new rule that makes it illegal to own a gun.

[Pilgrim]

http://www.wtvf.com/Global/story.asp?S=6242822

ANTIOCH, Tenn.- Some people in a Nashville neighborhood are furious over a new rule that makes it illegal to own a gun.

Residents in Nashboro Village said it's unconstitutional and leaves them defenseless.

Two weeks ago, residents received a letter from their homeowners' association indicating that guns are not allowed on the property.

"It thought it was ironic that they say you can't have something when the United States government says you can," said resident Cristina Salajanu.

Salajanu would like to give her neighborhood management company a history lesson.

"I think it's unconstitutional," Salajanu said. "They can't tell you what to own or not to own in your own house."

Salajanu is talking about the Bill of Rights, specifically the Second Amendment, which grants citizens the right to keep and bear arms. It's been an American freedom for 215 years but Salajanu and other residents said it's been taken away from them.

"Something needs to be done," she said.

Two weeks ago, the property management company at Nashboro Village told its residents no more guns on the property.

"It incensed me that it was written the way it was," said a resident who asked not to be identified.

She said there is a serious need to feel protected here and a firearm can do that.

"We've got dark areas, the lighting is very definitely very dim," she said.

Salajanu said that burglaries started to increase since late summer...

She said she believes her neighborhood has changed since she moved in last year.

"Three weeks ago someone was stopped at gunpoint," Salajanu said. "It seems the nature of those burglaries is becoming more dangerous."

Some residents at Nashboro Village have campaigned for better lighting and more security but if they can't get either they at least want their Second Amendment rights upheld.

"If I'm walking if I'm walking my dog or if I am outside walking and if I don't feel safe and I'm licensed then I'll carry a gun," said the resident who did not want her identity disclosed.

Officials with Ghertner and Company, the property manager at Nashboro Village, would not make an on-camera comment about the gun policy but said they plan on changing the rule soon to allow firearms on the property.

However, they would make it illegal to fire those guns, Roll Eyes which residents say is still unconstitutional.

Neighbors said they understand the gun rule is meant to keep criminals out of Nashboro Village but they don't believe that prohibiting firearms is the best way to do that.

 

[TomH]

I hope they get sued.

 

[Admin]

Neighbors said they understand the gun rule is meant to keep criminals out of Nashboro Village but they don't believe that prohibiting firearms is the best way to do that.

Hmm... Not the best way??? You've got to be shitting me...

 

[matt1956]

ah but.... the sad and pathetic part is this... I am betting that it is one of though areas that has a covenant that folks have to sign prior to moving in.

My brother live in one of those (snob holes)

Can't have a boat/rv or anything in yard. No pools, no retaining walls that are not approved by the covenant councile first, gutters must be copper of cedar... blah blah blah...

sounds like the same type of thing.

One could argue the constitutionality of that as well... but... if you sign up for it...

 

[MrsWildweasel]

Which is why I would never live in a housing area like that. My brother did for awhile, couldn't understand it.

 

[dwarven1]

ah but.... the sad and pathetic part is this... I am betting that it is one of though areas that has a covenant that folks have to sign prior to moving in.

One reason I told my wife that there was NO WAY I would ever live in a condo.

One could argue the constitutionality of that as well... but... if you sign up for it...

Can you actually sign away a Constitutionally-protected right? I mean, they can't, for example, tell you that you can't badmouth the community (first amendment), can they?

 

[drgrant]

This is why I think "Homeowners Associations" and "Restrictive Covenants"
are generally a huge bunch of BS. While the goal is to keep property
values high, these people go to absurd extremes. This kind of thing
is just the next extension of that. If I ever move I will not be moving
to property which is subject to anything other than perhaps town or city
ordinances.

Instead of having an HA that says "please dont leave trash on your front
lawn" they've gone to the point of telling you what you can and cannot do
inside your own home. These people have been a thorn in the side of
radio enthusiasts for the longest time... and now they're coming after
gun owners.

-Mike

 

[daveInME]

yet another reason to NOT to live in a neighborhood association.
bad enough having the feds and state morons telling you what you can and cannot do without some yahoo down the street being able to do tell you what color to paint your house an what kind of car you can have parked in your driveway.

 

[matt1956]

One reason I told my wife that there was NO WAY I would ever live in a condo.


Can you actually sign away a Constitutionally-protected right? I mean, they can't, for example, tell you that you can't badmouth the community (first amendment), can they?

I'll ask my brother, but i'm sure it is in there on page 38 of their covenant agreement

I told my wife it would be a cold day in hell when someone would tell me what I can and can't do in my own home.

Then she made me mow the lawn, trim the hedges nicely, clean the gutters, move my tools back to the shed & basment, fix the window boxes, resurface the driveway, paint the front porch. BUT NO ONE is telling me what I can do in my home

 

[Moderator]

Seems like the right thing to do when crime is rising in your neighborhood.

 

[dwarven1]

Why don't they just put these signs up?

 

[Len-2A Training]

IANAL, but I have to deal with them. As a Constable, I've had to serve "fine notices" that threaten people with huge fines (>$4K) and possible eviction for "not following the rules of a condo association" (one was in a single family home where the offense was that the table on the back deck was oriented in the wrong direction and a small rip in a screen = >$4K). My late MIL lived in a FL condo for the elderly and served on their BOD. I've heard plenty.

My Wife would love to move to a condo, but it would be the last place I'd ever want to live! Too many busy-bodies making rules.

This is "contract law" and I suspect (IANAL) that when you buy in, you sign agreeing to "whatever rules are created after the fact", kind of like our credit card agreements . . . by continuing to live there after the date of a change you are tacitly agreeing to it. I do think that they are enforceable up to and including eviction for not abiding by their rules.

NO THANK YOU!!

I own a house in a town with Town By-Laws that prevent much of the most objectionable stuff (e.g. only 1 non-registered vehicle visible on the property, regulating animals, etc.) and that is the most "regulation" that I can tolerate. I am very active in town gov't and have helped shape a number of our by-laws . . . keeps your enemies close, and spoken out at town meeting against some.

I broke my lease and bought my house earlier than planned largely due to the landlord's (AJ Antico) overbearing 5 pages of rules (you only got those AFTER you signed the lease) of what you could NOT do on their property! That was 32 years ago and I never looked back.

 

[EddieCoyle]

They should take a lesson from Kennesaw, GA where residents are required by law to keep and maintain at least one firearm per household. Since the law was enacted, residential burglaries have dropped 89 percent.

 

[Admin]

They should take a lesson from Kennesaw, GA where residents are required by law to keep and maintain at least one firearm per household. Since the law was enacted, residential burglaries have dropped 89 percent.

Jim you know better. No liberal has ever used facts to base a decision on. They go by strict emotion...

 

[Lynne]

Jim you know better. No liberal has ever used facts to base a decision on. They go by strict emotion...

And the day I hear any Liberal stating something that is actual fact and said Lib is using logic to figure out a solution to a problem, then I'll know hell hath truly frozen over.

 

[Garys]

I've read a fair amount about these type of restrictive covenants with regards to amateur radio. In those cases the HA bans external antennas or towers. IIRC, those have been upheld.

When my mother wanted to put a chair lift in the common stairway of her condo, she had to get permission from the management company to do so. The ADA did not apply since it was neither a public building or a commercial property.

Just remember that the Bill of Rights restricts what the government can do, but generally not what private individuals can do. So, although you have the right to free speech in public areas, private property owners can prohibit any kind of speech they desire. Just as Internet forum owners can.

And although I might not always like the result, I much prefer this to the government telling private property owners what they can and can not do on their own property.

Gary

 

[wilfx]

If the no gun rule was meant to keep criminals out of the community, maybe they should just put up a sign saying no criminals allowed on premises. That Ought to work!!

 

[Jose]

I'm pretty sure this BS rule runs afowl of Tennessee Statutes that pre-empt all firearms regulation to the state government.

Still, it will be a cold day in hell before I live in a "covenant" community again. NFW.

 

[dwarven1]

Still, it will be a cold day in hell before I live in a "covenant" community again. NFW.

I will try my damndest to NEVER live in one.

 

[Erebus]

Some on them go completely crazy with restrictions. A former boss of mine signed on to one of those without 'reading the fine print' so to speak and went through hell until he sold the place. A few examples of what happened to him.

His wife was told to remove a US Flag on THE 4TH OF JULY!! It's display hadn't been previously approved.

She was told to remove a cinco de mayo display in her window on May 5th(she's from Puerto Rico).

They had a one car garage and he got home first, he would park on the street and she would put her car in the garage and then pull his car into the driveway infront of the garage door. Got told they cannot park on the street.

Deck furniture wrong color, told to get rid of it. Had to be white their's was beige.

He got grief about his motorcycle.

She had a mail box with flowers painted on the side. Gone. White mailbox with black numbers only. No name just numbers.

There were more but these are the ones that come to mind. He spent a little over a year dealing with these people and the neighborhood busy body. Basically they can dictate anything that can be seen from the outside.

 

[reinbeau]

I would never, ever, ever even consider for a moment living anywhere that was governed by an HOA. And I'd forgotten Kennesaw, GA was that town that required gun ownership - we were just down there a month or so ago. Nice area.

 

[drgrant]

I'm pretty sure this BS rule runs afowl of Tennessee Statutes that pre-empt all firearms regulation to the state government.

Well, therein lies the problem- it's a rule, not a law. And if the property
"owner" signed on to RCs or an HOA, then they're essentially screwed as that entity can basically do whatever it wants- as it's a private matter not a
public one. (eg contract law). It's no different than a landlord saying
that you can't have a dog in your house. So the title here is a
little misleading, because the activity isn't illegal- but breaking a rule
which is defined in some sort of contract.

The only way the state preemption would apply is if TN had some kind of
a law saying it was illegal for private entities (eg landlords) to prevent
someone from having firearms in their residence.

-Mike