Gun-Friendly Apartment Complexes in Northern Virginia

VAgun22222 · Jun 25, 2011

SouthernBoy said:
However, if they exclude someone who is armed and then a violent situation ensues where the now-unarmed patron is injured, that patron should be able to pursue legal remedies from the store owner who willingly placed that patron in harm's way. Yes, the patron had the choice of not going into that business, but the owner also had the choice (responsibility?) of assuring the patron's safety. I know that there are a lot of items in this paragraph which could be open for intense discussion, but I'm just throwing them out (maybe playing devil's advocate, eh?).

That's very interesting. I suppose a law could also be written to provide renters who are prevented from possessing or carrying firearms on premises to sue for damages if they are harmed in an aggravated robbery or unable to resist an armed robbery. Obviously a harm has been done to them by the rental property for preventing them from protecting themselves, but properties have comprehensive ways of protecting themselves from liability, so something like a law could change that.

Coupled with a law that targets the insurance companies, property rights are intact, but there's no reason to completely ban guns outside of negligent discharge since it won't mean a lower insurance premium. And if they're taking government funds, that's really never a great thing to do anyway, because the government can always make up whatever conditions they want.

SouthernBoy · Jun 25, 2011

VAgun22222 said:
That's very interesting. I suppose a law could also be written to provide renters who are prevented from possessing or carrying firearms on premises to sue for damages if they are harmed in an aggravated robbery or unable to resist an armed robbery. Obviously a harm has been done to them by the rental property for preventing them from protecting themselves, but properties have comprehensive ways of protecting themselves from liability, so something like a law could change that.

Coupled with a law that targets the insurance companies, property rights are intact, but there's no reason to completely ban guns outside of negligent discharge since it won't mean a lower insurance premium. And if they're taking government funds, that's really never a great thing to do anyway, because the government can always make up whatever conditions they want.

I would like to reiterate that I am unsure of the best way to approach this situation as like I mentioned, I am a very strong proponent of private property rights AND our Second Amendment protected rights. I honestly do not know the best way to handle something like this.

Uber_Olafsun · Jun 25, 2011

Does this apply to it?

§ 55-248.9. Prohibited provisions in rental agreements.

A. A rental agreement shall not contain provisions that the tenant:

1. Agrees to waive or forego rights or remedies under this chapter;

2. Agrees to waive or forego rights or remedies pertaining to the 120-day conversion or rehabilitation notice required in the Condominium Act (§ 55-79.39 et seq.), the Virginia Real Estate Cooperative Act (§ 55-424 et seq.) or Chapter 13 (§ 55-217 et seq.) of this title;

3. Authorizes any person to confess judgment on a claim arising out of the rental agreement;

4. Agrees to pay the landlord's attorney's fees except as provided in this chapter;

5. Agrees to the exculpation or limitation of any liability of the landlord to the tenant arising under law or to indemnify the landlord for that liability or the costs connected therewith;

6. Agrees as a condition of tenancy in public housing to a prohibition or restriction of any lawful possession of a firearm within individual dwelling units unless required by federal law or regulation; or

7. Agrees to both the payment of a security deposit and the provision of a bond or commercial insurance policy purchased by the tenant to secure the performance of the terms and conditions of a rental agreement, if the total of the security deposit and the bond or insurance premium exceeds the amount of two months' periodic rent.

B. A provision prohibited by subsection A included in a rental agreement is unenforceable. If a landlord brings an action to enforce any of the prohibited provisions, the tenant may recover actual damages sustained by him and reasonable attorney's fees.

skidmark · Jun 26, 2011

SouthernBoy said:
I would like to reiterate that I am unsure of the best way to approach this situation as like I mentioned, I am a very strong proponent of private property rights AND our Second Amendment protected rights. I honestly do not know the best way to handle something like this.

I would like to again bring to your (the plural you) attention the fact that the Bill of Rights lists things that The Government may not do to you. Nowhere in the BOR does it say that, for example, private property owners, may not do A, B, or C. SCOTUS has found only a very few places where they say private property owners must not do X, Y, or Z. The most well known probably being the decision that private property owners may not discriminate on the base of race, sex, religion, national origin and iirc one other criteria that is not age.

Private property owners that do not allow firearms on their property are exercising dominion over their property. When I refuse to do business with them I am excercising both dominion over my life and using the most powerful tool at my disposal to indicate my feelings about their decision. Of course it helps if I tell them I am not doing business with them and why not. It helps even more if they care.

What I'm trying to say is that it is not a 2A vs private property issue. It's one of mutual trust and respect. When you run into a private property owner with "no guns" policies it obviously is a situation where he does not trust or respect you.

stay safe.

SouthernBoy · Jun 26, 2011

skidmark said:
I would like to again bring to your (the plural you) attention the fact that the Bill of Rights lists things that The Government may not do to you. Nowhere in the BOR does it say that, for example, private property owners, may not do A, B, or C. SCOTUS has found only a very few places where they say private property owners must not do X, Y, or Z. The most well known probably being the decision that private property owners may not discriminate on the base of race, sex, religion, national origin and iirc one other criteria that is not age.

Private property owners that do not allow firearms on their property are exercising dominion over their property. When I refuse to do business with them I am excercising both dominion over my life and using the most powerful tool at my disposal to indicate my feelings about their decision. Of course it helps if I tell them I am not doing business with them and why not. It helps even more if they care.

What I'm trying to say is that it is not a 2A vs private property issue. It's one of mutual trust and respect. When you run into a private property owner with "no guns" policies it obviously is a situation where he does not trust or respect you.

stay safe.

All true. The only thing here is with an apartment which is a type of home, one might wonder if a different set of laws might apply. That is what I am in the dark about. And here's an interesting tidbit. Suppose someone has lived in an apartment complex for, say, five years and has a collection of firearms. Then when it comes time to renew his lease, there has been a change in the form of an addendum which restricts firearms from the units and surrounding property. What is he to do then? I know the simple answer is that he now must find another home for them, but suppose he has not other place for their storage. Now he has to consider moving.

So is there a distinction between a shop or store owner's property and an apartment complex. In one, the patron is only present for a short period of time. In the other, he lives there. I remember in one of my law classes in college (business law), we talked about renters' rights and when a landlord could and could not enter someone's apartment. I do not recall those class discussions involving someone's personal property.

Also, what about a residential single family home which is rented out by a private homeowner? Suppose I owned five homes which I rented out. Could I insist that firearms not be stored in my rental houses?

I do not know the answers to any of these questions.

TFred · Jun 26, 2011

skidmark said:
I would like to again bring to your (the plural you) attention the fact that the Bill of Rights lists things that The Government may not do to you. Nowhere in the BOR does it say that, for example, private property owners, may not do A, B, or C. SCOTUS has found only a very few places where they say private property owners must not do X, Y, or Z. The most well known probably being the decision that private property owners may not discriminate on the base of race, sex, religion, national origin and iirc one other criteria that is not age.

Private property owners that do not allow firearms on their property are exercising dominion over their property. When I refuse to do business with them I am excercising both dominion over my life and using the most powerful tool at my disposal to indicate my feelings about their decision. Of course it helps if I tell them I am not doing business with them and why not. It helps even more if they care.

What I'm trying to say is that it is not a 2A vs private property issue. It's one of mutual trust and respect. When you run into a private property owner with "no guns" policies it obviously is a situation where he does not trust or respect you.

stay safe.

And this is the ultimate answer, in any mythical "gun-free" zone. The one who would deny you your basic right to self-defense is in essence also saying you are not worthy of the dignity of self-sufficiency. You are not a sovereign person in control of your own life. You are less than a full human. Criminals who will not obey these rules are by default, granted more respect than you are, and therefore they hold dominion over you.

It really is amazing that people don't get this.

TFred

VAgun22222 · Jun 26, 2011

I wonder if there are any receptive legislators in Fairfax county that would support reform. I looked around and the state senator is a Democrat (Janet Howell) and appears to be anti-gun from what I've read on her site. The House of Delegates member, Tom Rust is a Republican, but his website is devoid of anything related to firearms. I would think that since NRA HQ is right down the road in Fairfax, they would have put their money and support behind the most pro-gun people available for their home turf.

I'm really considering writing or meeting with Rust if I can't get a referral to a decent complex that allows guns. Even if I do, it probably couldn't hurt since this could happen to anyone who doesn't own their home (I would think that a bank could do this to a mortgage holder as well)

SouthernBoy · Jun 26, 2011

VAgun22222 said:
(I would think that a bank could do this to a mortgage holder as well)

I would seriously doubt they could do this. Even though they are the lender, you are the who owns the home... i.e., you are responsible for property taxes, maintenance, and other costs. Your HUD-1 statement lists you as the owner.

However, this does raise another question in regards to homes owned in developments with HOA's. Can an HOA restrict firearms possession in their development. I maintain that they cannot do this. Perhaps areas which they own and are responsible, such as a pool, but not in homes. Any information or opinions on this one?

JamesCanby · Jun 27, 2011

Uber_Olafsun said:
Does this apply to it?

§ 55-248.9. Prohibited provisions in rental agreements.

A. A rental agreement shall not contain provisions that the tenant:

1. Agrees to waive or forego rights or remedies under this chapter;

2. Agrees to waive or forego rights or remedies pertaining to the 120-day conversion or rehabilitation notice required in the Condominium Act (§ 55-79.39 et seq.), the Virginia Real Estate Cooperative Act (§ 55-424 et seq.) or Chapter 13 (§ 55-217 et seq.) of this title;

3. Authorizes any person to confess judgment on a claim arising out of the rental agreement;

4. Agrees to pay the landlord's attorney's fees except as provided in this chapter;

5. Agrees to the exculpation or limitation of any liability of the landlord to the tenant arising under law or to indemnify the landlord for that liability or the costs connected therewith;

6. Agrees as a condition of tenancy in public housing to a prohibition or restriction of any lawful possession of a firearm within individual dwelling units unless required by federal law or regulation; or

7. Agrees to both the payment of a security deposit and the provision of a bond or commercial insurance policy purchased by the tenant to secure the performance of the terms and conditions of a rental agreement, if the total of the security deposit and the bond or insurance premium exceeds the amount of two months' periodic rent.

B. A provision prohibited by subsection A included in a rental agreement is unenforceable. If a landlord brings an action to enforce any of the prohibited provisions, the tenant may recover actual damages sustained by him and reasonable attorney's fees.

This has already been listed in the thread. The only pertinent section is 6, but that section specifically stipulates "public housing." Based on my experience I believe that 6 applies only to government owned housing units.

skidmark · Jun 27, 2011

The only answer I know for sure is that you will have a very difficult time finding an attorney willing to take a tort complaint against a private property owner whose "no guns" policy may be involved in your suffering a physical or psychological injury when a third-party violent criminal actor enters the property for the purpose of committing a crime against the property owner and/or their patrons/lessees.

In theory it should not be difficult to show a direct nexus but in practice I'm afraid the sheer reluctance of a member of the bar to make the attempt is perhaps the biggest hurdle to overcome. In other words, there apparently is at least one thing an attorney will not do for money. <rim shot!>

stay safe.

VAgun22222 · Jun 27, 2011

skidmark said:
The only answer I know for sure is that you will have a very difficult time finding an attorney willing to take a tort complaint against a private property owner whose "no guns" policy may be involved in your suffering a physical or psychological injury when a third-party violent criminal actor enters the property for the purpose of committing a crime against the property owner and/or their patrons/lessees.

In theory it should not be difficult to show a direct nexus but in practice I'm afraid the sheer reluctance of a member of the bar to make the attempt is perhaps the biggest hurdle to overcome. In other words, there apparently is at least one thing an attorney will not do for money. <rim shot!>

stay safe.

Exactly. That's why I wondered if tort reform on a legislative level would solve the problem. They can shield a person from the liability of a shooting through a sort of "castle doctrine", so something like that. Except maybe they would have to find a clear way of showing that the person would have been armed had they not been prevented from doing so, hence the harm. I'm just speculating though.

That and Insurance reform. They can already make a man buy maternity coverage he can't use and determine how insurance companies do business within the state, so this could be something new for the pro-gun movement. Or at least this is what i would imagine.

VAgun22222 · Jul 3, 2011

So nobody knows of an apartment complex in or near Fairfax County that allows guns?

conhntr · Jul 3, 2011

I was in woodway apts off trinity cir (rt66/rt29) for several years and did no have any firearms restrictions. There was a restriction on "hazardous materials" which i guess could cover reloadin supplies, blackpowder etc. dot does not regulate small arms ammo as hazardous so i assumed short of my reloading setup i was fine.

Unfortunatel rent there just kept going up and up so i left. The way they handled the last few "blizzards" finaly convinced me to leave. 2 pickups with plows for a large complex full of 1200$ Renters? It was over a week until it finally was passable!

VAgun22222 · Jul 4, 2011

conhntr said:
I was in woodway apts off trinity cir (rt66/rt29) for several years and did no have any firearms restrictions. There was a restriction on "hazardous materials" which i guess could cover reloadin supplies, blackpowder etc. dot does not regulate small arms ammo as hazardous so i assumed short of my reloading setup i was fine.

Unfortunatel rent there just kept going up and up so i left. The way they handled the last few "blizzards" finaly convinced me to leave. 2 pickups with plows for a large complex full of 1200$ Renters? It was over a week until it finally was passable!

Thanks a million! I think I know the first place I'm going to be looking at now. How many years ago was it? Was it a nice area? Besides the plowing, was the management good with work orders/requests and general accounting of fees, payments, etc?

conhntr · Jul 4, 2011

Ya besides the plowing/high rent it was ok. I moved out about a year ago but double check rules because they where bought out by a new managment comPany.

The maintnance guys are actually really good and as long as they have the parts things are fixed eithin 24hours. What soured me on them was i was a 990a month and each renewal it just kept climbing and it got to be too much for me. Nice area and walking distance to a million resturanst. I open carried all over there and never a problem

SouthernBoy · Jul 4, 2011

We lived in an apartment complex in Centreville called Bent Tree Apartments for a year in 1998-99 because we were between houses; sold our house in Arlington to have a new home built in western Prince William County. I kept all of my guns in that apartment for the entire year in a safe and do not recall anything in the lease restricting me from doing this. Prince William County borders Fairfax County and may be a place where you could be more prone to finding an apartment where your rights are not so restricted.

Oh, we also looked at a complex on Fair Lakes called, I think, Autumn Woods. You might also want to check that one out... it is close to Centreville but I think carries a Chantilly address. It's just off of Stringfellow Road north of route 66.

VAgun22222 · Jul 5, 2011

More great places. My search just expanded. thanks!

FFchris · Jul 5, 2011

Man.... Leave the area for a few days and now I've had to play catch up. I didn't think my prior comment would spark a new thread, but now that it has, it's been a good read!

Gun-Friendly Apartment Complexes in Northern Virginia

VAgun22222

Regular Member

SouthernBoy

Regular Member

Uber_Olafsun

Regular Member

skidmark

Campaign Veteran

SouthernBoy

Regular Member

TFred

Regular Member

VAgun22222

Regular Member

SouthernBoy

Regular Member

JamesCanby

Activist Member

skidmark

Campaign Veteran

VAgun22222

Regular Member

VAgun22222

Regular Member

conhntr

Regular Member

VAgun22222

Regular Member

conhntr

Regular Member

SouthernBoy

Regular Member

VAgun22222

Regular Member

FFchris

Regular Member