My Apt Complex says I can't have my gun in the apartment.

[Oh Shoot]

If I remember right when I lived in Fl. about 10 years ago HUD tried to bar guns from all of their housing complexes and it went to court and the castle doctrine superseded the "HUD Law" so they had to take it out of their leases.....

Yes, there are a couple of federal precedents, one in California also, but they had to do with public housing, ie run with public funds. But none ever to my knowledge that overrode privately owned rental housing.

Contract law is very strong in most states and the federal government has generally respected it also, short of it containing anything unconstitutional. And we all know that "the shall not be infringed" part of 2A is not considered unconstitutional when it IS infringed, since the federal government is a primary infringer.

One interesting niche situation I can think of in all this, concerns privately owned apartment complexes that do accept public assistance monies for rent, but also allow tenants to live there who pay their own way. Like the odd complex in which I live. (although firearms are not mentioned in the lease).

- OS

[Guest spoolie]

Damn Drew...get evicted (that will take 3-6 months). Thank your childish room-mate (however you see fit). Relocate to another dwelling and shut up about your personal belongings.

Edited October 25, 2011 by MacGyver
We have language filters for a reason

[Guest WyattEarp]

According to MTSU PD, the upper part of the gun is not allowed even if the other half, ammo, and magazines are not in the vehicle. Still considered a weapon, and MTSU's policy is ZERO TOLERANCE.

I asked about a tire iron, he said that comes with the car and is considered a tool. So that's a no go. For the time being the weapon is at a trusted friend's house until I can get out of this situation.

Good thing I asked before taking anyone's advice. It'd a been real ****ter to have these punks call MTSU PD and report me, even if it only was just the barrel and nothing else. No doubt that's what would have happened, glad I didn't chance it. Even if it wouldn't have held up in court, I still would have to pay for a lawyer, court costs, plus the school kick in effect kick me out, and I just don't need ANY of that right now.

I put my name on the Early Release List today with the complex, if they have someone come in and inquire about a room, they'll call me, I pay $200 processing fee, the other person takes over the lease fully, im not liable for anything afterwards. In the meantime, I can still find someone on my own to assume the list. Once I or the apt complex finds someone, I'm out of here. To hell with this noise, I just wanna get through school and graduate! Ain't trying to start no **** with nobody, but people wanna start **** with me over stupid crap.

[JayC]

I've wondered about the gun on campus thang. The way it impacts me-- Wife's parents are retired academics and we often have Sunday lunch with them at a local college cafeteria. I get the impression that it is technically illegal to park on campus with the loaded pistol locked in the jeep underseat lockbox drawer.

It seems vanishingly unlikely that something would happen on a sleepy sunday afternoon on a small campus, which would cause the pistol to be discovered by the authorities. On the other hand, am a belt-and-suspenders person and try to avoid EVER having legal risk exposure.

The downside of course, if it truly is "technically illegal" to have the pistol in the bolted-down underseat lockbox, then the only realistic alternative is to leave the pistol at home for the entire Sunday outing.

There is another great option, go somewhere else for lunch I'm sorry but visiting with a family member isn't worth being disarmed in my book.

[MacGyver]

According to MTSU PD, the upper part of the gun is not allowed even if the other half, ammo, and magazines are not in the vehicle. Still considered a weapon, and MTSU's policy is ZERO TOLERANCE.

I asked about a tire iron, he said that comes with the car and is considered a tool. So that's a no go. For the time being the weapon is at a trusted friend's house until I can get out of this situation.

Good thing I asked before taking anyone's advice. It'd a been real ****ter to have these punks call MTSU PD and report me, even if it only was just the barrel and nothing else. No doubt that's what would have happened, glad I didn't chance it. Even if it wouldn't have held up in court, I still would have to pay for a lawyer, court costs, plus the school kick in effect kick me out, and I just don't need ANY of that right now.

I put my name on the Early Release List today with the complex, if they have someone come in and inquire about a room, they'll call me, I pay $200 processing fee, the other person takes over the lease fully, im not liable for anything afterwards. In the meantime, I can still find someone on my own to assume the list. Once I or the apt complex finds someone, I'm out of here. To hell with this noise, I just wanna get through school and graduate! Ain't trying to start no **** with nobody, but people wanna start **** with me over stupid crap.

Sound like you need to talk to your roommates about finding a fourth occupant. If you're relaying the whole story, it sounds like you want out, they want you out, and they're probably in a fine position to find another roommate.

[MphsTiger1981]

So, let me make sure I'm getting all this straight.

You live in an apartment complex which does not allow firearms. Prior to obtaining your new gun, you go to them and discussed having a permit and wanting them to make an exception to the lease agreement for you, which they originally agreed, but then reneged and have no memory of discussing.

Your roommates see you carrying your gun, and then turned you in to the apartment management for possessing the gun in the complex. They have agreed to allow you to stay there, but the gun must remain locked in your vehicle.

You then go to your school police department and ask if you can bring part of a gun in your car to school property? They tell you to go pound sand, and you cannot bring any part of the gun to campus with you?

My concern is too many people know your business. If they're nosey and looking through keyholes and tapping your phones and such, it's one thing, but I think you're becoming your own worse enemy. From the beginning, you clearly knew that the apartment complex had a no gun clause in the lease, otherwise, you would have never had the first conversation with them about making a special allowance for you since you have a permit. This is like apartments which do not allow pets, and you go out and tell them you're buying a cat, but since you work at the animal shelter they say they'll make an exception just for you, but then when they learn you have a cat, it's a problem and they no longer remember talking to you about exceptions?

Honestly, it all boils down to you knew they did not allow guns before you got yours. You tried to persuade them to make an exception, they agreed, but then no longer remember the agreement. As someone has pointed out, if it's not written on paper and signed by both parties, it never happened.

The real answer, Wyatt? Man up. Do the right thing. Either move to another place where you can keep the gun, or take the gun and leave it where it can be secured until you can afford to move. This is similar to the advice we get here all the time about guns at the workplace when you know it's not allowed and you can lose your job if you get caught. Big Boy Rules apply. You have to realize that you are responsible for what is happening, not the apartment folks, not your roommates, not the cops at MTSU, but the guy you see in the mirror every morning. The sooner you come to grips with the fact you made a mistake, the better this will be to take. Will it make you happy? No. But I think it will make you a better person if you've learned to accept that you control your life, not other people.

Good luck getting this all sorted out, and be sure next time that you know what you can and can't have in an apartment. And next time, remember the fewer people who know you have a handgun, the better off you will be.

My apologies if I've come across in anyway too harsh with my response to your thread.

Best.

[Guest ArmaDeFuego]

I dont see how complexes like that can stay in business. Who in their right mind would want to live in a place where they couldnt keep a weapon to protect their family? That boggles my mind.

I went through my lease agreement with a fine tooth comb before I signed. It doesnt say anything in it about weapons not being allowed. If they tried to add something like that in there I would be outta here tomorrow. My contract has expired now & I'm on month by month anyways.

[Guest WyattEarp]

No offense taken Mphs Tiger, not harsh it all, you're just telling it like it is. I should have gotten it in writing, or moved elsewhere. Hindsight 20/20. but I'm done with apartments. as soon as I find someone to take over the lease, i'm out of here.

I didn't let anyone in my apt know intentionally, it was accidentally discovered by one of the roommates (conveniently they're all denying that they said anything), and that's due to being sloppy therefore the fault lies upon me. At least this is not a situation that has gone terribly bad, just inconvenient and annoying more than anything.

Apparently one of them didn't like the fact that I asked him politely to clean the bathroom (he was supposed to do it 4 weeks ago) and clean up after himself, and that's what brought all this on. Childish, very childish, how hard is it to wipe a counter down and clean up a pizza pan after you're done (instead of leaving it out to rot for 3 days) and clean the bathroom once every 2 weeks? I guess that was too much too ask and it made him mad.

[Guest bkelm18]

I dont see how complexes like that can stay in business. Who in their right mind would want to live in a place where they couldnt keep a weapon to protect their family? That boggles my mind.

There are plenty of people who do not own firearms so therefor wouldn't care about a "no firearms" clause. Just like businesses that ban weapons stay in business. Not to mention the firearm owners who ignore the clause anyway.

[vontar]

1.) If I just have the barrel in my car, but no ammunition, magazine, and no lower receiver, would that still be considered possessing a firearm on School Property? Would I still get in trouble for that

Keep in mind, only the receiver (the Serial numbered part) is the fire arm. The barrel should not be part of the fire arm. I would not ask MTSU Police as it would only attract unwanted attention to you. The next time someone sets off fireworks or a loud fart they would come looking for you.

I can't find what I am looking for but a firearm should but defined some place as the receiver (the part with the SN) The barrel is only a part. So separating it like you defined in my opinion should be fine to only have a barrel with your car while at school. Of course the MTSU police are going to say any part is a weapon, even the mag.. They would probably tell you a screw related to holding the rear sights on is a weapon under ZERO TOLERANCE just to scare you about it.

BTW, sounds like you probably need new roommates.

However, I would not want it in my car with him knowning about it.

I would opt for a safety deposit box at my bank. You don't have to tell them what is going in it.

If you have insurance on your car, after you bank it, should tell him you left in you car as you agreed, put up a camera and wait.

not a lawyer, this is in no way legal advise.

Edited October 25, 2011 by vontar

[Lumber_Jack]

There are plenty of people who do not own firearms so therefor wouldn't care about a "no firearms" clause. Just like businesses that ban weapons stay in business. Not to mention the firearm owners who ignore the clause anyway.

Or people like me that just ignored the clause altogether. If his roommates weren't douche bags he would still be living there trouble free

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Ditto on safe deposit box. Maybe sometimes it is hard to get one? Years ago we finally got a safe deposit box at the local bank (mainly for important papers) and at that time the bank was "nearly out" of empty boxes to rent. We got one "big enough" for papers, but the bank only had small ones available to rent. All the big ones were already taken.

With so many people concerned about security and the future, hopefully banks don't tend to be "sold out" of safe deposit boxes nowadays.

[vontar]

Ditto on safe deposit box. Maybe sometimes it is hard to get one? Years ago we finally got a safe deposit box at the local bank (mainly for important papers) and at that time the bank was "nearly out" of empty boxes to rent. We got one "big enough" for papers, but the bank only had small ones available to rent. All the big ones were already taken.

With so many people concerned about security and the future, hopefully banks don't tend to be "sold out" of safe deposit boxes nowadays.

Were I bank, they have a couple of the smaller sizes available normally but the large ones are always taken. I ask every year. They never have a waiting list. However the smaller ones are big enough to put a couple pistols in ( minus AK 47 pistol). You might need to check at a couple banks but it would be worth the peace of mind. I keep important papers there as well.

[ted]

how mutch longer is the lease for how many months and how mutch per month have you signed for

Edited October 26, 2011 by ted

[Guest WyattEarp]

how mutch longer is the lease for how many months and how mutch per month have you signed for

Aug 24th, 2011 thru August 6th, 2012. So 10 more months @ $359 a month.

[ted]

are you the main signer or did you sign to be a add on to the original lease under the main signer in other words who all has signed the lease all room mates or only you

[Guest WyattEarp]

are you the main signer or did you sign to be a add on to the original lease under the main signer in other words who all has signed the lease all room mates or only you

They are individual leases done by room. Roommates were assigned by the apt complex this past summer.

[Guest 270win]

I would never discuss my firearm habits with people I do not know, including landords and campus police. If you are a student at MTSU, you basically can't have a firearm on campus due to state law. Nonstudents like me can leave a firearm in a vehicle legally. I go to a TN college campus every so often and just put the gun in the trunk before I get there. I'm probably breaking some policy but I really don't care. No way would I attract attention by calling the campus police. I have lived in apartments and I believe my leases just mentioned dangerous things as explosives, gasoline, etc. Mine never mentioned firearms. I did not seek to clarify that because I did not want to be noticed. I paid my rent every month and the property owner let me live there. I would never ever tell strangers that I have a pistol license/handgun carry permit. It is none of their business and not up for discussion. I wouldn't discuss that I kept a handgun in my nightstand. None of anyone's business, whether or not I had a pistol license.

[MikePapa1]

While the AG's Opinion is well known and appears to be the current law, I seriously wonder whether his position would withstand Constitutional scrutiny if the position were pushed. For example, the law is clear that, under the 14th Amendment, a lease which prohibited blacks, for example, to visit the apartment would be unconstitutional. With Heller and McDonald one wonders if in an adhesion contract, as most leases, particularly residential leases, are can contract away a Constitutional right. By the way, an adhesion contract is one where because of the disparity of power between the parties, there is little negotiation and the more powerful merely dictates on a take it or leave it basis to the less powerful.

I'd be interested to see, whether in such a case, the landlord can, in fact, strip a resident of his Constitutional rights. It would be no different, than an atheist landlord including a provision against the possession or display of a crucifix by a resident. Clearly, that violates the n1st Amendment and such a provision would be overturned. I'm not sure the 2nd Amendment deserves any less protection.

Unfortunately few college students can finance a fight to the Supreme Court, but maybe the NRA or some other organization might pursue it. It galls me a bit that someone in public housing can exercise their Constitutional right to own a firearm but someone in a privately owned apartment cannot.

[ted]

put a add on cregslist app for rent close by collage

[Guest ArmaDeFuego]

Unfortunately few college students can finance a fight to the Supreme Court, but maybe the NRA or some other organization might pursue it. It galls me a bit that someone in public housing can exercise their Constitutional right to own a firearm but someone in a privately owned apartment cannot.

I agree with this 100%. I dont see how an apartment complex can restrict someone's constitutional rights either.

[MphsTiger1981]

put a add on cregslist app for rent close by collage

while you're at it, be sure to mention in the ad that you're seeking crack smoking, anti-gun, transgendered cross-dressers who like to dress up like Liza Minnelli. that should pretty much even up the score with the former roommates.

[DaveTN]

While the AG's Opinion is well known and appears to be the current law, I seriously wonder whether his position would withstand Constitutional scrutiny if the position were pushed. For example, the law is clear that, under the 14th Amendment, a lease which prohibited blacks, for example, to visit the apartment would be unconstitutional. With Heller and McDonald one wonders if in an adhesion contract, as most leases, particularly residential leases, are can contract away a Constitutional right. By the way, an adhesion contract is one where because of the disparity of power between the parties, there is little negotiation and the more powerful merely dictates on a take it or leave it basis to the less powerful.

I'd be interested to see, whether in such a case, the landlord can, in fact, strip a resident of his Constitutional rights. It would be no different, than an atheist landlord including a provision against the possession or display of a crucifix by a resident. Clearly, that violates the n1st Amendment and such a provision would be overturned. I'm not sure the 2nd Amendment deserves any less protection.

Unfortunately few college students can finance a fight to the Supreme Court, but maybe the NRA or some other organization might pursue it. It galls me a bit that someone in public housing can exercise their Constitutional right to own a firearm but someone in a privately owned apartment cannot.

The government isn’t banning firearms; the property owner is. He read it, understood it, and signed it.

You do not have right to bear arms, you have a right to own arms, but not on someone else’s property. Carrying a crucifix in Tennessee is legal; carrying a gun is a crime.

[Guest WyattEarp]

While the AG's Opinion is well known and appears to be the current law, I seriously wonder whether his position would withstand Constitutional scrutiny if the position were pushed. For example, the law is clear that, under the 14th Amendment, a lease which prohibited blacks, for example, to visit the apartment would be unconstitutional. With Heller and McDonald one wonders if in an adhesion contract, as most leases, particularly residential leases, are can contract away a Constitutional right. By the way, an adhesion contract is one where because of the disparity of power between the parties, there is little negotiation and the more powerful merely dictates on a take it or leave it basis to the less powerful.

I'd be interested to see, whether in such a case, the landlord can, in fact, strip a resident of his Constitutional rights. It would be no different, than an atheist landlord including a provision against the possession or display of a crucifix by a resident. Clearly, that violates the n1st Amendment and such a provision would be overturned. I'm not sure the 2nd Amendment deserves any less protection.

Unfortunately few college students can finance a fight to the Supreme Court, but maybe the NRA or some other organization might pursue it. It galls me a bit that someone in public housing can exercise their Constitutional right to own a firearm but someone in a privately owned apartment cannot.

It's interesting, a business owner (private business and property) that posts up no carry under TCA may be legally held liable for injuries and wrongful death in the event a criminal comes into the store and kills customers and workers, but some of the responses in here indicate that the Apartment Complex can not be held liable because it's private property?

Doesn't seem to make any sense.

Upon further examination of the lease, they prohibit the possession of firearms on the property, and at the same time it states

Section 16. Safety

We and/or Manager Do NOT guaranteed your safety or security. You must exercise due care for your safety and security and the safety and security of others. Please read the safety guidelines attached to the lease. None of our safety measures are an express or implied warranty of security or a guarantee against injury, loss, crime, or of a reduced risk of crime. You acknowledge that Manager and we are not liable to you or your guests for injury to persons or damage or loss to property caused by other parties, including criminal conduct of other persons. Manager and we are not obligated to furnish security measures of any description or form including personnel, lighting, alarms, gates, fences or notices of criminal activity or suspicious events. You acknowledge that we can discontinue any of such items provided at any time without notice. You acknowledge that the premises are not a security building and that you do not hold Manager or us to a higher degree of care. YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY AND SECURITY.

but under

OTHER RULES AND REGULATIONS/PROHIBITIONS

Paragraph 6.

Neither you nor your guests will be allowed to engage in the following prohibited activities: (i) loud or obnoxious conduct (ii) disturbing or threatening the rights, comfort, health, safety or convenience of others in or near the Apartment Community, (iii) possessing, selling, or manufacturing illegal drugs/controlled substances or illegal drug paraphernelia, (iv) engaging in or threatening violence or any criminal activity (v) possession of a weapon (vi) discharging a firearm in the Apartment Community, (vii) displaying a firearm, BB gun, pellet gun, or any other air powered weapon, knife, or other weapon in the Apartment Community in a threatening manner, (viii) canvassing or soliciting business or contributions, (ix) operating a business or child care service within the Premises or Apartment Community, (x) storing anything in closets having gas and/or electric appliances, (xi) tampering with utilities or utility systems, (xii) bringing or storing hazardous materials into the Apartment Community, (xiii) using candles or kerosene or gas lamps in the Premises or Apartment Community. Management reserves the right at any time to fine, contact guarantors, or declare you in default of your lease for any of the above mentioned violations.

I've already found that employers who prohibit the possession of firearms company may in fact be held legally liable for injuries and/or wrongful death in the event of work place violence.

University of Memphis Law Review

bingo, found what I was looking for. By restricting my right to protect myself, i.e, handgun and permit for self-defense purposes, they Apartment Complex is in fact liable for any injuries and/or wrongful death if I happen to be assaulted, shot, stabbed, or otherwise wounded by an assailant, roommate, visitor, guest or other person. I don't think they can choose both to prohibit handguns and consider themselves not liable for any criminal behavior that is incurred to a resident on their property.

Memphis Negligent Security Attorneys | Nashville TN Parking Lot Assault Lawyers | Clarksville Tennessee Stairwell Attack Lawyer

[h=2]Premises Liability Attorneys in Memphis, Tennessee

[/h]Property owners of every type have a duty to ensure that their properties are safe, and that reasonable measures are taken to provide for the security of invited guests and others who may have license to be on the premises. When property owners don't and people are assaulted or harmed as a result, victims can seek appropriate legal action for their injuries and losses.

At HF Law Group, we work hard to see that people who've been assaulted or harmed because of negligent security receive full and fair compensation for their injuries and other losses. Our attorneys take a hands-on approach to working with people, and draw from more than four decades of combined litigation experience.

Negligent security cases typically involve problems such as inadequate lighting, understaffed facilities and failure to address known criminal activity on or near the property. The incidents most commonly seen in these types of cases include:

• Parking garage and parking lot assaults
  
• Stairwell attacks
  
• Hotel assaults
  
• Apartment building assaults
  
• Swimming pool accidents
  
  

We know this is a difficult time for you and your family. We understand and are here to help. Tell us your story. We'll listen, answer your questions, give you an honest perspective as to the strengths or weaknesses of your case, and provide the legal representation you'll need to make a full recovery.

[h=3]The Value in Working With Us[/h]Substantial trial experience and more than four decades of experience in defending insurance companies are two key assets that benefit our clients. Simply stated: We know how to investigate negligent security cases. We know what the critical issues are and the defense strategies insurance companies use to minimize their losses. We know and have access to top experts on these types of cases. Additionally, the fact that we will not hesitate to take the case to trial if negotiations fail to produce an acceptable result is something that provides a powerful incentive for insurers to resolve the case quickly and fairly through negotiation.

http://www.thefederation.org/documents/7.%20Negligent%20Security.pdf

ahhh, yes...here's the golden egg I was looking for (in regards to Business Owner liability for posting up prohibited firearms signs).

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/tennessee-politics-legislation/41111-new-law-sb3012-amended.html

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13; Section 57-3-204 and Section 57-4-203, relative to permitting or prohibiting the carrying of firearms in certain places.

(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter, reduce or eliminate any civil or criminal liability that a property owner or manager may have for injuries arising on their property.

and as was noted by barewoolf (in my thread about businesses having the right to opt out)

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/handgun-carry-self-defense/60122-do-you-feel-business-should-have-right-opt-out.html#post760996

A privately owned Apartment Complex is considered a private business, and private property, so until I find some legal ruling that eliminates them from legal liability, I have to think that portions of this lease are a bunch of bs, worded with improper language that would hold no legal basis in a court of law.

Anyone care to weigh in? Also if you have any legal sources that suggest they can deny the possession of firearms AND are not liable for my security, please post them up, I'm interested in reading on that, so far I've scoured the forum and google, but not found anything in particular to support that.

If there's no legal release of liability as result of injuries and/or wrongful death sustained by criminal activity on the property, I may have just found my way out of my lease without any further costs incurred, but big maybe.

[TMF]

I agree with this 100%. I dont see how an apartment complex can restrict someone's constitutional rights either.

They're not. If I rent out my property I can make a rule of no firearms on the property. It's my house. On my property I can dictate what rights someone can exercise. If someone exercises their right to free speech and I don't like what they say, I can kick them off. As much as I think it's an undereducated policy to not allow firearms, I support the right of the property owners to decide what's acceptable on THEIR property.