• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Landlord Prohibits Firearms on Property

This issue is cultural conditioning.

If this sort of thing is tolerated, it will expand. If it is not tolerated people will come, over time, to accept that gun owners have the same housing rights as blacks and jews. This is also the essence of the current battle over the "religious freedom laws" - is acceptance of gays something on which reasonable people can disagree, or is it something like racial equality in which there is only one socially acceptable "correct" answer? The legislatures in some of the southern starts are working hard to make sure that the former position prevails. (Nobody seems to be asking them if the religious freedom law would allow someone to deny service to an interracial couple if their religion prohibits it).

Not trying to be rude, although I am sure it will sound that way.

To me this line of reasoning boils down to, "It is ok to use the government to trample on a right as long as I do not agree with that right"
 
Unfortunately it's his property. Just tell them you don't agree with the terms. Don't even say why and move on.

A lot of landlords have that because of liability. That doesn't mean the landlord is anti gun. If you don't want to speak to them about it, I'd agree with the above and move on to someplace else.
 
I've always had a policy that I didn't want to be somewhere where they really didn't want me.

You can fight the landlord and win, and he can do little things to make your life miserable so that you want to leave. If he doesn't want me because I'm Jewish or because I'm a gun owner, then I simply don't want to be there either.

I've only had 2 experiences as a renter, one was great (manager told us to treat it like it was our own home, we did and went beyond requirements when we left) and another (Antico's Charlesbank Apartments in Waltham) which was a continuous horror show.

The CT experience: One tenant built a boat in the basement, another overhauled a VW engine there, etc. It was awesome and the management (husband and wife living on site) were great.

The MA experience: Refused to show me the lease until the day I moved in, consisted of 5 pages of what you could not do! Terrorized two young ladies (Brandeis students) living downstairs when they called to ask about putting up book shelves (forbidden). Called me at work about unpaid rent . . . however I wasn't the deadbeat, it was another person with similar (not same) last name who lived in another building. Woman across from us called owner directly every time she saw a rule violation and bragged about it. Storage was in the attic and Mr. Antico admitted to me in a phone conversation that since he liked birds, he left 1 brick out at the end of each building attic and put a dish of bird food inside the attic. Problem was that the birds couldn't find their way out and I found a dead one at the bottom of the stairs to the attic, plus crapped on people's goods/clothing stored up there. Health code violation but he's a big shot in Waltham so no way they would do anything about it. Back door to buildings were always unlocked (violation of code after the Boston Strangler it is a requirement that apt. building doors be locked at all times). I could go on, but you get the idea.

We broke our lease early and bought a house, never looked back and thus partly why I never want to live in a condo, apt., or elderly complex . . . please bury me first!
 
I've heard some places don't like to rent to law students, not sure if that's true or not (though I believe it).

My landlord by UMass upped our rent 300 a year, when he tried to do it again (1850 for a beat to shit farmhouse 3 bedroom apartment that started out at 1250 2 years earlier) we said goodbye. He excitedly told me he found someone for 1900... well when I had to fight him over my security deposit he poured his heart out that he'd spent thousands in legal fees and that person had been living their for 6 months and never paid rent and was sabotaging the apartment (clogging drains, etc) for their benefit.

Greedy bastard got what he had coming. Still the power tenants have, ESPECIALLY when you talk about individual unit leases, is insane.

Mike
Mike

This is why so many landlords will give a break in rent to those they KNOW are good tenants. Especially in friggin MA.

Friends of mine were renting out their house on the Cape many years ago. It took over a year to evict these people even after it was discovered that they were dealing drugs and running a fu(kin prostitution ring out of the house!
 
I've always had a policy that I didn't want to be somewhere where they really didn't want me.

You can fight the landlord and win, and he can do little things to make your life miserable so that you want to leave. If he doesn't want me because I'm Jewish or because I'm a gun owner, then I simply don't want to be there either.

I've only had 2 experiences as a renter, one was great (manager told us to treat it like it was our own home, we did and went beyond requirements when we left) and another (Antico's Charlesbank Apartments in Waltham) which was a continuous horror show.

The CT experience: One tenant built a boat in the basement, another overhauled a VW engine there, etc. It was awesome and the management (husband and wife living on site) were great.

The MA experience: Refused to show me the lease until the day I moved in, consisted of 5 pages of what you could not do! Terrorized two young ladies (Brandeis students) living downstairs when they called to ask about putting up book shelves (forbidden). Called me at work about unpaid rent . . . however I wasn't the deadbeat, it was another person with similar (not same) last name who lived in another building. Woman across from us called owner directly every time she saw a rule violation and bragged about it. Storage was in the attic and Mr. Antico admitted to me in a phone conversation that since he liked birds, he left 1 brick out at the end of each building attic and put a dish of bird food inside the attic. Problem was that the birds couldn't find their way out and I found a dead one at the bottom of the stairs to the attic, plus crapped on people's goods/clothing stored up there. Health code violation but he's a big shot in Waltham so no way they would do anything about it. Back door to buildings were always unlocked (violation of code after the Boston Strangler it is a requirement that apt. building doors be locked at all times). I could go on, but you get the idea.

We broke our lease early and bought a house, never looked back and thus partly why I never want to live in a condo, apt., or elderly complex . . . please bury me first!

Bingo, i would never put up with that shit.
 
Exactly what would the landlord be liable for?

Nothing, but his/her bartender who moonlights as an attorney told them so; therefore, they're liable if the tenant goes on a shooting spree,

or if their ammo stash bursts into flames and the flying bullets penetrate the walls and kill the entire family living two doors down.
 
Personally, I'd keep any damn guns I please.

Just don't be a jackass and keep them in some case with a glass front. This ain't Texas.

As for a Gun Safe - if anyone asks you keep your Vital Records in there. And no, you can't look inside.
 
Not trying to be rude, although I am sure it will sound that way.

To me this line of reasoning boils down to, "It is ok to use the government to trample on a right as long as I do not agree with that right"

We live in a world where fair housing laws are the order of the day, and that will not change. The SCOTUS decision on disparate impact will, if anything, expand the protections. That will not change.

Given the above, I am not willing to accept the 2nd as worth of any less protection than the choice to marry someone other than a person of the same color and opposite sex.
 
... Suppose OP chooses to become a poster boy for renters' 2A right by making a Federal case out of this. It's been pointed out that in this third world hellhole of a Commonwealth, his COP might magically discover that he's "unsuitable". ...
... We have not yet seek any retaliation against people for using the courts to enforce gun rights. It that were to happen, I think Comm2A would bring another federal case.

I spoke to Alan Gura, and he told me that even in Chicago, he did not see any attempt at retaliation against plaintiffs and Chicago was petty and obstructionist (which has not been the case in MA). We have treated the various MA agencies and officials with courtesy and respect, and they have done the same with us. ...

Interesting, thanks. (Granted those are more likely state level staff and town counsel than defendant town cops).

... As a landlord ... I go to great lengths to weed out bad candidates. ... If we mutually decide to move forward I collect references from previous landlords ...

I appreciate that you don't just ask the current landlord.

Word is that many landlords will tell an inquiring prospective landlord that their unwanted tenants walk on water, if only it will get the tenants moved into their next apartment and out of the current landlord's hair. So you have to go farther back to ask a landlord who doesn't stand to lose Big Time by telling the truth about their former tenants from hell.
 
Exactly what would the landlord be liable for?


today, an attorney will sue everyone. the mfg, the ammo, the owner, the shooter , anyone that has a relation to the incident. I don't know, someone breaks in, steals the handgun and shoots a tenant?

Could be insurance regs, cost a lot more if guns on premises. I'm just saying, you don't know why he doesn't allow them unless you ask.
 
Last edited:
today, an attorney will sue everyone. the mfg, the ammo, the owner, the shooter , anyone that has a relation to the incident. I don't know, someone breaks in, steals the handgun and shoots a tenant?

Could be insurance regs,
cost a lot more if guns on premises. I'm just saying, you don't know why he doesn't allow them unless you ask.

Might be insurance but if so, the landlord is insured with the wrong company!!

MetLife gave me a large discount BECAUSE I'm an NRA member, which one might extrapolate as a gun owner. I'd assume the same or better if it was a commercial property at least from them.

My guess is FEAR is the most probable reason for such restrictions.
 
if this is in Taunton, just pull up your shirt and show your gun and say "do you know who i am!?" Apparently, that's what we do now.
 
I spoke with a friend who is a real estate broker and a shooter. He feels that this is illegal but can recommend an attorney who deals in landlord tenant laws if it becomes necessary.
 
Your potential landlord doesn't approve of g**s? He'll confiscate the g**s and put them back in the closet? Sounds illegal and discriminatory to me. You should find sympathetic journalists at the local papers who will write a story about how the landlord hates g**s.
 
Minor thread resurrection:

I'm talking to my insurance company [starts with A, ends with mica] about setting up insurance on my rental unit. I've been pretty happy with them overall. Long list of questions... then comes this:

Will you allow pets? Will you allow guns?

I bite my tongue for a second... I want to say "WTF do you mean allow guns? It's none of my god damn business and it's none of your god damn business. You're talking about a fundamental civil right. It's like you just asked me if I'll allow black people or gay people." Instead, I finally say, "no pets, I have no say if someone has guns".

Well, they also asked if I'll allow college students - but I guess it's ok to discriminate against them?

Anyway, to connect back to the original thread - maybe the landlord was asked the same question by his insurance company, jumped to a "no" answer, and then followed through with the clause on their lease?

ps. my unit is for rent in a green town and it comes with a hidden safe... big enough to hold 3 or 4 baseball bats :)
 
Last edited:
Minor thread resurrection:

I'm talking to my insurance company [starts with A, ends with mica] about setting up insurance on my rental unit. I've been pretty happy with them overall. Long list of questions... then comes this:

Will you allow pets? Will you allow guns?

I bite my tongue for a second... I want to say "WTF do you mean allow guns? It's none of my god damn business and it's none of your god damn business. You're talking about a fundamental civil right. It's like you just asked me if I'll allow black people or gay people." Instead, I finally say, "no pets, I have no say if someone has guns".

Well, they also asked if I'll allow college students - but I guess it's ok to discriminate against them?

Anyway, to connect back to the original thread - maybe the landlord was asked the same question by his insurance company, jumped to a "no" answer, and then followed through with the clause on their lease?

ps. my unit is for rent in a green town and it comes with a hidden safe... big enough to hold 3 or 4 baseball bats :)

As a landlord you are legally able to discriminate against college students as they not a protected class. Many landlords have a no undergrad or no student policy. Some even have a specific no law student policy.
 
As a landlord you are legally able to discriminate against college students as they not a protected class. Many landlords have a no undergrad or no student policy. Some even have a specific no law student policy.

That, and clowns! A lot will not rent to clowns, since they try to fit 50 of themselves into the smallest apartments! [smile]
 
As a landlord you are legally able to discriminate against college students as they not a protected class. Many landlords have a no undergrad or no student policy. Some even have a specific no law student policy.

There's a city ordinance in Boston that limits the number of students that may live in one rental property. I'm not sure how anybody would enforce that.
 
There's a city ordinance in Boston that limits the number of students that may live in one rental property. I'm not sure how anybody would enforce that.

No more than 4 undergrads to one unit. I've never seen that one enforced though most properties in Boston are rented by agents and most agents abide by this.

What makes no sense is what if you have 4 undergrads and a 21 year old dropout?
 
Last edited:
When I was in college, in another city, they had a similar ordinance. We had 6 undergrads in a 4 bedroom house using the "dining room" and "living room" as the 5th and 6th bedrooms. The neighbors ultimately called the police based on the number of parked cars and the landlord was notified of his failure to comply. The ordinance actually limited the number of unrelated people in a house. Happens...

No more than 4 undergrads to one unit. I've never seen that one enforced though most properties in Boston are rented by agents and most agents abide by this.

What makes no sense is what if you have 4 undergrads and a 21 year old dropout?
 
Back
Top Bottom