rental-property tenant lease missouri
Firearm provision in lease agreement
<p>I'm a university student and I shoot skeet on the weekends. Currently getting ready to sign an apartment lease for next year and I noticed this clause. Section C is the part I am confused about, as it involves roommate terminology and is worded in a rather specific way.</p>

<p>I follow my state's (Missouri) laws and am knowledgeable about firearm safety. The unit I will be leasing is not shared with other roommates. Does this clause prevent me specifically from storing skeet gear (shotgun, shells, eye/ear protection, etc.) in my apartment, provided it is stored securely?</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Tenant shall not, or permit any of Tenant's guests or invitees to, (a) unless otherwise permitted by the Rules and
  Regulations, keep any item of a dangerous, flammable or explosive character that might unreasonably increase the
  danger of fire or explosion or that might be considered hazardous or extra hazardous by any responsible insurance
  company; (b) engage in the manufacture, sale, distribution, use, or possession with intent to manufacture, sell,
  distribute or use illegal drugs, controlled substances or drug paraphernalia; (c) engage in acts of violence or threats of
  violence, including, but not limited to, displaying, discharging, or possessing a firearm, knife, or other weapon that
  may threaten, alarm or intimidate others or roommates; (d) engage or assist in the consumption of alcohol by a person
  under the legal age to consume alcohol in the State in which the Neighborhood is located, or (e) engage in any other
  illegal activities. It is understood and agreed that a single violation of this section shall be a default of the Lease.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Clauses (a) and (c) are potentially relevant. You have to look in the Rules &amp; Regulations to see what exceptions are permitted. Although firearms and especially shotgun shells are of a "dangerous,  flammable  or  explosive  character", it is reasonable to believe that when stored properly, they do not unreasonably  increase  the danger  of  fire  or  explosion, and would not be  considered  hazardous  or  extra  hazardous  by  any  responsible  insurance company. On the latter point, you could ask any responsible insurance company if they would consider such shells to be hazardous.</p>

<p>While in ordinary language simple possession of a firearm is not a threat of violence, the wording of clause (c) is open to a wider interpretation, since acts considered to be a threat of violence include displaying or possessing a firearm, knife, or other weapon that 
may  threaten,  alarm  or  intimidate  others. The fact is that many people are alarmed by the simple existence of a weapon, so simply possessing a weapon could be interpreted as a "threat" in this special sense.</p>

<p>Since you are not in the position of having signed the lease and now need to deal with the consequences of this clause, the simplest solution is to explain your interest, and ask them if having your gear in your apartment would be a violation of the lease. Be really clear about this and get it in writing in some form, if they say "no problem". Then either pick a different place, pick a different hobby, or find a separate storage facility.</p>

<p>I do not see how you can violate this section without threatening someone. </p>

<p>(C) has, I count 6 components. Pay close attention to how they interact. </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>engage in acts of violence or threats of violence, </p>
</blockquote>

<p>This is the crux. It's a pretty clear statement, and its definition is reasonably narrow.  Perfectly appropriate for a rental agreement. Don't hurt people, don't threaten to hurt them.  </p>

<p>”Threat" means a credible threat that would pass a "Reasonable Person" test, i,e. A reasonable person would feel threatened.  If you go over to your goldfish bowl and say "sic 'em Nemo, tear his throat out", that's not a real threat.  But don't push it.  </p>

<p>If you said that same thing about a ferret, that could be credible, the issue isn't whether a ferret is physically capable of it, but <strong>whether a "Reasonable Person" would think it *might</strong>. It's a Reasonable person, not an Omniscient one. </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>including, but not limited to, </p>
</blockquote>

<p>That specific language means  <em>absolutely anything</em> could cause the above effects, including your fists, a drone, pet ferret, whatever.  <strong>It is saying that what follows are only examples</strong> to give you a sense of what the first part means. Nothing reasonable is excluded, but you probably can't violate the above rule with a bag of popcorn or a child's bubble blower. </p>

<p>The lawyers don't even need the examples that follow, they are more for the benefit of teenage tenants reading this.  </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>displaying, discharging, or possessing </p>
</blockquote>

<p>This part is irrelevant, since it's only providing examples of methods to accomplish the first part.  "Stay away from my girlfriend, I have guns" would fit the example because it is a <strong>threat</strong> that is made via <strong>possessing</strong>. </p>

<p>But if you said   "Stay away from my girlfriend, I have a big iron pipe", <em>it doesn't matter whether you actually have a big iron pipe</em>. So you can violate without displaying, discharging or possessing anything.</p>

<p>It doesn't even need to be about possessing a thing, threatening a fellow gamer or minor online celebrity would also violate. </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>a firearm, knife, or other weapon </p>
</blockquote>

<p>This part is irrelevant, since it's only providing examples, again, it wouldn't matter if the attack weapon was a Cisco router.  </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>that may threaten, alarm or intimidate </p>
</blockquote>

<p>Again, we are still in the "example" zone, and it's only applicable to the first part.  So they mean "a threat of violence that may threaten, alarm or intimidate". </p>

<ul>
<li>a threat of violence that may threaten (duh)</li>
<li>a threat of violence that may alarm</li>
<li>a threat of violence that may intimidate</li>
</ul>

<p>The "Reasonable Person" test applies.  Some snowflake can whip themselves into a lather because they saw a copy of <em>Guns and Ammo</em> in your mailbox, but that is not a threat of violence.   That said, <strong>don't push it</strong> i.e. troll them or prey on their fears to make them uncomfortable, because the least misunderstanding <em>could indeed</em> turn into a credible threat. </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>others or roommates;</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Also irrelevant, since it means <em>any human</em>. </p>
