Last week I wrote about several women in Florida who’ve been told to vacate their apartment after what appears to be a defensive gun use because discharging a weapon, even in self-defense, is a violation of their lease agreement.
That kind of insanity could come to a screeching halt if a bill by Rep. Randy Feenstra (R-Iowa) wins approval in both the House and Senate. Feenstra has introduced the Preserving Rights of Tenants by Ensuring Compliance to the Second Amendment Act before, but there’s hope that this time around the legislation will win the backing of House and Senate leadership.
In this legislation, any resident of a property that receives federal funding is protected from unconstitutional restrictions of having a firearm within their home or when passing through a common area on their way to or from their home. Federal taxpayer money should never be used to infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans to defend themselves in their own home, and this bill ensures that landlords or property managers can’t end-run that protection.
“The right of law-abiding Americans to keep firearms in their homes for self-defense has been a fundamental freedom since our nation’s founding and has been reaffirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court,” said John Commerford, Executive Director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA). “No one should be forced to give up this right, especially when a landlord or property manager is receiving federal tax dollars. The NRA applauds Representative Feenstra for introducing this important legislation that protects the right to keep and bear arms.”
Speaking on his legislation Representative Feenstra said, “The right of Iowans to keep and bear arms is enshrined in our Constitution and shall not be infringed. These constitutional protections must be strongly defended and certainly do not cease to exist for gun owners living in rental properties. My PROTECT the Second Amendment Act ensures that landlords or rental property managers who receive federal financial assistance at taxpayer expense cannot unlawfully restrict Americans from exercising their constitutional rights. As a strong advocate of the Second amendment, I will always defend the right of Iowans to keep and bear arms and support law-abiding gun owners.”
I’d like to see Feenstra’s bill go even further in its protections, but this is a great step. Courts across the country have already declared that gun bans in public housing violate our right to keep and bear arms, but the legal question becomes murkier when dealing with housing that might only be subsidized to some degree by the federal government.
Property owners have the right to impose any number of restrictions on their tenants, but the government also has the authority to attach strings to any federal funds landlords may receive. As much as I’d like to see Feenstra’s legislation block all landlords from depriving tenants of their Second Amendment rights, something like that would be on much shakier legal ground than the current language of the Preserving Rights of Tenants by Ensuring Compliance to the Second Amendment Act.
Feenstra’s bill would benefit millions of Americans who live in subsidized housing, and ensure that they’re not forced to choose between protecting their families or putting a roof over their head. This should be one of those bills that can draw bipartisan support, but I suspect that if and when Feenstra’s legislation comes to the House floor for a vote dozens of Democrats will be opposed. I’d love to be proven wrong, and I hope we get the chance to find out exactly where every congresscritter stands in the near future.
Read the full article here
