Originally Posted by jallman

Person B is overreaching private property rights because he is, supposedly, extending the domocile for rent and probably under the terms of a lease. The property, when leased, becomes the property of the new tenant which must only be returned in the same condition it was leased. Owning a gun, which is protected by the second amendment, isn't going to permanently alter the leased unit in any way like, say, painting or smoking. If the landlord could make an argument that merely owning the gun irrevocably alters the quality of the residence, then yeah, he could ban the gun. Otherwise, the rights afforded by the Constitution always trump the private property rights of the landlord. Otherwise, he could just not rent to black people, people with disabilities, and other prejudicial traits.