• OsaErisXero@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    263
    ·
    5 months ago

    Could you imagine if the thing that kills HOAs ended up being liability for the actions of their members?

    Go Ralph go!

    • MagicShel@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      5 months ago

      That would be great, but police can barely take a person’s guns away if they aren’t actively involved in a crime. I’d be shocked if a court found an HOA to have that power. I’m not against it but I don’t even think the Supreme Court of 12 years ago would do for it, much less this Supreme Court.

      • bane_killgrind@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        52
        ·
        5 months ago

        It wouldn’t be “no guns”, it would be “carry this insurance if you have guns” and then fining the people who don’t or won’t carry the insurance.

          • bitwaba@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            25
            ·
            5 months ago

            You’re right. Let’s give everyone good free gun insurance. We can call it Otrumpacare

          • ThrowawayOnLemmy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            5 months ago

            Guns aren’t cheap. If you can buy a gun, and you can buy ammo, you can afford insurance. It’s only the well off who already can afford firearms so I don’t get what you’re arguing? You wanna give guns to poor people?

            • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              5 months ago

              No, all of that is wrong, and yes, the poor people should have guns. Everyone has the right to self defense.

              Guns can be cheap, ammo is generally affordable, and there could be many who could afford both but not insurance. $250 one time purchase versus $hundreds or $thousands annually.

              Also, there’s no way in hell you could put a requirement to pay regular insurance costs as a requirement to exercise a Constitutional right. The courts would flush that down the shithole immediately.

          • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            5 months ago

            Ah yes, let’s ensure only the well off can afford firearms.

            Let’s be fair, half the point of an HOA is keeping the poors (and ethnics, but they aren’t allowed to say that part out loud any more) out of your neighborhood to maintain property values. So your HOA requiring you to carry some kind of gun insurance wouldn’t be completely unreasonable, if you can’t afford it (or anything else they want) you shouldn’t be living under that HOA.

            Also why I don’t live in an HOA, and having an HOA was a red flag when I was looking for a house.

        • EtherWhack@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          I doubt that fine would be legal. The most I’ve seen is just a standard requirement for a license/permit (i.e. legal ownership), and maybe restricting open/concealed-carry in the neighborhood (but outside the house. Inside your house is out of the HOA’s grasp, though.)

          https://vinteum.io/security/qas-about-guns-in-your-hoa/

          Edit: Kansas actually doesn’t require any license or permit to buy or own a gun. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Kansas

          • bane_killgrind@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            25
            ·
            5 months ago

            HOAs implement illegal rules all the time. They were literally first used to end run discrimination laws. It doesn’t even have to be insurance, it could be something else to frustrate gun owners lives. That’s the beauty of selective enforcement /s

            • EtherWhack@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Illicit rule making being in their repertoire wouldn’t make it any more just (two wrongs, and everything) or enforceable, as the gun owner could easily just not abide by or pay it. Also, Making any regulation/fee or anything to “frustrate” gun owners could also be seen as harassment.

              There is no indication that the guy ever used or brandished the gun outside his home, which is where the HOA’s jurisdiction would be. Like I said, the HOA can’t do a damn thing about what goes on inside someone’s home. If they were to try, it would fall flat the minute it gets challenged especially with Kansas being one of the states having a castle doctrine which implies the possibile use of a gun (i.e. deadly force) for defense.

              The case is likely going to be about the castle doctrine and it’s limits on whether someone standing on your doorstep constitutes a threat, (which it doesn’t) along with trying to prove that the kid was trying to break in (this I doubt) which could justify an imminent threat.

              I am in no way on the side of the old man. I actually think he was completely in the wrong (also got off way too easy) and the kid was legitimately just at the wrong house.

              My opinion is the man should be evaluated for mental fitness and if unfit would be required to need a caretaker, of sorts. If no mental issues, be tried and convicted for the first degree assault (attempted homicide) charge.

              The HOA however does not have any actual stake in it that I’ve found, as the kid was shot from behind the storm door by the old man who was inside his house.

              • bane_killgrind@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                It’s pissing into the wind to assume an hoa won’t do the wrong thing.

                There’s existing mechanisms to enforce fines.

                I’m not talking about this article just HOAs in general

                • EtherWhack@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Yes. I’m not saying that they wouldn’t try to come up with bogus/farfetched regulations, but they legitimately cannot do anything about what goes on behind closed doors in someone’s house. To do otherwise would be a breach in that person’s right to privacy. It’d be like an HOA telling you, you have to vacuum/sweep/mop every other day, otherwise you can be fined. (or saying you can’t have sex on Sundays)

                  HOAs do have some extralegal clout, but the right to privacy stops them from interfering in anything you do that isn’t openly visible. (i.e. Doing a meatspin in front of a window facing the street can be penalized, but taking a dump in your kitchen sink can’t, unless the sink is in front of a window facing the street and the blinds/curtains/shutters are open.)

          • lath@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            5 months ago

            Shooting your gun makes a loud noise that can lower property value hence gun use falls under hoa purview.

      • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’d be shocked if a court found an HOA to have that power.

        Courts have pretty consistently found that HOA’s have more power than local authorities. That’s why they can set their own laughably restrictive bylaws.

        Second amendment violations may not fly, but that’s a constitutionality problem, not a limit specifically on HOAs.

    • JoeyJoeJoeJr@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      5 months ago

      Not to justify the actions of the shooter, but ringing the doorbell before breaking in is definitely a thing. It’s a means of checking if the house is occupied - if you’re just trying to steal things, an unoccupied house is ideal, and if someone answers when you ring, it’s easy enough to make up an excuse and walk away.

      A much better solution than a gun, though, is a security door (similar to a screen door, but more kick proof).

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        5 months ago

        ringing the doorbell before breaking in is definitely a thing

        It’s only a thing because that’s predominantly what “normal” people do. There’s plausible deniability, and it still doesn’t change the fact that almost all people who knock on the door are not breaking in

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yep. I was robbed at knifepoint by a couple of goons. They knocked politely first.

        Outside the door? Cop problem. Inside the door? Your problem.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    5 months ago

    I hope this 84 year old piece of shit doesn’t die before this case concludes. Hard to believe it’s already been more than a year since this happened.

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 months ago

      Every time a case like this comes up I either think “wow, it’s been THAT long?” Or “wow, it happened THAT recently?”

  • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    5 months ago

    Anyways this is part of why I support a legal duty to retreat. If you can shoot anyone on your property some people will do shit like this

  • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    5 months ago

    Suing the HOA is an interesting one; I wonder if the rest of the residents in that HOA could sue as well, I mean, having a known psychopathic firearms enthusiast in the neighborhood must decimate the property values.

    • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      5 months ago

      Maybe after the conviction they could have a bylaw like, “any owner housing a resident convicted of an armed assault will be fined $1,000 daily.”

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      I think the idea is that if that old geezer croaks while the court is twiddling their thumbs on this case, the HOA will at least still be there to pay…

      • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’m really liking the precedent this could set. HOAs like to wield government-like authority with none of the limits that actual government (is supposed to) operate under, ostensibly to provide a “nicer” neighborhood. And then a young man gets shot for ringing a door bell.

        I ask all the other HOA residents of the nation: Are any of YOUR neighbors getting ready to tank YOUR property values like Andrew Lester did for his neighbors? If a resident of your HOA answers his doorbell with a hail of lead, and it makes the news like this one did, you think it’s going to be easy to find a buyer for your house?

  • Crass Spektakel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    5 months ago

    Funny fact, “Stand your ground” is also the Law in Germany. And in 150 years of German Law there were exactly seven cases where “Stand your ground” was used to defend an violent act.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      5 months ago

      Because it’s extremely limited in scope with a corresponding duty to retreat or because there aren’t enough black people for racists to be scared of?

      • Crass Spektakel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        5 months ago

        I don’t think fear of minorities is the reason. We have other optically different minorities around. Arabs, Vietnamese, Turks. On the other hand I think I have only interacted with one black person around here EVER. Which was kinda funny because he spoke heavy Bavarian dialect and had a perfectly German name.

        While lots of people feel uneasy around Minorities, violence still is very low. To be honest, as a German I am more afraid of a left German punk or right German Skinhead than any other minority.

        Sure, there are also Poles, Romanians and Italians but those are not visibly different

  • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Make that bitch homeless. The only reason you should ever be homeless for, being a racist POS. Merica’s 🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲

  • korny@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    This makes total sense, with the typical MO of a ne’er-do-well ringing the doorbell before trying to get into a building nefariously.