Apartment Complex Bans Weapons and Firearms: No Self-Defense Allowed

[Nickleanddime]

I agree. The problem with that is that the government has overruled that concept when you are a business. If it's your home...no problem. But if you are in the business of renting housing there are rules you can't break. Like you can't deny a renter because they are colored...any color. or because they practice a homosexual lifestyle (in many places now), or because they are Muslim. All of these because they violate the constitution. Same goes with the gun ban, and for the same reason.
Like it or not, when you're in business the rules have been changed. Do I agree with the changes...no. IMHO it's just what you said. But, that's not the way the law rules it. I think the non-discrimination thing should only be applied to the way governments treat citizens. Individuals should always have the right to discriminate. Doing it on the basis of the aforementioned reasons might be stupid, but it still should be a right.
People won't obey an immoral law. Obviously there are millions of cases of discrimination taking place every day...for a multitude of reasons, and by every race, religion, sex, origin, you name it.
Jim

If you go to the equal opportunity act we page and the civil liberties union we page it will tell you what you can't be discriminated against in housing ect. No where does it say anything about not being able to keep a gun in your house. Now if you had it because your religion required it, yes you can have it and no one can say a thing.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Treasure_Hunter]

If you go to the equal opportunity act we page and the civil liberties union we page it will tell you what you can't be discriminated against in housing ect. No where does it say anything about not being able to keep a gun in your house. Now if you had it because your religion required it, yes you can have it and no one can say a thing.

It is a cash cow law suit the first time someone is attacked...

I am always armed and wouldn't care what property manager rules were, but if I was someone unarmed and assaulted I would file a multi million law suit on grounds their policy kept me from being able to defend my self and contributed to my injuries. I would get a good attorney and seek millions...

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

If you carry a gun into a posted store in ohio your in some trouble. It's a felony here, if you refuse then they have the right by law to treat you as hostile, and the cops will treat you as the same. Also it's disrespectful and gives gun owners a bad look. Why? Because its clearly posted and you willing commit that crime. A store is not "public" property but private that you allow someone to enter and use. I k ow I'm a business owner. But if someone tells you to leave you do, don't be disrespectful it hurts everyone in the end.

In Fla the no guns signs mean nothing as long as the building is not one restricted by law to begin with.

If for some reason your concealed weapon is seen and they order you to leave then you leave, no law was broken, only if you refuse to leave have you broken a law here.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[packerbacker]

Even in Calif. it is NOT a crime to enter an establishment that has a sign stating no guns allowed. It is NOT a law, it is a rule established by the property owner. All they can do is ask you to leave. Law enforcement will do nothing but confirm that you have to leave. It may give gun owners a bad look but a "crime" was not committed; a rule was broken is all. A person who conceals properly would not be noticed in the first place, it's not like they enter a store waving the gun around. You don't see the guns the thugs on the Chicago streets are carrying either but they have them. Odds are they are the ones that will carry in the posted store, not the legal carrier.

 

[Jim in Idaho]

Even in Calif. it is NOT a crime to enter an establishment that has a sign stating no guns allowed. It is NOT a law, it is a rule established by the property owner. All they can do is ask you to leave. Law enforcement will do nothing but confirm that you have to leave. It may give gun owners a bad look but a "crime" was not committed; a rule was broken is all. A person who conceals properly would noy be noticed in the first place, it's not like they enter a store waving the gun around. You don't see the guns the thugs on the Chicago streets are carrying either but they have them. Odds are they are the ones that will carry in the posted store, not the legal carrier.

Yup...huge difference between "rules" and "laws".
Jim

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

I verified what nickleanddime said and read Ohio's CWL law. He is correct in his statement, law is written businesses can ban firearm and it is a crime to enter businesses that are clearly signed no firearms. Signs must be where public can see.

That is first state I have seen that restriction written into the law. But again if your concealed your concealed.


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[Jim in Idaho]

I verified what nickleanddime said and read Ohio's CWL law. He is correct in his statement, law is written businesses can ban firearm and it is a crime to enter businesses that are clearly signed no firearms. Signs must be where public can see.

That is first state I have seen that restriction written into the law. But again if your concealed your concealed.


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

The really stupid thing about businesses banning firearms is that the ban only keeps out the people who would help defend against a robbery or assault. The people who would rob or assault, would not care an iota about the sign, or rule.
Jim

 

[DeepseekerADS]

Castle Rock apartment's controversial policy banning firearms is thrown out

Castle Rock apartment's controversial policy banning firearms is thrown out | 9news.com

CASTLE ROCK - A controversial gun policy at an apartment complex for seniors has been thrown out after a 9Wants to Know report.

The Douglas County Housing Partnership, a multi-jurisdictional housing authority, held an emergency board of directors meeting late Wednesday afternoon.
Board members decided that the policy, which would have prohibited residents from having firearms in their homes, will not go into effect.

The Douglas County Housing partnership owns Oakwood Apartments in Castle Rock. It was purchased with federal funds and is supported by local, state, and federal tax dollars.

"These community policy changes were distributed without the knowledge or authorization of the Board of Directors of the Douglas County Housing Partnership or its staff," a Douglas County Housing Partnership release said. "This board does not support any action that infringes on an individual's rights and will not allow Ross Management to implement these changes. The mission of the Douglas County Housing partnership is to preserve and develop safe, secure, quality housing while providing housing choices for those who have few,"

After 9Wants to Know reported on the policy Tuesday night, Douglas County commissioners began calling for quick action by the housing authority.

Douglas County Director of Public Affairs Wendy Holmes said commissioners were "alarmed" to learn of the policy and pushed the housing authority for "an acceptable and expeditious resolution."

"The Board of Douglas County Commissioners is pleased that the Housing Authority concurred with the Commissioner's position that the policy changes from Ross Management should not move forward. We thank them for a quick and proper conclusion," Holmes said in a statement.

When retired US Marine Art Dorsch got a notice from Oakwood management, he felt like the freedom he fought for was being taken away.

"It upset me very much," Dorsch said. "Because I don't think it's fair."

The notice was informing residents of an updated policy, banning all firearms and weapons from the property effective October 1.

There is no gun language in the lease Dorsch signed earlier this year.

"They want to take them all away from me. They say I can't live here," Dorsch said.

The Ross Management Group, based in Wheat Ridge, implemented the policy change.

Managers refused to comment. An employee even closed the door on 9Wants to Know reporter Will Ripley as he asked why tenants were being told they can't have firearms.

The Denver Housing Authority wants to know if Ross Management Group is trying to pull similar rogue gun bans in the city.

The company manages properties in Aurora, Arvada, Denver and Greeley.

"It's unconstitutional to prohibit the legal possession of a gun or a firearm on public housing property," a DHA spokesperson said.

The company wouldn't talk about the gun ban via phone or in person. So it's not clear the motivation behind the company's decision.

The company's owner, Debi Ross, and her husband have given $9,000, only to Democrats, since 2006.

Public housing gun bans have been challenged in a number of states. In several cases, outright gun bans have been more narrowly tailored to common areas, after a lawsuit was filed.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

ROFLMBO X 2.....

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2