The Ross Management Group, which manages the Oakwood Apartments

[rahlquist]

Link Removed

 

[AndyF]

I don't think they can do that retroactively. That's a bait and switch tactic. In NYC they have rent controlled apartment buildings where the owner/landlord may not raise the rent on the tenant that lives in the building above a minimal fixed amount until that tenant either moves or dies. Once that happens the landlord has the right to charge free market rates but as long as the tenant occupies the apartment they are prohibited from changing the rent. If the lease he signed doesn't prohibit firearms, the landowner can't enforce the new rule until he moves out and they get a new tenant.

 

[Johnee84302]

Let's see how much crime goes UP in this complex if this is allowed. Gun free zones are a theif's paradise!

 

[dcselby1]

Breaking: Link Removed

 

[ezkl2230]

OK. Time to stir the pot again.

I've said it many times on these threads, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE TREAT BUSINESSES LIKE TRULY PRIVATE PROPERTY. What we do in our homes (truly private property) is one thing. You don't want people carrying guns in your home? Knock yourself out. That's your right. But when you own a business, the moment you begin imposing those views on others as a condition of employment, doing business, or renting a home, views that have a direct impact on the safety of those others, then you have a real problem. I currently work for a company that does not allow me to carry on the job; the PUBLIC can carry on our premises, but we as employees can't. Didn't find out about that one until after I was hired, and I can't afford to leave right now - jobs are too scarce in this area. I'm working on getting my own business up and running - and I will ENCOURAGE my employees to carry. In the meantime, anything ever happens to me on the job because someone attacked me and I was denied the right to defend myself using WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY, you can bet I'm going own a BIG chunk of the company.

I will continue to say it, and I will continue to work on my legislators to pass it, the Second Amendment is a fundamental, human, civil, legal right that no business has the right to infringe - even though firearms owners don't show up in any of the civil rights acts as "protected" groups. The right to bear arms was a civil right long before any of the civil rights acts were compiled. A place of public accommodation/business/employment is not truly private property, and the government already infringes on the rights of the owners of such places in thousands of ways (zoning laws, civil rights laws, disability laws, financial laws). A business owner is not free to conduct business in any way they choose. If that were the case, then they would be able to construct their business EXACTLY the way they chose, they would be able to hire EXACTLY whom they wanted, and they would be able to exclude ANY customer for ANY reason at all. Yet, we all know that business owners do not have those rights; those rights have been infringed by the government. That's why I have to laugh every time a business owner tells me, "NO ONE is going to tell me how to run MY business!" Yeah, right. Big brother is looking over their shoulder every day to make sure that their business is being run the way big brother tells them to run it. And I will tell you what REALLY gets to me about this debate: the number of business owners on this forum who insist on their right to have firearms on their private property, who carry firearms in their homes or business and in public places, and then tell everyone else that while they are on THEIR business property they have to take their chances and leave their right to carry at the door - and then, to top it all off, have the nerve to scream about how the government wants to infringe on THEIR right to carry. The hypocrisy of these people absolutely blows my mind.

If you're going to be for the right to carry, then be for it - all the time. If you're only going to be for the right to carry when it suits you, then shut the heck up.

 

[BC1]

OK. Time to stir the pot again. A place of public accommodation/business/employment is not truly private property, and the government already infringes on the rights of the owners of such places in thousands of ways (zoning laws, civil rights laws, disability laws, financial laws). A business owner is not free to conduct business in any way they choose.

A place of public business is private property. It is not a public place, it is a privately owned facility. The owner is not bound by the second amendment, only the government is bound by it. As a business owner I'm free to choose who I allow on my property. And when I say it's time to go... it's really time to go. I believe that is what makes America great. I have the right to toss junior out by his ear without fear of repercussion. If he refuses to leave he's charged with criminal trespass.
.
The same holds for the first amendment. You aren't free to come into a privately owned store and begin speaking your mind regarding any topic. Get up on a soapbox and spout political rhetoric and you'll be booted. Because the first amendment is between you and the government, not between you and I. I don't have to allow freedom speech on my privately owned property.
.
IMHO

 

[ezkl2230]

A place of public business is private property. It is not a public place, it is a privately owned facility. The owner is not bound by the second amendment, only the government is bound by it. As a business owner I'm free to choose who I allow on my property. And when I say it's time to go... it's really time to go. I believe that is what makes America great. I have the right to toss junior out by his ear without fear of repercussion. If he refuses to leave he's charged with criminal trespass.
.
The same holds for the first amendment. You aren't free to come into a privately owned store and begin speaking your mind regarding any topic. Get up on a soapbox and spout political rhetoric and you'll be booted. Because the first amendment is between you and the government, not between you and I. I don't have to allow freedom speech on my privately owned property.
.
IMHO

And you and I both know that your statement is only true to a point. You throw the wrong person out of your business and they make the right Civil Rights case they will own your business. You do not have complete freedom to throw out anyone you like. You do not have complete freedom to refuse to hire anyone you want. You don't have the right to refuse service to absolutely anybody you wish. I guess it might be okay for you to bluster like that here on this thread, but you know as well as I do that the reality is your rights as a business owner have legal limitations.

 

[AndyF]

Look what's happening with the Christian cake baker in Colorado that didn't want to bake a cake for a same-sex couple.

 

[BC1]

And you and I both know that your statement is only true to a point. You throw the wrong person out of your business and they make the right Civil Rights case they will own your business. You do not have complete freedom to throw out anyone you like. You do not have complete freedom to refuse to hire anyone you want. You don't have the right to refuse service to absolutely anybody you wish. I guess it might be okay for you to bluster like that here on this thread, but you know as well as I do that the reality is your rights as a business owner have legal limitations.

Couldn't be more wrong. I can throw you out for being armed and you have no civil rights case. Gun owners are not protected under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. You also have no second amendment case because I'm not the government. Law suit? Go ahead, I can afford the attorneys. Besides, I'm insured for legal costs. If your suit is deemed frivolous by the court there's a huge fine and assignment of my costs to you. If you lose I return the favor with a suit for malicious prosecution. If you win I don't pay you... ever... regardless of court orders. If I win I move on your personal assets. Those of us with business smarts don't hold assets within the company. We establish a holding company as a distinct entity, thus assets can't be attached. You get zippo
.
Regarding hiring? I've hired many, many people over the years. I hire whom I want. It is your responsibility to prove upon preponderance of the evidence that I discriminated based on some protection afforded by the Civil Rights Act.
.
I'm an old cat. A porcupine. Been doing this forever. Good luck dealing with me. I'll send your attorney blind on motions and responses at $300 per hour.
.
Post not intended to disrespect you, just sayin'

 

[BC1]

Look what's happening with the Christian cake baker in Colorado that didn't want to bake a cake for a same-sex couple.

They're protected under the civil rights act.

 

[jcreek]

I don't think they can do that retroactively. That's a bait and switch tactic. In NYC they have rent controlled apartment buildings where the owner/landlord may not raise the rent on the tenant that lives in the building above a minimal fixed amount until that tenant either moves or dies. Once that happens the landlord has the right to charge free market rates but as long as the tenant occupies the apartment they are prohibited from changing the rent. If the lease he signed doesn't prohibit firearms, the landowner can't enforce the new rule until he moves out and they get a new tenant.

Most people sign 12 month leases these days. It's pretty easy to wait until the lease is up and say give em up or go. I moved apartments every year for 4 years because every time we found something we could afford, at then end of the lease they'd want to raise the $200. Fck that, I have no problem leaving. Cheaper to rent a UHAUL and gtfo.

 

[AndyF]

They're protected under the civil rights act.

Is it the baker that's protected by the civil rights act, or is it the couple?