Guns allowed in apartments?

[Technosavant]

I fully agree with Aguila Blanca.

Legal agreements (of which a lease is one) need to be exhaustive- that is, if there is a rule which is expected to be followed it MUST be spelled out. Read the lease carefully. If firearms are mentioned as being prohibited, then they are. If they are not mentioned at all, they are not. Only that which is mentioned explicitly is covered by the agreement.

If you have questions about the lease agreement, find a real estate lawyer and pay for an hour of his/her time to look it over and answer questions in plain English about that agreement. I would not recommend asking the landlord about things not mentioned... they may try to make things more restrictive than the agreement actually allows.

[shortwave]

Take Aguila Blanca's wise advice.
Read and understand the rental agreement/contract prior to signing. If no mention of firearms, you are good to go as you are only held to standards of which are in the contract you signed.

If guns aren't mentioned in the lease agreement, , asking further questions is just poking the hornets nest with a stick.

If there's a 'no guns policy', look elsewhere for an apartment...and please inform apartment owner/manager as to the reason.

[Pahoo]

If guns aren't mentioned in the lease agreement, , asking further questions is just poking the hornets nest with a stick.

Amen to this and what Aguila Blanca has replied. In a previous life, I use to be a Supervisor of a maintenance crew. Whenever they presented a management question to me, I reminded them up front that if I did not know the answer, I'd have to go further up the chain of command and they probably would not like the answer. Funny how the climate can change when someone falls back on their CYA program. Have to add that most of the time, the question was settled at my level. ....

Be Safe !!!

[carguychris]

Southwest Texas state!
Enjoy it!

That would be Texas State University–San Marcos now.

Planning on running for President?

There's no federal law and, I believe, no Texas law, that prohibits a person 18+ years old from buying a handgun in a private party sale.

It is a state determination on whether it will allow private party handgun sales or handgun transfers to those between the ages of 18 and 21. Some states allow it, some don't.

TX state law allows residents between 18 and 21 to own handguns but not to get a TX CHL.

FWIW TX state law allows people to CCW in privately-owned vehicles without a CHL, but the circumstances for legal in-vehicle CCW are fairly restrictive, and the law does not allow you to leave a handgun in a vehicle parked on the campus of a school that prohibits firearms otherwise. (TX in-vehicle CCW is covered in other threads and I don't feel like rehashing it all here.)

[Gunnut17]

Quote:
Originally Posted by newshooter1992
But why could a private party be able to sell me a handgun and not a dealer?

Because federal law has specifically prohibited FFLs from selling handguns to anyone under 21 years of age but is silent on non-FFL transfers of handguns in private party sales to those over 18 years of age. It is a state determination on whether it will allow private party handgun sales or handgun transfers to those between the ages of 18 and 21. Some states allow it, some don't.

Can anyone tell me the restrictions on handgun ownership in NM?

[Sparks1957]

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/newmexico.pdf


Since you're only thirteen, you're a bit limited in what you can do just yet.

I'm a huge fan of HK and Sig alike.and despite the fact I'm thirteen years old, (which may come as a suprise to anyone who has visited any of my threads or replied to a post of mine.) I consider myself quite knowledgeable in firearms and other weaponry/gear, and despite my 100+ posts, I joined three days ago.

[Gunnut17]

Since you're only thirteen, you're a bit limited in what you can do just yet.

I mean when I actually turn eighteen, me and my dad worked out a plan, I find a way to make enough money, he will use that money to buy the gun(s) of my choice, and then I get the gun(s) when I'm old enough, I'm wondering if I would have to wait until I'm 21 if I decide on a handgun.

And I'm suprised anyone read that already, It's not even a hour old.

[Sparks1957]

...and by then, you'll have about 78-79 thousand posts on TFL at the current rate.

[Spats McGee]

You cannot give your dad money to buy you a firearm. That's a straw purchase, and very, very illegal. From the back of the 4473:

Question 11.a. Actual Transferee/Buyer: For purposes of this form, you are the actual transferee/buyer if you are purchasing the firearm for yourself or otherwise acquiring the firearm for yourself (e.g., redeeming the firearm from pawn/retrieving it from consignment, firearm raffle winner). You are also the actual transferee/buyer if you arc legitimately purchasing the firearm as a gift for a third party. ACTUAL TRANSFEREE/BUYER EXAMPLES: Mr. Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith gives Mr. Jones the money for the firearm. Mr. Jones is NOT THE ACTUAL TRANSFEREE/BUYER of the firearm and must answer "NO" to question 11a. The licensee may not transfer the firearm to Mr. Jones. However, if Mr. Brown goes to buy a firearm with his own money to give to Mr. Black as a present, Mr. Brown is the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm and should answer "YES" to question 11.a. However, you may not transfer a firearm to any person you know or have reasonable cause to believe is prohibited under 18 U.S.c. § 922(g), (n), or (x). Please note: EXCEPTION: If you are picking up a repaired firearm(s) for another person. you are not required to answer 11.a. and may proceed to question 11b.

The most common response to my statement regarding a straw purchase always seems to be "How will the prosecutor prove that I gave him the money?" My answer: By reading your internet posts.

Edited to add: As Don H points out below, this applies if the transaction goes through an FFL.

[Don H]

Gunnut17, the plan you and our Dad came up with is known as a straw purchase and is a federal felony if the firearms are bought from a dealer. From the back of the Form 4473 that your Dad would have to complete when making a purchase from a dealer:

For purposes of this form, you are the actual buyer if you are purchasing the
firearm for yourself or otherwise acquiring the firearm for yourself (for example,
redeeming the firearm from pawn/retrieving it from consignment). You are also the
actual buyer if you are acquiring the firearm as a legitimate gift for a third party.
ACTUAL BUYER EXAMPLES: Mr. Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for
Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith gives Mr. Jones the money for the firearm. Mr. Jones is NOT
the actual buyer of the firearm and must answer “no “ to question 12a. The
licensee may not transfer the firearm to Mr. Jones. However, if Mr. Brown goes to
buy a firearm with his own money to give to Mr. Black as a present, Mr. Brown is
the actual buyer of the firearm and should answer “yes” to question 12a.

[Gunnut17]

Darn, I was really looking forward to going shooting, get a chance to bond with dad, guess my happiness will have to wait.

[Gunnut17]

Is it the same thing if say, I give my dad a sum of money as a gift, he uses the money to buy said gun from dealer, later, when I am 18/21, he gives the gun to me?

And if not, What if we aquire the gun in a private transaction?

[Sparks1957]

It's the transfer of cash that makes it illegal. If your dad simply buys the gun and gives it to you as a gift (once you are old enough to possess a handgun, which is when you are 19 as far as I can tell looking at NM law), than there is no problem.

Giving someone money and having them purchase the gun is what constitutes a "straw purchase"

[Frank Ettin]

Enough of this off topic excursion. This thread is about guns in apartments, not straw purchases or ways someone underage can get a gun.

The next off topic post will result in the thread being closed and probably some posts being deleted.

[hermannr]

Apartment rental contracts. Remember one thing also,,.,you do NOT have to agree to everything in a rental agreement...if there is a section that you do not like, run a single line through it, initial and date it. Have the person you are contracting with initial and date the line out, then do the same to his/her copy.

A lot of rental contracts are just stationary store copies, often, a landlord will agree to a modification if it means getting his apartment rented, or not. BUT: You have to be prepared to walk if the landlord won't agree to the change(s) you want.

It sounds like you do not have that problem anyway, if there is no gun clause in the rental agreement.

The one thing I would worry about is you say there are going to be others in that apartment beside yourself and your gal... You want to lock up that weapon if you are not there to control it...really bad...if one of your buddies gets in trouble, and the cops show up, there is a good possibility that they will not care that the weapon is not his...keep that possibility in mind.

[1hogfan83]

I actually had this happen to me once. The senior leasing agent came over to do some repairs and we were pretty good friends. I had my gun on my night stand and had forgot to put it up after cleaning it. He saw it and I thought "uh oh." He said what kinda gun is that, I explained the details and showed him the rest of the arsenal. He asked if they were all legal and said the lease said nothing in it about not owning handguns/long guns and its legal in the state. I was out of the woods so if it says nothing in the lease, its legal for you to own a gun I would say its a "dont ask, dont tell matter." Thats just my opinion though. To each their own. He did trust my judgement on the legality of each gun and they did do a background check before I could move in.

[Madcap_Magician]

If it's not in the lease, then don't worry about it.

I lived in an apartment when I was going to college here in Minnesota... back in 2007. The lease said no firearms, but I pointed out that this was actually in violation of state law- our CCW law has a clause specifically stating that a landlord cannot forbit a tenant or a tenant's guest from the lawful possession or carry of firearms.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by Madcap_Magician

...The lease said no firearms, but I pointed out that this was actually in violation of state law- our CCW law has a clause specifically stating that a landlord cannot forbit a tenant or a tenant's guest from the lawful possession or carry of firearms.

I think there may be a couple of other States that also prohibit a "no guns" clause in a lease. But they are a tiny minority.

Absent a state law (statute or court decision) prohibiting a "no guns" clause in a lease, they would generally be enforceable and be grounds for an eviction if the tenant had a gun on premises in violation of the lease.

[rts99]

There's something in contract law that claims it is illegal to enter into an unlawful agreement. The law nulifies anything in a contract that is unlawful. If the 2nd Amendment is the "Supreme law of the land", and it is, then anything that contradicts this law is unlawful and cannot be prohibited by contract. At least that's the way I understand it. The Supreme court ruled twice, once in Heller & again in McDonald, that citizen's have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms within their homes for self defence (the arguments of this right extending beyond the home not withstanding). The McDonald ruling applies this law against all the states & their subdivisions. This is the law - at least as I understand it. The Supreme court did NOT rule that only homeowners have this right, nor that only landlords have this right. If so that makes it discriminatory and therefore a privlege of home ownership, not an individual right. I'm not sure what to make of the homeless, according to the Supreme court the homeless have no rights and therefore all the government has to do to take all of our rights away is to take our homes away. Something VERY fascist in this conclusion and I find it very freightening if it is true........

[Hog Red]

like everyone has said, no need to worry about it if it's not in the lease. even if it were i would violate it because i wouldn't care. it's not a criminal act, kinda like having a pet or smoking in a unit that does not allow it. i dont know about the legality of restricting guns in this case but any business can certainly restrict guns on their property by posting it without violating your rights.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by rts99

There's something in contract law that claims it is illegal to enter into an unlawful agreement. The law nulifies anything in a contract that is unlawful. ...

There's a whole lot you don't understand about the law and a whole lot that's incorrect in your post. I'm out right now working on my iPhone, so I'll go into it in detail when I get home to my computer.

[Spats McGee]

rts99, welcome to TFL!

There are several flaws in your statements. I've broken your post up into several sections so that I can deal with them one at a time.

Originally Posted by rts99

There's something in contract law that claims it is illegal to enter into an unlawful agreement. The law nulifies anything in a contract that is unlawful. . . .

As a general rule, yes, but it is not illegal for a private property owner to determine whether or not firearms will be allowed on his or her property. As I understand from previous posts, there may be some states with statutes that supersede this principle, but setting those aside, the owner of property is typically allowed to set the rules for licensees or tenants on the property. This is not a constitutional matter, but a contractual matter. In an apartment setting, the owner we're talking about is the landlord, and he (or more likely the corporate "it") is free to set that restriction. (Unless, of course, the government is the landlord, in which case the 2A should apply.)

Originally Posted by rts99

. . . .If the 2nd Amendment is the "Supreme law of the land", and it is, then anything that contradicts this law is unlawful and cannot be prohibited by contract. At least that's the way I understand it. The Supreme court ruled twice, once in Heller & again in McDonald, that citizen's have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms within their homes for self defence (the arguments of this right extending beyond the home not withstanding). The McDonald ruling applies this law against all the states & their subdivisions. This is the law - at least as I understand it.. . . .

The US Constitution does many things. It enumerates rights, it limits governmental actions. It does not define or limit the relationship between private actors, and that's what we've got here: (a) a potential tenant; and (b) a landlord. These are private (non-governmental) actors to whom the US Constitution simply doesn't apply. If the landlord says "no guns in my buildings," that's his right. That is not a governmental infringement to which the 2A refers.

Originally Posted by rts99

. . . .The Supreme court did NOT rule that only homeowners have this right, nor that only landlords have this right. If so that makes it discriminatory and therefore a privlege of home ownership, not an individual right. I'm not sure what to make of the homeless, according to the Supreme court the homeless have no rights and therefore all the government has to do to take all of our rights away is to take our homes away. Something VERY fascist in this conclusion and I find it very freightening if it is true........ . . . .

See above. This is a contract matter, not a constitutional one. If the landlord doesn't want guns on his/her/its privately owned property, it is perfectly within its rights to ban them, unless some other statute applies. The RKBA is a fundamental, individual right that on which the government is prohibited from infringing.

[Frank Ettin]

It looks like Spats beat me to it. Just as well. He's a much nicer guy than I am.

[animal]

rts99 You have the right to waive your rights. As long as it’s voluntary, you can do it by contract.

The Constitution is a set of design parameters, or boundary conditions, for the creation of law. Laws (and contracts) regulate private society, not the Constitution.
When it comes to contracts, laws also set the boundary conditions for them.

In a landlord/tenant agreement, the landlord states the terms under which he will rent the property to the tenant. In that contract, he describes the various rights that he retains with respect to the property, and the rights he is surrendering to the tenant in exchange for the rent (selling you the ability to exercise rights on his property.).
Basically, a "no gun" policy of a landlord ... is where he isn’t selling you the right to have your gun on his property.

[Powderman]

As a landlord and a supporter of guns rights I do not call out firearms in my lease. But I can tell you I would prefer that my teneants are not armed.

One question...why?