Disabled man shoots home intruder...

GunnerK19GunnerK19 Senior MemberPosts: 1,083 Senior Member
and then is told by the landlord to get rid of his gun.

http://www.pressherald.com/2015/09/02/rockland-man-shot-during-break-in-to-make-first-court-appearance-today/

Either the apartment management needs to reconsider its policies, start providing armed security for it's tenants, or it needs to start respecting their Constitutional rights.
I'm a Conservative. How conservative? Only Alex P. Keaton has me beat.

Taurus 605 .357, Ruger .45 Vaquero, Ruger 10/22, Colt frontier commemorative .22 SA

Replies

  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,816 Senior Member
    Apartments, HOAs, and such are bat scat crazy on a lot of things. Duty to retreat in your own home? I don't think so. That is a stupid law that should require a cop at every door to vet the people other than the resident(s) trying to enter. I doubt the apartment complex owners will back down, but maybe the people can help the man find better accommodations that don't have such **** asinine rules.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 6,461 Senior Member
    The rules are asinine, however the rules were on the lease, and the tenant signed it. The complex is not now nor has it ever restricted his constitutional rights. If he didnt like the rules, he was under no force of law to sign the lease or live there. He chose to self restrict so that he could live there.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,269 Senior Member
    Now all he needs to do is quote Leonidas- - - - -"Come and take it!" Let's see if the apartment manager has a set of balls big enough to enforce his rules!
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 6,461 Senior Member
    Yep, a man shouldnt be as good as his word.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,624 Senior Member
    The rules are asinine, however the rules were on the lease, and the tenant signed it. The complex is not now nor has it ever restricted his constitutional rights. If he didnt like the rules, he was under no force of law to sign the lease or live there. He chose to self restrict so that he could live there.

    Bee Ess. No lease, regardless of its provisions and clauses, can deprive a citizen of his Constitutional rights. What if the lease required him to not vote? Would that be enforceable? What if the lease required him to be an atheist? Suppose the lease required the tenant to submit any letters he writes to management for review and or censorship before being mailed? Can an apartment lease abrogate a tenant's right to freedom of speech, or the free exercise of religion, or of voting? Ridiculous? Of course. But no more so than banning lawfully qualified tenants from possessing firearms.

    Apartment complexes are a kind of public accommodations - when offering an apartment for lease, their options for discrimination are extremely limited. Credit rating, criminal history, and legal status may be it. But under no circumstances should they be allowed to discriminate for the mere exercise of any civil right.
  • ghostsniper1ghostsniper1 Banned Posts: 2,645 Senior Member
    I'd just be happy that I'm alive still. Then I would find a new place to live and tell that landlord to pound sand. I break companies rules by carrying where they don't want me to because it's not illegal unless they tell me to leave and I don't ablige. Now federal or state property where it IS illegal to carry is a different thing.
  • BAMAAKBAMAAK Senior Member Posts: 4,262 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    Bee Ess. No lease, regardless of its provisions and clauses, can deprive a citizen of his Constitutional rights. What if the lease required him to not vote? Would that be enforceable? What if the lease required him to be an atheist? Suppose the lease required the tenant to submit any letters he writes to management for review and or censorship before being mailed? Can an apartment lease abrogate a tenant's right to freedom of speech, or the free exercise of religion, or of voting? Ridiculous? Of course. But no more so than banning lawfully qualified tenants from possessing firearms.

    Apartment complexes are a kind of public accommodations - when offering an apartment for lease, their options for discrimination are extremely limited. Credit rating, criminal history, and legal status may be it. But under no circumstances should they be allowed to discriminate for the mere exercise of any civil right.

    Substitute workplace for apartment. Do have all those rights at work? No. As a condition of employment, you give up rights while at work and some away from work. Same with accepting a lease.
    "He only earns his freedom and his life Who takes them every day by storm."

    -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
  • ghostsniper1ghostsniper1 Banned Posts: 2,645 Senior Member
    BAMAAK wrote: »
    Substitute workplace for apartment. Do have all those rights at work? No. As a condition of employment, you give up rights while at work and some away from work. Same with accepting a lease.

    Big difference between breaking the law and breaking policy. One can put you in jail and the other can put you unemployed. I'd rather take my chances and be unemployed.
  • Fat BillyFat Billy Senior Member Posts: 1,813 Senior Member
    Evicted is better than dead! The lawsuit should be interesting on evicting a disabled person. :popcorn: Later,
    Fat Billy

    Recoil is how you know primer ignition is complete.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,803 Senior Member
    Irregardless whether he has a real legal right or not, if it's me I'd just find a better apartment, because they aren't disarming me.

    I remember back in the 70s we lived upstairs in an apartment complex south of Houston and these guys down in the court yard hit this guy in the head with a baseball bat when they had him down on the ground. I thought it killed him at first. I walked out on my porch with a shot gun and started to point it and tell them to stop. But a neighbor on the ground floor walked out with a revolver and told them to drop the bat and put their hands up. They did. Before anybody noticed me I went back in the house. The cops came and had an ambulance haul the injured guy off to the Hospital and arrested the bad guys. The guy was lucky he only suffered a concussion. That's as close to fully exercising my 2 A rights as I've come. The other guy got to be the hero, but that didn't bother me. I was happy for the way it came down. Of course a bunch of us were witnesses, but they never subpoenaed me. I did tell the cops what I saw, but since nobody saw me with a gun, I didn't disclose it. Not too many people were openly anti gun down here back then.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,624 Senior Member
    BAMAAK wrote: »
    Substitute workplace for apartment. Do have all those rights at work? No. As a condition of employment, you give up rights while at work and some away from work. Same with accepting a lease.

    While employers face laws against discrimination and favoring protected classes, and even unionization, there is no other similarity between a public accommodation and the job site. Your employer is paying you - compensating you for your cooperation with his policies. Your landlord is being paid by you, and that's different.
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 6,461 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    While employers face laws against discrimination and favoring protected classes, and even unionization, there is no other similarity between a public accommodation and the job site. Your employer is paying you - compensating you for your cooperation with his policies. Your landlord is being paid by you, and that's different.

    You signed a contract to abide by the landlords rules. One of the rules is that you pay to be there, another in this case is that you cant keep a gun. You are right, it is different. One is a policy, the other is a contractual obligation.

    If the lease said "no pets" and the guy had a cat, would you be standing up for that? Or if he was running around the halls with a Islamic flad yelling Allah whatever, is it a violation of his 1A rights to toss him out?
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • knitepoetknitepoet Senior Member Posts: 18,672 Senior Member
    The rules are asinine, however the rules were on the lease, and the tenant signed it. The complex is not now nor has it ever restricted his constitutional rights. If he didnt like the rules, he was under no force of law to sign the lease or live there. He chose to self restrict so that he could live there.
    Yep :that: While I think it's a crock, the man agreed too and signed a legal contract, part of which says he is not allowed to have firearms on the property.

    In my mind, he has 2 options, get rid of the gun, or move. Personally, I'd move. I have a feeling the guy will get enough support from people that it shouldn't be that difficult for him to find a new place to live.
    Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates, Rule #37: There is no “overkill”. There is only “open fire” and “I need to reload”.


  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 6,461 Senior Member
    I wouldnt have signed the lease to begin with, or taken the pen and lined that part out. If the land lord accepted the contract with that wording removed, all is good and you move in. The only thing standard about any contract is that it is written on paper.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    Funny how those rules do not apply to FLEOs or LEOs, only to non LE personnel only,
    Because if a person gets hired to work in LE, that person will not be forced to disarm, ever, so I guess LEOs are exempt from such rules.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • GunnerK19GunnerK19 Senior Member Posts: 1,083 Senior Member
    DoctorWho wrote: »
    if a person gets hired to work in LE, that person will not be forced to disarm, ever, so I guess LEOs are exempt from such rules.

    There's a Burlington, VT LEO currently facing a charge of Domestic Violence. You can bet your butt if he's convicted his job and guns will go bye bye.
    I'm a Conservative. How conservative? Only Alex P. Keaton has me beat.

    Taurus 605 .357, Ruger .45 Vaquero, Ruger 10/22, Colt frontier commemorative .22 SA
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    GunnerK19 wrote: »
    There's a Burlington, VT LEO currently facing a charge of Domestic Violence. You can bet your butt if he's convicted his job and guns will go bye bye.

    If a LEO commits a crime and the DA prosecutes, the rest follows of course, once convicted thats that, we weren't talking about that, only non LEOs are forced to disarm, not LEOs, or retired LEOs.
    Just like all LEOs are not only authorized to carry in their own States, but in every State, retired LEOs too.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 6,461 Senior Member
    DoctorWho wrote: »
    Funny how those rules do not apply to FLEOs or LEOs, only to non LE personnel only,
    Because if a person gets hired to work in LE, that person will not be forced to disarm, ever, so I guess LEOs are exempt from such rules.

    If the lease has no provision for LEO, then that person is under the exact same obligation if he signs the contract. He has the same option, sign and be bound legally with the rules of the contract, or get another place. He is not being forced to disarm, he has the choice to live there or not.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.