Thursday, May 22, 2008

Guns, Guns, Guns

The NRA is looking to change Ohio's gun laws. I have only one issue with the proposed law: the provision that allows tenants to keep firearms against the wishes of the landlord. The second amendment does not supercede the right to property. So, if a landlord says no guns, then no guns. Property rights must always come first.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Wow, that is a tough one for me.When our "new house" was being built, our old one was sold and we had to move to an apartment for three months. We had to take our guns and gun safe with us. I guess under this new law, if our landlord would not accept guns, then we would have to find some one to "keep" them for us.Maybe this would be a new opportunity for a "gun safe rental business". I hope not a new crime opportunity. I can understand, if I owned rental property, that I might not want renters guns on my premisies.

Anonymous said...

WHAT? "Property rights should come first?!?" What are you talking about. Personal rights ALWAYS come first.
I own rental property and I am appalled by your comments. Sorry, you can't rent from me, you own a gun. Sorry, you have an orange couch. Sorry, you're fat. Sorry, you're black.
Look, if they pay their rent on time, don't violate any laws, and don't destroy or deface the property than you give me a good reason why I shouldn't let them bring a gun in their home?

Jim Fedako said...

11:02 PM:

I'm assuming that all you understand is the product of government schools. Sad!

Personal rights come first?!? So, you own a gun and now believe that you have a right to take it onto my property? Are you really such a fool?

The belief in personal rights -- resulting from civil law -- is what is destroying this country.

You have a right to what is your, and I have a right to what is mine. You seem to believe that you -- through the means of government and its laws -- have a right to use my property as you choose.

You have no understanding at all about the theory of negative rights -- property being the first. Instead, you folks believe the you have first claim to my property.

Your ideals are the basis of Marxism, the antithesis of the ideals that found this nation.

A sad state of affairs.

Anonymous said...

Nice, you type and type and still don't answer the question.

Give me a good reason why I shouldn't let someone take a gun into a rental property? It's simple, answer the question without dancing around it.

Jim Fedako said...

8:54,

I don't even understand your point. What do you mean when you write, "Give me a good reason why I shouldn't let someone take a gun into a rental property?"

Where is your authority coming from?

If you are a landlord and want to allow your renters to possess firearms, that is your right.

If you are not a landlord, you have to right over other's property, just as I have no right over your's.

What is so hard about that concept?

Anonymous said...

Do you even read what you type....or try to type?

Jim Fedako said...

Ouch ... your pen is as sharp as a razor!

Jeff said...

As a libertarian, would you extend the same logic to homosexuals? I think private property trumps.

Jim Fedako said...

Yes. Just as someone could exclude me for whatever reason.

Funny, no one ever considers the other side of the exchange. Are renters allowed to discriminate? What about consumers in general?

Folks regularly boycot one company or another based on a position a company has taken. The intent is to change the position but the punishment is economic. Is that OK?

What about patients who only want to see doctors of the same gender. Is that wrong?

Why is the consumer given special rights? Why the disdane for the property owner? Marxism and envy of course.

The end solution is government-run everything. That eliminates all possibilities of government-banned discrimination.

Though, of course, government discriminates on the basis of political views.

So, there you have it: It's either property or government, but discrimination always remains.

Anonymous said...

I understand and agree with Jim 100%. A property owner has an unmitigated right to discriminate ON ANY BASIS WHATSOEVER.

Meaning if you are a white libertarian heterosexual gun owner then your black lesbian socialist pacifist landlord or shopkeeper can deny you service.

Meaning a "white-only" sign is the right of a private property owner to display and enforce.

So-called public property is completely different. We are tenants-in-common when we are out in public.