Harvard Grad Student Facing Eviction over Legally Owned and Stored Firearms

It is... IF he put it in the lease.

Many forms for apartments or other multi tenant lease forms often have this built in. So it might be there and the landlord just doesn't realize it at this point because well... most landlords are as dumb as their tenants are.

 

concession accepted.

 

So does the landloard have armed security provided that guarantees the tenants protection 24/7? Your rights end where my rights start. If I have a legally owned object in my home, why should you have the right to take it away? Does the landloard also have the right to tell this person she can't speak how she so chooses while inside her own home? If not, how do you justify removing one right while not removing the other? This is a very slippery slope. While you might disagree with people having guns, it is their RIGHT and if you take away one right, what's to keep others from taking away others on the same principle?
The left is starting to see this come back to bite them in sanctuary cities..... Look at the Sheriff that is refusing to enforce the newly passed gun laws in Washington state and is calling his town a sanctuary gun city..... Sort of funny to me actually... What's good for the goose... Right?

 

the anti-gun left needs to demonize inanimate objects and conflate we law abiding gun owners with street thugs so they can convince voters to pass legislation that further erodes our 2nd amendment.

 

i love that sheriff. kate brown is about to take my neighboring state of oregon off a cliff. oregon is currently a strong 2nd amendment state but she wants to enact gun legislation that will make california jealous. at least one sheriff, shane nelson of deschutes county (the most populous east of the cascades) has stated the same thing, that he will make his country a 2nd amendment sanctuary. what is it with governors named brown anyway?

one of our complaints about oregon is that though we honor their chl, they do not honor ours. hence, we don’t go there vwry often, even though it’s a lovely state only 45 minutes away.

but perhaps we will visit deschutes county.

this is why we need constitutional carry.

also of ironic tangential interest, the voters of oregon defeated a ballot measure that would have rescinded oregon’s sanctuary state status which ought to give you a sense of where the state is headed. 20 years ago it would have likely passed. my guess is the influx of californians to the portland metro has altered a once politically reasonable state forever.

they want to grant rights to illegal foreign invaders while at the same time taking rights away from natural born citizens which is their birthright.

 

ha ha ha ha! you can’t even make your “argument” without moving the goalposts out of the stadium!

 

I agree on the condition that the landlord gets an absolute right to refuse anyone for any reason without question, subject to the terms of any contracts signed of course.

 

Cambridge and Boston run on blue collar labor. The kind of people that put Trump in the White House.
OTOH, she is a Harvard grad student. The working class may not have much sympathy for the Harvard elite regardless of headgear.

 

massachusetts has among the nation’s most anti 2nd amendment gun laws in existence. and the cities of boston and cambridge are downright draconian, going far beyond the already tyrannical state laws. ffs you need a permit for pepper spray...

 

The law in the US now reflects the will of the corrupt bipartisan ruling political class. Ordinary Americans have nothing to do with its creation.
Most Americans would never go outside their homes in Boston without a concealed firearm if that was a legal option.

 

boston hasn't had a republican mayor since 1930.

 

People vote for Democrats for many reasons. Nevertheless, most ordinary Americans would prefer to have the option of carrying a gun.

Republican politicians are often very repulsive to voters and are not reliable defenders of the 2nd amendment.
Trump has proved that more contrast with the Democrat pols can help Republicans win elections. More of them should try that approach.

“In recent years, despite thousands of bills introduced into Congress every year, only a small percentage (approximately 5%) become law. Of course, what matters for laws is quality not quantity. But why would legislators bother to introduce so many hopeless bills? What if they are not even designed to pass? What if they are instead designed to make money? The cold harsh reality in Washington is this: the very conditions that are so maddening for most Americans —gridlock, problems being ignored, hyper partisanship — are the very conditions that are most lucrative for the Permanent Political Class. Washington may not be working for citizens, but it's working quite well for members of the Permanent Political Class who profit handsomely.” EXTORTION, "How Politicians Extract Your money, BuyVotes, And Line Their Own Pockets, Peter Schweizer, HMO, NY, NY, 2013, p. 7, 8.

 

i wish i shared your optimism, but if you would prefer the option of carrying a gun, you would not vote for democrats.

they are more reliable than democrats when it comes to defending the 2nd amendment.

 

One person wanted guns in the house, the rest did not want guns in the house. What happened to democracy?

 

Democrats tend to offer voters immediate tangible benefits for their votes. Bait and switch works.

Before Reagan and now Trump the RP strategy was to offer itself as the lesser evil. Iceberg lettuce vs, romaine - iceberg will not make you as sick as often.
Frankly it is amazing that the RP has done as well as it has since WW II.

 

i'm sorry, but you are contradicting yourself. even the most low information voter knows that gun control is a central facet of the democratic party platform, and though some republicans (like RINO Romney) support gun control measures, generally speaking the GOP is the party of the constitution.

 

What happened to right to privacy? They went through her stuff uninvited. They could have simply asked her and then went from their. Any legitimacy they might have had went out the window when they went through her personal belongings.

 

she may have a trespassing case against the sniveling little ****s who went through her personal belongings, yes.

 

You aren't making a point that I didn't make. You didn't read all of my posts.

 

Since they're roommates they would not be in violation of any trespassing laws. She may have a case against them for invasion of privacy but even then that's iffy.

 

Cash money trumps most other issues.
Too many Republican pols like Romney have supported gun control schemes for the RP to offer itself as a credible opponent of gun control.
Toomey-Manchin comes to mind. A lot of RP pols supported it. Voters notice that sort of thing.
The RP Really Is The Lesser Weevil - but that is not a very good campaign slogan.

Screw Big Government We Will Give You The Cash would work a lot better.

 

There is no law that can take away her right to keep and bear arms.

 

Ha,ha,ha that is what she did and that is what her supporters on this forum are advocating for.

 

Sorry but you are making an entirely specious series of arguments. First of course it isn't her house. And no I don't disagree with people owning guns. Don't approve though of morons who leave loaded unlocked guns unattended. And I don't eant to take anything of yours away. Try to stay on topic.

 

This is an idiot that left loaded inlocked guns unattended in an unsecured space. What part of responsible gun ownership do you not understand?