Obama Admin Tells Landlords They Can’t Refuse To House Criminals

Juan or Julian does not change what he said.

 

If they did their time, it should be against the law to ban them from renting.

 

Still ducking the question I see. Either you deny there are disparities, believe they are racist, or think there is another reason for them...so which is it?

 

What disparity? Minorities commit more crimes then the population %'s should suggest? That is not a disparity.

 

http://commons.emich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1381&context=honors

Look at the impact of Banks in the USA laundering money for drug king pins. The government doesn't even know how much profits are made annual but a conservative estimate for the banks who were recently held responsible, were estimated at over $14 billion dollars, but the fines they were given were only in the few hundred million range. How much indirect impact on society do you think came directly from the cooperation of these criminal bankers?

 

So the problem is you don't what a disparity is.

lack of similarity or equality; inequality; difference:
a disparity in age; disparity in rank.

So now that we have agreed there is a disparity how can you keep saying they are claiming its racism when nobody has said that.

 

There is no lack of equality. If you commit a crime you commit a crime. If a group commits more crimes then another group that is on that group no the Justice System...

 

Committing more crime IS a disparity. So who said the disparity is racist?

 

are likely disproportionately to burden African-Americans and Hispanics

Back to this...

Just admit you are going to spin his comments all you can...

 

Spinning is claiming he said something that nobody said. Now that we agree there is a disparity and that nobody said it was racist...the appropriate thing Is for you to admit your mistake.

 

I never said there was a disparity he did and i did say his words were racist.... your first sentence proves my point thanks.. You have wasted enough of my time today.. I will let your first sentence stand as a reminder all the other posters

 

https://www.hrw.org/news/2009/06/19/race-drugs-and-law-enforcement-united-states

White people are punching way above their weight in the amount of drug users.
Black people are predominantly arrested over it.

 

Denial of what disparity means even after I posted the definition? Sad. You're right it's a good time to run away.

 

I just find it bizarre that any kind if criminal record is even mentioned.

My wife and I have an investment property which we lease out via a real estate agency. We stipulate the kind of tenants we want when we advertise the property. Family, children, pets are OK, tenant working stuff like this. Nothing is mentioned about criminal record. The real estate agency sends us a number of candidates profiles with references from other real estate agencies. We just need to choose which tenant. We and the tenant also need to sign a rental agreement of terms and conditions which is a pretty standard form. A bond is paid into the Rental Bond Board and the amount of rental up front is also set.

 

Sounds fair. Deposit, first and last is what we paid before, but that was over 20 years ago. Not much else covered other than how many people and if you had pets.

 

problem is, there are laws on the books that prevent pedo's from living next to schools. So, in order to know if you are ALLOWED to rent a house in certain locations to someone, you need to know if there is anything that can prevent it.

people credit check, and a public records search reveals quite a bit. I may never have to ask you "are you a convicted felon" to find out.


How Obama plans to enforce this silly rule seems impossible unless he outlaws public records searches.

 

The law doesn't say you can never deny an ex-con. It's just saying you can't have a blanket policy of nobody with a record.

 

And I have no problem with a criminal record showing rapists, thieves, drug dealers, and actual murderers, or credit checks which show a background of fraud, or failure to pay rent/utilities, etc... The rest should be confidential. IOW if you are not a threat to the community, you shouldn't be held to an unrealistic standard.

 

why? it's on a public records search. Personally, I want to know if I'm putting a criminal in my property. I also use it for people dating my kids, job interviews, etc.

Criminal records, unless they are juvenilles, should not be private

 

A pot smoker isn't a threat, a thief is, a teen having sex with another teen isn't a threat, an actual rapist is, somebody who defended themselves and charged ridiculously for manslaughter isn't a threat, an actual murderer IS! Some crimes should be public information, especially if those people impose a threat, unfortunately many of our laws are antiquated, or just political BS, they have no bearing except to promote profits for corporate prisons, and generate revenue for criminal politicians.

 

that's your opinion.... what if I have a kid in the house (on the same property as the apartment I'm renting out) and I don't want pot heads on my property but still want to rent out my apartment...

statutory rape is always justified away by "we were both teens" but when you look into it... she was a teen, you were 24.... there's a difference. Either way, if I have a teenage daughter, why am I compelled to rent to a stat-rapist because YOU don't deem him a danger.

everyone attempts to justify their crimes like you are. I'm sorry your poor choices led you to your life station... doesn't mean I am compelled to give you benefit of the doubt.


if you want to rent out your on property apartment to a stat-rapist around your daughter, feel free. I will not.

 

You probably already are if you have apartments and haven't got a clue since most pot smokers are not stereotypical identifiable. One of these days the refer madness lies are going to stop.

Didn't say anything about a 24 year old and you either don't know the law or how it works.

Good grief you are a peach aren't you? I'm not justifying anything, I'm saying that many laws are ridiculous and idiotic, and there are obviously serious crimes that should be public knowledge, while others are over reaching, plain harassment, and antiquated nonsense.

Exactly, no pedophiles, asking for trouble, they deserve harsher sentences, and that has nothing to do with 2 teens, having sex in the back of a car mutually consenting.

 

your definitions of what risk is appropriate for me to take with my property is YOUR definition. you have arbitrary lines, too where you deem the risk is too much to take. Sorry my arbitrary line isn't what your arbitrary line is.


in the mean time... .if I don't want a pot head, a 18/17 stat rape conviction, a full blown pedo, or a guy with 1 DUI, that's my decision.

 

Everybody has every right to be a judgmental supremacist prick if they want to be, but there are serious criminals offenses like actual statutory rape (18 being the line), and pedos which have lost the right to have their backgrounds kept confidential. There are also some idiotic unconstitutional laws that persecute individuals unnecessarily because of supremacist pricks misusing their authority in government. You should also work on your reading comprehension skills so we don't have to keep repeating ourselves.

 

I'm not concerned if you don't agree with laws being the reason I should have to rent to them if they apply. you don't agree with pot laws, I don't agree with income taxes either. However, I'm not stupid enough to not file because it's a stupid law I dont agree with. If I don't... I face the consequences of that law.


If later down the road, after jail, if my refusal to pay my income taxes previously, costs me a job, or some other unforseen consequence (like rent), that's my self made problem



When a person has consequences due to their own decisions... I have no sympathy for you if life later, doesn't go your way because of it.