Messages
3,020
Reactions
6,649
Even once you "own", a home, you still rent from .gov via taxes! Can they dictate what you keep there?
What would stop them from putting something like a gun prohibition in the contract? Lenders have already expressed a willingness to refuse loans to manufacturers -- there's no reason they couldn't also refuse loans to owners.
There you have stepped over the line......the Government can not restrict via the second amendment. What prevents the lenders is your right to not sign up for a mortgage like that. An interesting question would be about someone living in places like “the Projects” in the East, crime ridden places where the government is your landlord......
 
Last Edited:
Messages
3,020
Reactions
6,649
Well glad we at least found the line.....
The line is you have to voluntarily give up your right via contract... (contracts are generally civil law and not enforceable by jail time)...........if the rent has advantages that outweigh your need for guns, you are welcome to take the deal. If not you just move on to the next rental property. It is about choice and your decision to accept it.
 
Last Edited:
Messages
3,758
Reactions
8,128
I think like you can't have your cake and eat it too. Either "classes" of people are protected, such as minorities and people that sexually identify as a frog, as well as gun owners, or no one is protected and property owners have ultimate say.

The Part missing from the equation is listing gun owners as a protected class. Of we are as crazy as they think we are, then might as well!
 
Messages
3,020
Reactions
6,649
I think like you can't have your cake and eat it too. Either "classes" of people are protected, such as minorities and people that sexually identify as a frog, as well as gun owners, or no one is protected and property owners have ultimate say.

The Part missing from the equation is listing gun owners as a protected class. Of we are as crazy as they think we are, then might as well!
The classes of protected people are specific and well defined. They change from time to time with the addition of laws and court precedents but here in Idaho, they have not been able to get the legislature to include sexual preference in to the constitution..... every year they have “add the words” protests during our short legislature sessions. A local government could pass a law that would make a gun owner exclusion illegal.
 
Messages
3,758
Reactions
8,128
The classes of protected people are specific and well defined. They change from time to time with the addition of laws and court precedents but here in Idaho, they have not been able to get the legislature to include sexual preference in to the constitution..... every year they have “add the words” protests during our short legislature sessions. A local government could pass a law that would make a gun owner exclusion illegal.
Over in portlandia or Seattle (since the rest of the state apparently doesn't matter) the protected list encompass just about every flavor of person or thing other then gun owning straight white men.
 
Messages
605
Reactions
459
Interesting to read this thread and majority grumble property owners ‘can’t do this,’ ‘constitutionally they can’t do that,’ ‘what they don’t know won’t hurt them,’ ‘owners lack legal status,’ etc.

Yepper they can.

Now other members say residential ownership doesn’t/won’t stop government agents they are correct to a point. the term founding framers felt private property, defined by case law, pre-exists the governmental entity constitutional rights now apply, to a point! Remember if the residential owner make illegal substances, presents a nuisance to others, the property owner can lose their property.

Private property owners can’t regulate firearms, do not sign the Costco contract then.
 
The line is you have to voluntarily give up your right via contract... (contracts are generally civil law and not enforceable by jail time)...........if the rent has advantages that outweigh your need for guns, you are welcome to take the deal. If not you just move on to the next rental property. It is about choice and your decision to accept it.

It should be noted that there are currently laws that prevent giving up rights, even if/when stipulated via contract (to whit leases)...
 
Did you ever see one involving guns? There are unlawful unenforceable contracts. That is what lawyers are for.

Oh yah.

Plus most folks whom rent, would not be able to afford an attorney.

Not sure on how left leaning tenant laws are in Oregon (leaning towards tenant). However Massachusetts has huge tenant rights legal humps, which also include significant financial penalties PLUS court costs against landlords committing unjust acts.

Edit, adding: We rent, and have always rented. Likely will for another 3-5 years.

The ONLY time we’ve had issues with “owners” was in a managed apartment complex (managers feeling free to pop in at any time), and that was the ONLY time we have never rented directly from the owner.

EVERY other time we’ve rented, has been directly from owner.

We’ve treated the places the same in every instance, as one would there own home.

Took care of it, kept it clean & presentable, dealt with issues within our realm & notified owners outside of our comfort realm. Failed furnace, in the midst of a holiday blizzard...yup. Called that owner, no problem, furnace guy on the way.

Boiler had burned thru, required replacing it. Done. Amidst a blizzard over the holidays.

Ice dams one place, took down what we could...after notifying the owner. So they could asses wether or not further clearing out of the ice would be needed (or not). The owner and son came right over & laddered up and cleaned out more...ice dams can cause severe roofing/leak damage.

At the same time, we’ve left EVERY place as nice, or nicer than when we’ve moved in. Always have had the full deposit returned, and have references back probably half a dozen places which we could likely still use.

And rent was always payed early. Either dropped off in person, if owner(s) nearby, or mailed at least a week before due.

It really is not too difficult to treat any place as if you own it. Pretty easy actually. Because that is what we’d expect from anyone else, if we owned & rented to people....but it seems a lot of folks simply “go out of there way” being dirtbags..
 
Last Edited:
Messages
3,020
Reactions
6,649
Oh yah.

Plus most folks whom rent, would not be able to afford an attorney.

Not sure on how left leaning tenant laws are in Oregon (leaning towards tenant). However Massachusetts has huge tenant rights legal humps, which also include significant financial penalties PLUS court costs against landlords committing unjust acts.
That is why we hire professional property managers.....to protect us from stepping over the lines created by those laws.
 

Latest Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top