Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 85

Thread: So my condo association took over 1 month ago....

  1. #1
    Regular Member jsanchez's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    503

    So my condo association took over 1 month ago....

    by the tennants, and tonite at our board meeting they are going to ban guns in our little park. They will probably say it reduces our liability or something like that. Does anyone have any arguments I can use in my defense.

  2. #2
    Regular Member 1911er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Port Orchard Wa. /Granite Oklahoma
    Posts
    836

    damb!!! can they do that

    Ask them what security co. they are going to hire to protect you and your guests and the other residents from the people who don't follow the laws.
    Last edited by 1911er; 06-28-2012 at 10:01 AM.
    I truly Love my Country, But the government scares the he!! out of me.

    DEMAND IT
    Congress SHALL NOT receive A salary greater than any service member and will be given EQUIVELANT insurance as any service member

    I came into this world kicking and screaming covered in someone else's blood. And if necessary to protect the Constitution of The United States of AMERICA. I will go out the same way

    All hail the Domain of Neptunus Rex

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    132

    Lame Condo Assoc.

    I'd like to say that they can't do that... but I believe they can. The fact that it is private property means they can set their own rules. At least they cannot stop you from carrying on your person within your own home! I would try and find a new condo if I were in your shoes.

    -B

  4. #4
    Regular Member decklin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Pacific, WA
    Posts
    764
    I know this doesn't help you but this is one reason why I will never own a condo or a house in a Home Owners Association.
    I was still in Iraq when my Wife bought our house. When she asked what I wanted I said I only had two conditions. No suburbs and no HMA.
    So naturally my Wife picked a house in the suburbs.
    At least I don't have an HMA telling me if I have the right to defend myself in the neighborhood. In fact, I've lived in this house for almost 2 years and my neighbors have never said a word about me carrying.
    At your next meeting you could try showing them the Uniform Crime Reports, State Constitution and relevant State Laws. Basically just do your best to prove that less armed citizens do not equal less crime.
    Good luck.
    "Loyalty above all else except honor. " -John Mahoney

    "A Government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." -Gerald R. Ford

  5. #5
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Tell them that they had better be willing to buy your condo so you can live somewhere that you're not being barred from carrying your self defense tools with you.

    Just an idea.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  6. #6
    Regular Member LkWd_Don's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Dolan Springs, AZ
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911er View Post
    Ask them what security co. they are going to hire to protect you and your guests and the other residents from the people who don't follow the laws.
    I agree with asking the HMA that, but I think I would go further.

    Tell them that their proposal violates Article 1 Section 24 of our Washington State Constitution and then tell them that should you or any member of your family become the victim of any criminal activity within the Park or on your way to or from that park, that you will hold the HMA legally responsible. Additionally, even though they are not a Municipality, they in effect are acting in a municipal capacity and might also be in violation of State Preemption under RCW 9.41.290

    Ask if they can afford the legal challenges that they are potentially exposing themselves to.

    Article 1 Section 24 of WA State Constitution: http://www.leg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyR...stitution.aspx
    SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.
    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.290

    State preemption.

    The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.
    Lets Unite and REMIND our Government that WE are the source of their authority and that WE demand our Rights be returned, Unabridged, Non-infringed, without denial or disparagement. The faults of a few, reflect badly on many, I therefore do not suggest anyone support WAC. My EDC is either a H&K USP .40 or a Taurus 689 .357 filled with Snake Loads

  7. #7
    Regular Member waterfowl woody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Silvana, Washington, USA
    Posts
    137
    to put up a rule to stop lawful people from being safe is a great way to ask criminals to come in.

    The more crime that shows up because its a "gun safe zone" will drop all of the owners value in their property.
    criminals love a easy helpless score and that rule will make lawful people helpless and easy for criminals to pray on.

    good luck and OC to the meeting

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667
    Quote Originally Posted by jsanchez View Post
    by the tennants, and tonite at our board meeting they are going to ban guns in our little park. They will probably say it reduces our liability or something like that. Does anyone have any arguments I can use in my defense.
    And what is the penalty if someone carries a gun in the park? And is it enforceable?
    Live Free or Die!

  9. #9
    Regular Member Ajetpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,410
    IANAL, but assuming that the park is owned by the HOA, they may be able to have someone who violates their park rules legally trespassed.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,762
    At your next meeting you could try showing them the Uniform Crime Reports, State Constitution and relevant State Laws.


    But there are no relevant state laws re: how a private homeowners association may regulate firearms in common areas.

    Tell them that their proposal violates Article 1 Section 24 of our Washington State Constitution


    But it does not. The federal and state constitutions only regulate the conduct of government, not private parties.

    Additionally, even though they are not a Municipality, they in effect are acting in a municipal capacity and might also be in violation of State Preemption under RCW 9.41.290


    How, exactly? There is no legal basis for your position. How exactly would you make this argument to a court?

  11. #11
    Regular Member decklin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Pacific, WA
    Posts
    764
    Quote Originally Posted by deanf View Post
    But there are no relevant state laws re: how a private homeowners association may regulate firearms in common areas.



    COLOR]
    I never said that there were any such laws. I was implying that the HMA and tenants may not be aware of State Law concerning firearms.
    If you were preparing to argue this issue you're telling me that you would not provide an overview of State Law?
    "Loyalty above all else except honor. " -John Mahoney

    "A Government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." -Gerald R. Ford

  12. #12
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by jsanchez View Post
    by the tennants, and tonite at our board meeting they are going to ban guns in our little park. They will probably say it reduces our liability or something like that. Does anyone have any arguments I can use in my defense.
    I think the idea that if they prohibit you from supplying your own security, then they must provide community security, and how do they think they are going to pay for a security company to provide that security?

    I would think that the arguments will be on the legal liability side, and I would point out that they will be legally liable for your security if the motion passes. Liability is the argument that will prevail, whichever way the vote goes.

    I agree...this is one reason I have/would never buy into a place that has a homeowners association.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,762
    If you were preparing to argue this issue you're telling me that you would not provide an overview of State Law?


    No. There's no reason to, since the HOA is sovereign in the common areas. State firearms law, v
    is--vis the HOA's authority to regulate the common areas, does not apply. Why argue something that is irrelevant?

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546
    Quote Originally Posted by deanf View Post
    No. There's no reason to, since the HOA is sovereign in the common areas. State firearms law, v[/COLOR]is--vis the HOA's authority to regulate the common areas, does not apply. Why argue something that is irrelevant?
    I think the question would come down "is an HOA or condo association a government that is under the purview of preemption" since they are a quasi-government entity under state law, and state law makes it explicit that all government entities are preempted, regardless of their nature.
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,762
    since they are a quasi-government entity under state law


    Which law would that be? If HOAs are incorporated as a municipality, I will stand-down.

  16. #16
    Regular Member jt59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Central South Sound
    Posts
    1,025
    It seems that at a minimum, you should be able to muddy the waters....and call for a legal review of the liability issue raised. If the COA is sued, (whether from an actual incident or simply a legal challenge to doing it by one of the COA members or group of them) and subsequently loses, who pays the bill?

    At a minimum, it could be argued to apply to non-residents of the COA and not to the owners and something of this magnitude should require something more than a vote of who shows up vs the impacted communicty (all owners)....see below the requirements for voting, quarum's and proxy's. Was notice of the meeting properly delivered?

    You can also debate this simply based on need..... what is the frequency or issue that demands a new "rule" even be put in place?

    You should also validate the authority of board to make these kind of decisions in the by-laws of the association and what is your recourse to challenge it.

    There are differences in HOA vs condominium associations in law:

    Authority of board - properly elected - http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=64.34.308

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=64.34.304

    bylaws: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=64.34.324

    Rules for calling meetings: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=64.34.332

    Voting/quorums: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=64.34.336

    Voting and proxy: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=64.34.340

    A lot of times, these types of boards act, but are so far behind in their own legal authority under some of these RCW, you may be able to make a case....and effect a delay while you marshall your own support to the issue.

    p.s. - what is the crime stat's for the units... car prowls, breakin's, domestic disputes, assault ...same for the city that you are surrounded by:

    http://www.seattle.gov/police/crime/

    or neighborhood crime maps that are more specific to where you live; http://www.seattle.gov/police/crime/onlinecrimemaps.htm
    Last edited by jt59; 06-28-2012 at 02:31 PM.
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the grey twilight that knows not victory nor defeat....Teddy Roosevelt

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667
    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    And what is the penalty if someone carries a gun in the park? And is it enforceable?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajetpilot View Post
    IANAL, but assuming that the park is owned by the HOA, they may be able to have someone who violates their park rules legally trespassed.
    Can you be trespassed from your own property?
    Live Free or Die!

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Request a copy of the HOA bylaws, get on line and look up the state laws regarding HOAs, look to see if this sort of rule needs put to a vote by the owners. Look to see if they have to give notice etc etc.

    In my past experience most HOAs do not follow their own rules much less state law. If you spend the time you will most likely find that they have broken a rule or two. Make them do it right hold their feet to the fire, petty tyrants hate it when you make them follow the rules. Go to each and every HOA meeting and speak up otherwise they will rule your life they already own you. If your renting read your lease to see what the rules are. If your renting then leave as soon as you can, if you own sell as soon as you can.

    Don't live where someone else gets to tell you what to do unless you are willing to do what they say. Personally I would live in a cardboard box before I will ever live anywhere that has a HOA again.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    Can you be trespassed from your own property?
    One place I lived tried.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769
    IMHO, the "rules"that were in place when you moved inwould apply to curreent residents. The new "rules" would apply to those moving in after the new "rules" take effect.
    Check the Landlord tennant act. There might be an answer there for you.

  21. #21
    Regular Member LkWd_Don's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Dolan Springs, AZ
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by deanf View Post

    SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.
    But it does not. The federal and state constitutions only regulate the conduct of government, not private parties.
    So then by what you are saying, even though the 2A exists as a protection from the Federal Government that any Government formed below it can simply ignore the 2A and abuse citizens as they wish? That the same would then apply to the Washington State Constitution not protecting all of Washington State?
    If that is the case, then recent SCOTUS cases based upon State infringments of the 2A should all have been decided in favor of the states and not the individual citizens.


    Quote Originally Posted by deanf
    Additionally, even though they are not a Municipality, they in effect are acting in a municipal capacity and might also be in violation of State Preemption under RCW 9.41.290
    How, exactly? There is no legal basis for your position. How exactly would you make this argument to a court?
    A Home Owners Association is required to be registered with the Washington "Secretary of States" office in the same manner that all Cities, towns and other Municipalities are required to be. Though the before mentioned all have powers of Policing their own statutes or ordinances, a Home Owners Association still can make rules (legislate) much like a municipality can but have to rely on the Policing powers of others to enforce their rules and is why I mention that RCW 9.41.290 "might" be used/invoked to steer them away from establishing a rule that otherwise violates State Preemption.
    Lets Unite and REMIND our Government that WE are the source of their authority and that WE demand our Rights be returned, Unabridged, Non-infringed, without denial or disparagement. The faults of a few, reflect badly on many, I therefore do not suggest anyone support WAC. My EDC is either a H&K USP .40 or a Taurus 689 .357 filled with Snake Loads

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,762
    So then by what you are saying, even though the 2A exists as a protection from the Federal Government that any Government formed below it can simply ignore the 2A and abuse citizens as they wish?

    The answer to your question turns on incorporation. I don't think the 2nd Amendment has been incorporated against the states yet, so the answer is yes.

    If that is the case, then recent SCOTUS cases based upon State infringments of the 2A should all have been decided in favor of the states and not the individual citizens.

    Which cases would those be?

    A Home Owners Association is required to be registered with the Washington "Secretary of States" office in the same manner that all Cities, towns and other Municipalities are required to be.

    So is every other corporation.

    A better test might be: is the HOA audited by the Washington State Auditor, who is required to audit all municipal corporations? The answer is no. That's because the State Auditor only protects public funds. HOA funds are private - they are not allowed to incorporate as a municipality.
    Last edited by deanf; 06-28-2012 at 05:23 PM.

  23. #23
    Regular Member LkWd_Don's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Dolan Springs, AZ
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by deanf View Post
    SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.
    But it does not. The federal and state constitutions only regulate the conduct of government, not private parties.
    Maybe you would care to expound on this and fully enlighten us.
    Lets Unite and REMIND our Government that WE are the source of their authority and that WE demand our Rights be returned, Unabridged, Non-infringed, without denial or disparagement. The faults of a few, reflect badly on many, I therefore do not suggest anyone support WAC. My EDC is either a H&K USP .40 or a Taurus 689 .357 filled with Snake Loads

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,762
    Maybe you would care to expound on this and fully enlighten us.


    I would direct you to the Obama-care case released just this morning. In it, Chief Justice Roberts expounds at length on the concept of federalism, and artfully so. No need for me to rehash his fresh explanation.

    Tell me, is it your contention that the Bill of Rights regulates private parties?

  25. #25
    Regular Member jsanchez's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    503

    So here is what the rule says...

    Illegal drugs, firearms, and fireworks are prohibited.

    The penalties are fines will be assessed, 1st offense - $50, 2nd offense - $100, 3rd offense - $200, 4th offense and subsequent offenses - $700.

    Also call the coppers and prosecution and or other legal remedies.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •