Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Man evicted for shooting thief
World Net Daily ^ | 23 October, 2008 | NA

Posted on 10/25/2008 5:13:54 AM PDT by marktwain

A man and his family have been served with an eviction notice after he legally protected his property by shooting at a would-be thief. The unnamed resident at Landera apartments in San Antonio, Texas, took action after neighbors complained about having their vehicles broken into or stolen, KENS-TV reported. Vandals attacked his apartment, shattering a window and breaking into his car.

"It's just tough to swallow something that you work so hard for to get taken away from you so easily," he said. The burglars returned Tuesday, smashed his car window and ran away. The man called police and filed a report. "I just told my neighbor, maybe we should stay up, keep an eye on things tonight," he said. The intruders came back three hours later. "The driver's side guy got out, ran toward my vehicle," he said. Rather than watching strangers steal and destroy his possessions, the man ran outside and fired his shotgun five or six times, according to the report. He managed to hit one of the suspects. He is not facing charges. "Texas law states you can protect your personal property, even if it's deadly force," he said. To his dismay, the apartment served his family an eviction notice.

"We had three days to leave," he said. The man said he is unable to find another home in three days, much less afford an unexpected move. His apartment lease included a clause stating residents are not allowed to own or discharge guns on the premises – but he claims the rule is unfair.

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: banglist; eviction; homedefense; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: Drew68
*** A typical apartment lease these days is ten pages of fine print. I'll bet more of them than we realize have a "no firearms" clause. ***

Thankfully we haven't had to sign a lease since 1976 when we were still newlyweds and everyone was 'Firearms Friendly'. I think that lease was two pages and mostly pertained to how you had to leave the apartment when you moved -- white walls, no holes from picture/fixture hangers, no carpet damage, no damage to fireplace, etc. (It was one of those (cough) 'Swinging Singles Complexes' so 'rules' were on the light side).

*** As much as I disagree with it, I think it may be a liability issue for the property managers to have tenants owning guns. After all, they're the ones who are going to get sued if an irresponsible tenant accidentally discharges a firearm into another unit. ***

"Liability". Yeah, thanks to lawyers they go after the deep pocket, not the irresponsible scum bag. But you still can't sign away your Constitutional Rights. Except if you live in a gubmint owned building, all thanks to Mayor Daley

One day he arbitrarily BANNED all otherwise legal Firearms (Rifles and Shotguns) from 'his' Public Housing buildings. This went to court, then up to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and he won. Poor people have no 2nd Amendment Rights when they opt to live in a gubmint owned building.

21 posted on 10/25/2008 8:15:55 AM PDT by Condor51 (The only difference between Bill Ayers and Timothy McVeigh is the body count!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LuxMaker
This is part of the reason why it is so important to own property and not rent.

Ideally, yes. Unfortunately, I'm in the military and have to relocate often. Owning a home isn't really an option until I get closer to retirement.

Fortunately, my last three apartments didn't mention firearms in the leases, only "illegal activity" (I checked).

22 posted on 10/25/2008 8:26:55 AM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: marktwain; sit-rep; Squantos; Eaker; Joe Brower; SLB

Did the tenant ever year of going to court? Landlords don’t evict, courts do, after minimal legal notice, a complaint, and a court hearing, and an additional statutory period to comply with or appeal the court’s edict.

There is no such thing as a “three-day eviction.”


23 posted on 10/25/2008 8:34:12 AM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Condor51

A lot of states have a 3 day to respond or quit notice. That means you simply respond to the eviction notice and then they serve notice that you must move. Depends on what state you are in to how much time you have. In CA it is about 3 months after the dust settles before person is actually shown the door by a sheriff. A good lawyer can probably beat this. How about all the neighbors this guy saved from vandalism and theft of their property get together and help him?


24 posted on 10/25/2008 8:55:36 AM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
It is their property but is it even legal to ban the discharge of a firearm in this manner?

It is legal, and I don't think it's uncommon, but such bans applies to things like target shooting. They do not apply to the discharge of firearms in bona fide self defense.

25 posted on 10/25/2008 11:14:45 AM PDT by supercat (Barry Soetoro == Bravo Sierra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
His apartment lease included a clause stating residents are not allowed to own or discharge guns on the premises...

Perhaps that's why the thieves and vandals target this particular area...

26 posted on 10/25/2008 11:21:23 AM PDT by Grizzled Bear ("Does not play well with others.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Popman
Nothing like advertising your renters are are prey for thugs

Many leases contain such clauses, but there is an implicit exemption for self-defense cases (to explicitly forbid self-defense would be illegal; many contract clauses are routinely interpreted as including such exceptions as may be required by law). A clause forbidding firearm ownership might be a trickier thing to judge, legally, since there's seldom any way to prove in advance that a self-defense situation is going to arise. In this case, however, a situation did arise and the police seem to have ruled it a legitimate use of a firearm in self-defense.

27 posted on 10/25/2008 11:22:10 AM PDT by supercat (Barry Soetoro == Bravo Sierra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Condor51; Popman

The most thankless job is being on the board. You have a real complaint and it never would have happened if you were on the board.

Get involved and nip this crap in the bud. It ain’t fun but it is important and you can make a difference.

Or you can just bitch when one of these slip past you.


28 posted on 10/25/2008 11:29:53 AM PDT by Eaker (Dutch expression "You can give a monkey a gold ring, but it stays an ugly thing." - EscapedDutch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido

Sounds like BS to me too.


29 posted on 10/25/2008 11:49:47 AM PDT by Eaker (Dutch expression "You can give a monkey a gold ring, but it stays an ugly thing." - EscapedDutch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson