TexasCHLforum.com

sumyungai wrote:

drjoker wrote:Sue them. Call the NRA. Call your lawyer. Have your lawyer send them a letter on NRA stationary. From DC to Chicago, these unconstitutional pinko carpetbagger landlords are being told by our courts that they can't do this. A total ban on arms in your home is unconstitutional.

If it's unconstitutional for a land owner to prohibit firearms on his private property, then it's really unconstitutional for the Texas government to prohibit concealed handguns in bars, schools, and professional sporting events.

If it's unconstitutional for a landlord then it's also unconstitutional for an employer.

Home ownership and self employment look better and better every day.

drjoker wrote:A total ban on arms in your home is unconstitutional.

Not quite. It is unconstitutional for the government to do this, but a private individual or company can do so. The Constitution restricts the government, not other individuals not acting under the color of the law.

A landlord can ban anything he wants to ban in the lease, unless there is some specific law forbidding it. And I am not sure of any law in Texas restricting the landlord's authority to ban gun possession by his tenants.

The question may be whether the change in rules by the landlord is "reasonable" or if it instead causes something akin to a material modification of the lease. Would the prohibition of firearms cause a lessee hardships because the aggrieved tenant would now have to pay for off-site storage and now feels a considerable lack of personal security in their residence?

That may get you out of the lease contract, but would not stop the landlord from trying to evict if you decide to continue on with the lease. There's also the consideration of how likely it is that your violation of the new rule would be detected and what the consequences of such detection would be (eviction, at least). Weigh that against the idea of disarming yourself. Just my simple thoughts...

Just to give an update on this, a few weeks ago I emailed my Texas state representative and state senator from their websites about the need for legislation to be introduced in the next session to protect Texas gun owners who rent their homes and gave the Minnesota statute as an example.

I also put in a call to the NRA ILA and they patched me through to their Texas office where I left a voicemail for someone to call me back regarding this issue. After waiting a week I called them back and they patched me through a second time. Another voicemail.

To date no response from anyone!!! I'm really disappointed at the NRA. Except for a couple of years that I skipped, I've been a member since 1966 and this was the first time I contacted them about anything other than renewing my membership. If I don't receive a callback from the two voicemails I left, I'm really going to have to think hard about renewing again.

texman45 wrote:...
So no, I'm not about to get rid of my legal means of self-defense at the whim of some out of state landlord. I'll risk the eviction, even though an eviction on your record makes it very difficult to get a new apartment...

I doubt very seriously that you're going to have an eviction on your record (though it is still possible). Many years ago, when I was first divorced and trying to provide for my kids (I got custody) I was short on rent. It was at a complex where I had insisted they make some repairs or I would withold rent. They used the late rent as an opportunity to move me out. They served an eviction notice (handed it to my eight year old), and two days later I offered to pay the rent, plus late fees. They refused, and said the eviction process had started, and I would be evicted.

I suprised them. I didn't move, and showed up for the hearing (yes, there's a hearing). I explained to the justice of the peace that I had looked up the law, and from my understanding the notice had to be given to a resident 12 years or older. I also explained why I thought I was really being evicted (the request for repairs), and that I had tried to pay the rent two days after the notice.

The JP dismissed the case because I had not been properly served. He also told the property manager "Ma'am, I'd suggest in the future that you be very cautious about refusing payment from a tenant, whether it is late or not". I don't know what legal basis he had for that, and didn't really care at the time. I lived there another year and half, and then bought a house.

I say all that to say this - part of the eviction process is a hearing. I suspect that as soon as a JP or a judge hears your side of the story, that the change was made after you signed the lease, at the very minimum he'd give you time to move out. More than likely, he'd refuse the eviction completely.

texman45 wrote:...What I did this week was email the NRA-ILA explaining the situation with a suggestion that they contact all Texas state legislators about the need for a statute protecting Texas renters who legally own firearms.

I'm asking everyone here who agrees to take a few minutes and do the same. Legal gun possession in a home should not be a class distinction thing, where homeowners have no problem but those who can't afford to buy a house run into this. Thanks.

That sounds like a good move as well!

I thought we had already established that a hotel could not prohibit someone from bringing a gun into their hotel room? How is this any different?

C-dub wrote:I thought we had already established that a hotel could not prohibit someone from bringing a gun into their hotel room? How is this any different?

Excellent question!! Of course, hotel rooms don't have leases, but I'm betting there is a list of rules of behavior somewhere yor're agreeing to.

sjfcontrol wrote:

C-dub wrote:I thought we had already established that a hotel could not prohibit someone from bringing a gun into their hotel room? How is this any different?

Excellent question!! Of course, hotel rooms don't have leases, but I'm betting there is a list of rules of behavior somewhere yor're agreeing to.

Most certainly there is a contract to rent a hotel room.

C-dub wrote:I thought we had already established that a hotel could not prohibit someone from bringing a gun into their hotel room? How is this any different?

Can you cite a statue or some case law to that effect?

I agree it's (probably) not a crime to keep a weapon in your room because it's your temporary residence. However, if a hotel has a policy against firearms, I haven't seen a compelling argument that they're not allowed to enforce their policies though civil remedies.

Similarly, they could have a policy to charge 10x the room rate if you bring a firearm or pet in the room. Call it liquidated damages. If they catch you, they charge your credit card automatically, rather like the minibar or ppv movies. If you signed a piece of paper agreeing to the policy, it could prove difficult to effectively dispute those charges with your credit card company.

Granted, the risk of being caught sneaking a firearm in a hotel room is rather low, but in theory...

apostate wrote:

C-dub wrote:I thought we had already established that a hotel could not prohibit someone from bringing a gun into their hotel room? How is this any different?

Can you cite a statue or some case law to that effect?

I don't think I can. It's been discussed on here several times before and I'm sure Charles or a few others, with whom the Googlefu is strong, have cited references before. I'll look around and see what I come up with.

I can't find anything. I thought for sure it was discussed and those that know said that the possession of a gun could not be prohibited from your residence or "living quarters" as stated in 46.02, where it also specifically mentions permanent or temporary. I could not find anywhere where Charles has said anything definitive on this subject and Srothstein had affirmed that if it's in the lease then they can do it as long as it's not one of the federally protected things.

However, in light of recent SCOTUS rulings, I wonder if the ability of a landlord to prohibit the mere possession of a gun by a renter is still legal. Anyone?

The only legislation I know of concerns the Castle doctrine. It was expanded to include your car and any hotel/motel room you might stay in. I think it needs to be clarified by the yahoos in Austin. I won't be staying in any place that bans my carry...or will I?

RJ

johnson0317 wrote:The only legislation I know of concerns the Castle doctrine. It was expanded to include your car and any hotel/motel room you might stay in. I think it needs to be clarified by the yahoos in Austin. I won't be staying in any place that bans my carry...or will I?

RJ

Can you point to the legislation that speaks to hotel/motel rooms?

Lewis Kram wrote:

texman45 wrote:The Texas apartment complex I live in was bought out by an out-of-state company. Last month a booklet was stuck in our doors stating that the rules included in this booklet are now part of our lease and must be followed. One of the rules is regarding firearms and states that possession of firearms of any kind can cause a tenant to be evicted for "Material Non-Compliance" and/or "Other Good Cause." It goes on to say that it is prohibited for any tenant's guest or visitor to bring firearms onto the property, including storing them in their vehicle while visiting, and that the tenant is responsible for this. These rules were not in the lease when I signed it. Can a landlord of a Texas rental property evict a tenant who legally possesses a firearm, or who has a visitor who is carrying with a valid CHL (or even a visitor without a CHL who has a gun legally stored in their automobile?) There is no 30.06 currently posted on the property. Can they post a 30.06 for rental apartments? Thanks in advance.

If the policy is still in effect two months later, that answers the question if a landlord can do this.

HOW does that answer the question? Because no one has made a stink about it? Because no one has challenged it in a court of law? I could proclaim myself "El Granito Hombre, Master of All Mountain Rock", but it doesn't necessarily make it so...

Heartland Patriot wrote:I could proclaim myself "El Granito Hombre, Master of All Mountain Rock", but it doesn't necessarily make it so...

Maybe it does if no one challenges you on it.