Harvard Grad Student Facing Eviction over Legally Owned and Stored Firearms

Democracy has nothing to do with RIGHTS guaranteed by the Constitution of this country. Sorry if you don't agree, but just because you don't want me to have a gun, doesn't mean I shouldn't. You don't just get to vote my gun away!!!!

 

So you agree that a land lord should have the right to limit what you say in your own home? Should they be allowed the right to search and seize property within your home without warrant? Should they be allowed to decide who you vote for because you live on their property? Should they be able to limit which or if you worship a God in your home? Should they be allowed to not rent property to you because you are gay, black, white, Muslim, Christian..... See all of these things have something in common. Careful what you ask for.
All of these things are are NOT granted to land lords simply because you are "on their property" and neither should the right to keep and bear arms simply because you are a tenant of their property. If they have a viable business and you having a firearm is a problem, then yes, by all means they have a right to ask you to leave, but when that firearm goes into your HOME, that is YOURS because you are entering into an agreement with the land lord that you will protect their interest, but that they are allowing you to treat that property as YOURS in exchange for financial compensation.
I don't debate that they COULD write limitations into contracts, but what makes limiting one thing (GUNS) ok, but limiting others (gay, race, religion, speech, etc) not ok when all of these things are protected by our constitution?

 

If no firearms wasn't in the lease, then the landlord for constructive eviction since he literally sent her a letter saying she should quit the place or he was going to screw with her.

I haven't kept up with this enough to know whether it was in the lease or not. I assume it wasn't because it wasn't touted in the first story.

 

Specious? What does the 2nd Amendment guarantee as according to SCOTUS rulings?
I'll give you a hint.... It guarantees that the people have a right to protect themselves using firearms, that protection could come from the government or other people that might do them harm. IF a land lord is able to take that right away, who's charged with protecting the tenants of his/her property? I pose this question because we have the right to protect ourselves and IF that person wants to remove that right, the responsibility should then be placed on that land lord. You call it specious, I call it common sense!
As for not wanting to take anything of mine away.... Yea, that's exactly what this does. While it might not be MINE personally today, I might one day live in a multi-family housing unit.... the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms being removed simply because they live in a gun grabbers housing unit IS removing a right that SHOULD be everyone's! Your not special, I'm not special.... We are all Americans and all deserve the right to protect ourselves in our own homes regardless of who's name is on the deed. When you rent that home, you are passing "limited ownership" to the person living there..... NO ONE wants the government or landowner telling them how to vote, what to say, or any other constitutional right, so why should they be allowed to limit gun ownership which is ALSO PROTECTED BY THE CONSTITUTION.....

 

A judgment lasts for years. Depending upon the state up to 15. Judgments can also be refilled and extended.

These are supposed graduate students. They have a future income. Harvard's student families, parents, average about $240k in annual income. When mom and dad shuffle off the mortal coil no doubt millions in assets will flow to these students.

 

The landlord hasn't kicked her out. She still lives there (at the time of the creation of OP)

 

He did not say that he would screw her. He stated that whoever remains in the house will be responsible for the rent which is what any joint lease will state. ie if she left the remaining 6 students will be responsible for the shortfall in rent until they find a replacement

 

How many toddlers lived in the home? Why does that matter you ask? Because if everyone that lives in the home and uses that home is an adult and knew anything at all about guns, I guarantee you they would never be hurt in any way by a fully loaded, unlocked gun.
Prove me wrong!
I'm sorry, but I see all these people arguing and complaining about locked/unlocked, loaded/unloaded.... If you come to my house, you better expect that the guns are loaded, and can be gotten to at a very quick pace.......
You can call it irresponsible, I call it wise! A gun locked in a case unloaded with ammo on the other end of the house is about as useful as a phone call to 911 when someone breaks into your house.
Now, Does that mean I leave it so my son can get it, NO, but I also don't put it where I can't get to it either.....
Common sense and a LITTLE understanding of guns is all it takes.... Then again, we are talking rocket science to so many in this country that are scared of guns!

 

If you no longer have permission to be there, ie the lease is broken, then yes you can be trespassed and arrested. No you can't practice your rights on someone else property. As i stated before your civil rights protect you from the government, not private persons. When you own a home, you're free to do what what ever you want, as long as it isn't illegal or violates some HOA rule. The same can't be said when you rent as you don't own the property. If a landlaord puts in their lease no poltical signs in the front yard and you sign it, that means no poltical signs in the front yard. Something with firearms, it is up to the landloard as to what the rules are. You don't like it agree with them, find someplace else.

 

before an eviction process I don't believe you.

of course not but when you lease property it is yours.

have you ever heard of the 14th Amendment?

same with when you are leasing property As Long as You follow the leasing agreement.

well yes you have to follow a leasing agreement. But as long as you do just like an h o a you can do whatever you want.

the same exact thing could be an HOA agreement.

okay it's like you're broken record the same thing can be listed in an HOA agreement. Would you consider that a violation of the second amendment?

When you rent something yes the landlord holds the deed, but you have every right to be there if you're paying rent it's yours. If you didn't there would be no such thing as eviction landlords could go in and steal everything you own and it wouldn't be a crime.

 

College town landlords, true money grabbers of the earth, ever dealt with one? It better be in the lease, this is no different than no pets or motorcycles. If their is no lease or she violated the lease he can file eviction proceedings following the laws of that state. If the lease is in one persons name than its not the landlords problem and nothing he can do. That said it is probably not in the lease or this would not be a story.

If it is a joint lease, that is the only way she could possibly hold her responsible for the entire rent. If this house in rented to multiple individuals with individuals leases, again is has to be in the lease "no firearms" and the other tenants have know say in the matter. It is probable this is an individual lease since it appears she didn't know the others prior to moving in and those are most profitable.. Or it could be no lease for her with the lease in other tenants names and they just advertised for an addition roommate on a bulletin board.

https://blog.easyroommate.com/choose-individual-joint-lease-agreement-renting-property/

If it was a joint lease with all tenants signing and equally responsible for the entire rent, and all the tenants that disagreed with the weapons in her room moved out. The remaining tenants would be responsible for the entire amount due but she could also take legal action and recover her cost resulting in them not paying their share of the lease.

Anyway sound like her father is going to see her through this and will take the best action for her future.

I believe this female gun owner has learned a valuable lesson, to keep to her own kind. Diversity and inclusion my ass, as she a female gun owner is to be excluded.

 

Indeed, but it also explicitly told her she was no longer welcome as well and was all but a notice to vacate. Constructive eviction. I didn't say he couldn't use the joint and severable liability clause, and in fact I've pointed to it elsewhere in the thread.

The fact remains he cannot simply direct she vacate absent a default in the lease which she has not apparently committed.

 

I don't disagree at all with anything you are saying. However, I chose not to keep my weapons in the house when my kids were small. That was my choice. Yours may differ. Now that they are grown, and competent in shooting a few different platforms, and know and understand gun safety, I am comfortable having loaded weapons in the house.

The issue in this thread is the response from the roommates when they discovered the weapons. Apparently, it made some, or all, of them uncomfortable. You can accuse them of being liberal snowflakes all you want. That is neither here nor there. Like it or not, guns, with a little assistance from a human hand, kill people. That's what they are designed to do, and these roommates were simply voicing their concerns about living with this perceived danger, as is their right.

When I was living with roommates I made it clear at the introduction that I owned firearms, and demonstrated to them that they were secured in a way that made them completely inaccessible to anyone but me. It's called common courtesy, and an acknowledgment that not everyone shares my views on firearms.

If the girl in this story had had the foresight to do the same, there wouldn't be PF thread about it.

 

Ditto.

 

If a lease is broken, the only legal recourse is eviction. You still maintain all of your property rights as a tenant, and the landlord can do nothing about it until the eviction is carried out by the local sheriff.

 

You can bet going forward that firearms will be addressed in subsequent leases.

 

I didn't say anything otherwise. Did I?

 

I’m not sure what you’re trying to say. Its hard to follow. All that I am saying is that unless there is a state or federal law that says otherwise, that landlord can regulate can regulate just about anything on their property including saying no fire arms in their lease. If you sign that lease it’s a binding contract

 

The problem here is the perception that the land lord or the roommates have a say here. This person has a right guaranteed by the constitution to keep and bear arms, and is protected further by the 14th A that those rights should be protected and NOT taken away unless DUE PROCESS has been executed.
I realize that there are laws in certain states that allow land lords to restrict gun ownership in rental properties. I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH THOSE LAWS AS WELL and feel that if ever challenged in today's high courts they might find it difficult to keep the same laws on the books.
This grey area is a perfect opportunity for the new right leaning SCOTUS to assert its opinions on such matters.
Just my thoughts and I guess wishes really.

 

Why not religion?

 

apologies. I may have misread your post. I thought you said if a leas is broken, you lose your property rights and can be trespassed. That is not correct. You can only be evicted.

 

I'll make it more clear. When you hold a lease that is your home.

the Constitution is the federal law.

Unless it isn't legal

 

When you live with other people, in a house, or in society as a whole, it is incumbent upon you to at least consider the thoughts and feelings of others. Were we not to do so, society would simply fall apart. I choose to get along with other people by not shoving my 2A opinions down the throats of others, even if I have a constitutionally guaranteed right to do so. Especially when I know that their opinions differ from mine.

This wasn't the only room for rent at Harvard. And if a MAGA wearing 2A princess from Alabama wants to live where she can leave her guns laying about, then it is her responsibility to find such an abode.

 

And exactly how was she protecting herself by leaving a loaded, unlocked gun in her room while she was gone for the weekend?

 

Having unattended loaded guns available just compounds the stupidity.