I'm surprised this is even an issue....it's already been established that that Amendments 1 through 10 only apply to GOVERNMENT action, not private action. Thus, when a PRIVATE PROPERTY LANDLORD, says no guns on the property, the tenant doesn;'t have a 2nd Amendment argument because the private property landlord is not the GOVERNMENT.Attorney General Bob Cooper says landlords can ban their tenants from bringing firearms into their property even if they have handgun carry permits.
Now if the landlord is the GOVERNMENT, like in a public housing situation, that would be a different story.
In short, your Constitutional rights end where my private property begins.
109 U. S. 11
http://supreme.justia.com/us/109/3/case.html#11
"It is State action of a particular character that is prohibited. Individual invasion of individual rights is not the subject matter of the amendment."
Cornell Legal Information Institute
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/state ... equirement
"The state action requirement stems from the fact that the constitutional amendments which protect individual rights (especially the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment) are mostly phrased as prohibitions against government action. For example, the First Amendment states that “[c]ongress shall make no law” infringing upon the freedoms of speech and religion. Because of this requirement, it is impossible for private parties (citizens or corporations) to violate these amendments, and all lawsuits alleging constitutional violations of this type must show how the government (state or federal) was responsible for the violation of their rights. This is referred to as the state action requirement.
Oh, and please don't try to make an analogy about private landlords banning certain types of people (Blacks, women, etc) from renting...this ain't 1965...this issue is already covered in the Fair Housing Act.
http://www.justice.gov/crt/housing/title8.php
T-man is unusually quiet after his schoolin'. Must have drank Beano for Thanksgiving.
