped it). Anyway....she and I had pet-friendly options, but those options put us at a disadvantage with regard to location and cost, for the jobs we were looking for. We had to take everything on balance and in the end we opted to risk the pet in a no-pet apartment. We ran the numbers and so long as we weren't discovered and evicted in the first 3-4 months then we could survive an eviction after that.

Then we rolled the dice and signed the lease. After 6 months we approached the landlord and explained what the counselor had said about getting a pet to help cope. At that time, now established in our new jobs, we could afford a reasonable pet deposit. The landlord agreed, we paid, and "bought a new cat".

There's nothing wrong with choosing the option to lie about owning a gun of that's the best choice for you, because home invasion is a very real thing. When a landlord stipulates no gun ownership, they have just established a relationship of mutual distrust. Should a gun owner then sign the lease knowing they are going to willingly brake the no-gun policy, that is nothing but consistent with the established relationship of distrust. Good faith and credit go right out the window the instant the landlord stipulates no guns. Anything either party can get away with is fair game at that point.

Do what you have to do to survive. Don't sacrifice your personal safety to appease the whimsical and illogical political opinions of some dweeb.

"Sure I was brutally raped, but at least I followed the landlord's rules".
~~No Woman Ever.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

There's nothing wrong with choosing the option to lie about owning a gun of that's the best choice for you.
When a landlord stipulates no gun ownership, they have just established a relationship of mutual distrust. Should a gun owner then sign the lease knowing they are going to willingly brake the no-gun policy, that is nothing but consistent with the established relationship of distrust.
Good faith and credit go right out the window the instant the landlord stimulates no guns. Anything either party can get away with is fair game at that point.

Your grasp of ethics isn't the best, imho.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

There's nothing wrong with choosing the option to lie about owning a gun of that's the best choice for you.

When a landlord stipulates no gun ownership, they have just established a relationship of mutual distrust. Should a gun owner then sign the lease knowing they are going to willingly brake the no-gun policy, that is nothing but consistent with the established relationship of distrust.

Good faith and credit go right out the window the instant the landlord stimulates no guns. Anything either party can get away with is fair game at that point.

Is that just for guns or any policy a landlord has? That logic is ridiculous. Have you ever heard of a misfire? Accidents? Maybe they don't want the chance of those things happening. Those are legitimate reasons to not want guns on the property. And yes, it actually is wrong, whether you think so or not, to sign a contract knowing full well you intend to violate and not abide by the terms of the contract.