Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Apartment tenants told they must get rid of their guns or move. [View all]mercuryblues
(14,530 posts)116. the decision is
based on 1st, 3rd, 4th and 9th. 10 years after Griswold vs Ct, the supremes ruled that the right to privacy included all females. There are also laws to protect your medical records. Theoretically an employer should not even know what medications women are taking. So why can employer deny a legal prescription to an employee based on his beliefs. yet a property owner has to allow tenants to have guns on his property, contrary to his beliefs.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Griswold+v.+Connecticut
Addressing the propriety of its review of such legislation, the Court reasoned that although it is loath to determine the need for state laws affecting social and economic conditions, these statutes directly affected sexual relations between a married couple and the role of a physician in the medical aspects of such a relationship. Such a relationship is protected from intrusion by the government under the theory of a right to privacy. This right, while not specifically guaranteed by the Constitution, exists because it may be reasonably construed from certain amendments contained in the Bill of Rights.
snip
The Court created the right of privacy from the penumbras of these specific rights, which it deemed created zones of privacy. The statutory regulation of a marital relationship by the state was an invasion of the constitutional right of a married couple to privacy in such a relationship, a relationship that historically American law has held sacred. The means by which the state chose to regulate contraceptivesby outlawing their use, rather than their sale and manufacturewas clearly unrelated to its goal and would detrimentally affect the marital relationship. The question of enforcement of such statutes also was roundly criticized since it would mandate government inquiry into "marital bedrooms."
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
151 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
re: "So why can employer deny a legal prescription to an employee based on his beliefs."
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Aug 2013
#121
Chances are greater far greater that you will die by the hands of a criminal with a gun rather than
spin
Aug 2013
#84
There is the federal fair housing act and many states have Renters' Rights laws.
dballance
Aug 2013
#72
You better read your state and local laws and any rental agreement you enter into.
dballance
Aug 2013
#76
None of those places are a persons' dwelling- and that makes a huge difference.
friendly_iconoclast
Aug 2013
#100
Legally, it *is* your home, and there's lots of case law to back that up.
friendly_iconoclast
Aug 2013
#10
His only worry is how to spend his share of the settlement from the management company.
friendly_iconoclast
Aug 2013
#15
He doesn't have the right to search for drugs either....but if he finds out you have them....
VanillaRhapsody
Aug 2013
#63
but guns never cause holes in floors, walls, ceilings, furnishings, tenants......
lastlib
Aug 2013
#24
Can I get some vinaigrette and extra croutons to go with that salad?
friendly_iconoclast
Aug 2013
#9
GOOD! If they own the property....they HAVE the right to prohibit them.
VanillaRhapsody
Aug 2013
#54
It provides an alternative for those who believe that living surrounded by guns . . .
MrModerate
Aug 2013
#92
-3 for not using the terms "gun safety", "reasonable" and "common sense".
friendly_iconoclast
Aug 2013
#99