User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
VA, USA
|
Posted: 7/26/2014 10:51:42 PM EDT
This is just in, Wow! This is good news that my ears haven't hear in a long time.
Thumbs up to Palmer vs DC, a defeat to the unconstitutional gun carry in DC. The ruling right to bear arms extends outside the home in DC. But expect DC to appeal this decision too. Lets see how it goes in the coming days. I wouldn't recommend carrying just yet till the dust settles. I live really close to DC and hate to disarm every time I have to enter DC for work related. One step forward and victory for the 2nd Amendment. Palmer v. District of Columbia, et al http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/26/emily-miller-federal-judge-rules-dc-ban-on-gun-carry-rights-unconstitutional/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/27/2014 2:04:41 PM EDT
[#1]
Wahoo! I'll wait till somebody else is a test case, though, but still, WAHOO!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/27/2014 3:48:04 PM EDT
[#2]
So does anyone have more details? I am reading it is effective immediately. Does my VA permit allow me to carry in DC now? I am having a hard time finding out exactly what this means.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/27/2014 11:22:47 PM EDT
[#3]
To those of you saying "I'm going to carry in DC tomorrow!", I would be VERY cautious here.
Your normal carry weapon, even if simply possessed within a home in DC, would land you in jail. More than ten round magazine? Definitely a felony in DC. Possessing a firearm within 500 ft of a school in DC? Probably still a felony. Possession of unregistered ammunition? Probably still a felony. Hollowpoint ammo? Gun not on the Maryland "approved handgun roster"? Lots to think about here. Savor the symbolic victory, but you need to understand who you are dealing with here before you think about exercising your rights in the black hole of liberty known as DC. I would hate to see any more good people go to jail. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/27/2014 11:35:23 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By libertyforall:
To those of you saying "I'm going to carry in DC tomorrow!", I would be VERY cautious here. Your normal carry weapon, even if simply possessed within a home in DC, would land you in jail. More than ten round magazine? Definitely a felony in DC. Possessing a firearm within 500 ft of a school in DC? Probably still a felony. Possession of unregistered ammunition? Probably still a felony. Hollowpoint ammo? Gun not on the Maryland "approved handgun roster"? Lots to think about here. Savor the symbolic victory, but you need to understand who you are dealing with here before you think about exercising your rights in the black hole of liberty known as DC. I would hate to see any more good people go to jail. Oh, I'm sure... Maybe someone should call DC Police and see about registering one of their firearms. Provably be laughed off the phone, if Emily Miller's experience is any indication. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 11:45:22 AM EDT
[#5]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-attorney-general-plans-to-seek-stay-of-ruling-overturning-districts-handgun-ban/2014/07/27/00d9e9d0-15c5-11e4-9349-84d4a85be981_story.html
More great news! DC Metro Police Chief has ordered DC Metro Police to NOT ARREST anyone who is lawfully carrying, which is being defined as anyone who currently has a legal license to carry in another state, has a firearm with 10 rounds or less, and whose firearm is registered. Therefore, the DC Metro Police Chief is upholding this ruling, and is allowing concealed and open carry. Im from TX, and will be living in Arlington VA for a job in DC. Im going to call Texas Law Shield and see if they are interested in covering me while I am away. I may just pick up a wheel gun or a carry gun to bring with me, if I can secure a lawyer ahead of time for defense in case need or arrest arrives. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 12:34:37 PM EDT
[#6]
I don't open carry. I also am not going to be the guy that tests the limits of this ruling. But, I live so close that it is advantageous that I figure out exactly what this means and what restrictions still remain. I also don't want to be the guy carrying in DC and it turns out it was put on hold for an appeal.
I carry an M&P 40c which is 10-rounds. In the clear there. Has anyone heard anything about ammo? You would think this is in the clear as well but I have heard no specific statements about ammunition being allowed in DC again. |
|
|
|
KY, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 12:37:14 PM EDT
[#7]
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 12:42:00 PM EDT
[#8]
No Cigar on TLS coverage in DC.
Anyone know any good self defense lawyers in NOVA/DC? |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 12:44:58 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryI'll just go ahead and print that off, and take it with me. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 12:48:03 PM EDT
[#10]
WHOA, WAIT.
Correct me if I am wrong, but the legislative body that passes laws concerning DC is Congress/Senate, so Congress would have to approve any CHL Laws/ further restrictions, am I correct? Thus, there is a chance (If our 2A congressman have any balls) that lengthy restrictions may not come about? |
|
|
KY, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 1:08:02 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SkunkTop:
WHOA, WAIT. Correct me if I am wrong, but the legislative body that passes laws concerning DC is Congress/Senate, so Congress would have to approve any CHL Laws/ further restrictions, am I correct? Thus, there is a chance (If our 2A congressman have any balls) that lengthy restrictions may not come about? We broke eggs, now we gotta get some other ingredients to make omelets. Theres a whole host of issues like liberty posted above. I do not think the Chiefs statement is an intentional trap, but its definitely possible they'll be making arrests of CCDW holders near schools or someone parking in a garage thats really federal or federal busts. They'll then brand that as "look at all these irresponsible gun owners" and some poor guys are going to go to jail while it gets ironed out. Someone in my echo chamber asked about carry on the National Mall. Is it federal land? If so is it national parks land and is it considered surrounded by DC and thus the surrounding states rule applies for carry inside a national park? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 1:13:41 PM EDT
[#12]
Forgive my language but... Holy Shit... that is the go ahead for non-resident open carry and conceal carry (if your state allows) WITH AMMO.
Thank you for posting that documentation. I am absolutely in shock right now that this has happened, and happened so rapidly. Very excited. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 1:38:49 PM EDT
[#13]
Don't get me wrong- I will be very carefully finding out every last minutia of information on any location I go to, and where I can and cannot carry. But as I will be working in a federal building, and I have to Metro rail at night to and from NOVA to DC, Ill be carrying. Ill just have to find a local bank close to the federal building to get a safety deposit box, and stop in every day before and after work.
|
|
|
KY, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 1:48:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: RotaryJihad]
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SkunkTop:
Don't get me wrong- I will be very carefully finding out every last minutia of information on any location I go to, and where I can and cannot carry. But as I will be working in a federal building, and I have to Metro rail at night to and from NOVA to DC, Ill be carrying. Ill just have to find a local bank close to the federal building to get a safety deposit box, and stop in every day before and after work. What if the local bank is posted? I'm willing to bet that "the sign" in DC has the force of law. Not knocking your plan - just thinking through the pitfalls. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 2:07:37 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RotaryJihad:
What if the local bank is posted? I'm willing to bet that "the sign" in DC has the force of law. Not knocking your plan - just thinking through the pitfalls. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RotaryJihad:
Originally Posted By SkunkTop:
Don't get me wrong- I will be very carefully finding out every last minutia of information on any location I go to, and where I can and cannot carry. But as I will be working in a federal building, and I have to Metro rail at night to and from NOVA to DC, Ill be carrying. Ill just have to find a local bank close to the federal building to get a safety deposit box, and stop in every day before and after work. What if the local bank is posted? I'm willing to bet that "the sign" in DC has the force of law. Not knocking your plan - just thinking through the pitfalls. A very good point, too. Ill have to go to work for the first week or so scoping out my normal patterns and alternate routes/patterns in the event something happens. Undoubtedly the extra stop will incur earlier departure. And, of course, the possibility I may not get out of work in time I retrieve my pistol from the bank before 5pm. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 2:10:17 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SkunkTop:
Don't get me wrong- I will be very carefully finding out every last minutia of information on any location I go to, and where I can and cannot carry. But as I will be working in a federal building, and I have to Metro rail at night to and from NOVA to DC, Ill be carrying. Ill just have to find a local bank close to the federal building to get a safety deposit box, and stop in every day before and after work. You'll need a locker or something, not a deposit box. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 2:17:26 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Tony-Ri:
You'll need a locker or something, not a deposit box. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Tony-Ri:
Originally Posted By SkunkTop:
Don't get me wrong- I will be very carefully finding out every last minutia of information on any location I go to, and where I can and cannot carry. But as I will be working in a federal building, and I have to Metro rail at night to and from NOVA to DC, Ill be carrying. Ill just have to find a local bank close to the federal building to get a safety deposit box, and stop in every day before and after work. You'll need a locker or something, not a deposit box. True. Perhaps there is one at the Capitol South Metro? Somewhere between Capitol South Metro and Cannon House Office Building. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 2:19:30 PM EDT
[#18]
Backtracking, this also repeals the ban on deadly weapons. Perhaps now I can carry an asp? Maybe? Hmm...
More research to be conducted. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 2:32:49 PM EDT
[#19]
Originally Posted By aimmaster: This is just in, Wow! This is good news that my ears haven't hear in a long time. Thumbs up to Palmer vs DC, a defeat to the unconstitutional gun carry in DC. The ruling right to bear arms extends outside the home in DC. But expect DC to appeal this decision too. Lets see how it goes in the coming days. I wouldn't recommend carrying just yet till the dust settles. I live really close to DC and hate to disarm every time I have to enter DC for work related. One step forward and victory for the 2nd Amendment. Palmer v. District of Columbia, et al http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/26/emily-miller-federal-judge-rules-dc-ban-on-gun-carry-rights-unconstitutional/ I never would have arrested anyone for it anyway, providing they were not engaged in something else unlawful past a traffic ticket. But its good to finally see anyone with a carry permit can defend themselves in the capital when they travel there. This was obviously, not legal to prohibit anyway. |
|
|
KY, USA
|
Posted: 7/28/2014 2:49:52 PM EDT
[#20]
The situation is fluid, Alan Gura (one of the attourneys in this case) has a post up: http://alangura.com/2014/07/your-d-c-handgun-carry-permit/
UPDATED: I have a better understanding of what the city will now do. The city will probably file an appeal — that’s within their right. The city would ask for a stay pending the resolution of the appeal — they can ask for that, and we would oppose that. The city would ask, in the alternative, for a shorter, closed-ended stay of the Palmer decision to allow the city council time to enact remedial legislation. In Moore, the state of Illinois received first 180 days, then over our strenuous objections, another 30 days on top of that. We would not agree to anything in that neighborhood here, but we would not oppose a shorter stay that would give the city council some reasonable window in which to make a decision, without frustrating the progress of the appeal. The decision as to whether to grant any stays and if so for how long, of course, belongs to the courts. I’d expect the city to file something later this afternoon. I now think that either the DC Chief is being good at her job and staying out of it by issuing a memo on the current law and procedures to her forces and maintaining that status until the cases are settled *OR* (less likely) the Chief is playing politics and expecting the rules to change rapidly and hoping to trap a CCW holder in a gotcha. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 7/29/2014 2:37:46 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RotaryJihad:
The situation is fluid, Alan Gura (one of the attourneys in this case) has a post up: http://alangura.com/2014/07/your-d-c-handgun-carry-permit/ I now think that either the DC Chief is being good at her job and staying out of it by issuing a memo on the current law and procedures to her forces and maintaining that status until the cases are settled *OR* (less likely) the Chief is playing politics and expecting the rules to change rapidly and hoping to trap a CCW holder in a gotcha. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RotaryJihad:
The situation is fluid, Alan Gura (one of the attourneys in this case) has a post up: http://alangura.com/2014/07/your-d-c-handgun-carry-permit/ UPDATED: I have a better understanding of what the city will now do. The city will probably file an appeal — that’s within their right. The city would ask for a stay pending the resolution of the appeal — they can ask for that, and we would oppose that. The city would ask, in the alternative, for a shorter, closed-ended stay of the Palmer decision to allow the city council time to enact remedial legislation. In Moore, the state of Illinois received first 180 days, then over our strenuous objections, another 30 days on top of that. We would not agree to anything in that neighborhood here, but we would not oppose a shorter stay that would give the city council some reasonable window in which to make a decision, without frustrating the progress of the appeal. The decision as to whether to grant any stays and if so for how long, of course, belongs to the courts. I’d expect the city to file something later this afternoon. I now think that either the DC Chief is being good at her job and staying out of it by issuing a memo on the current law and procedures to her forces and maintaining that status until the cases are settled *OR* (less likely) the Chief is playing politics and expecting the rules to change rapidly and hoping to trap a CCW holder in a gotcha. Honestly, I think deep down the Chief knows that in the next week or so, when people start carrying, crimes will go down. She knows this will make her job easier. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 7/29/2014 12:39:31 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SkunkTop:
Honestly, I think deep down the Chief knows that in the next week or so, when people start carrying, crimes will go down. She knows this will make her job easier. Yeah, not so much. 
Imagine what happens when your staff is reduced because there are fewer crimes to 'investigate' (meaning sweep under the rug) "all" those people out of a job 
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 7/29/2014 12:53:53 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By millerized:
Yeah, not so much.
Imagine what happens when your staff is reduced because there are fewer crimes to 'investigate' (meaning sweep under the rug) "all" those people out of a job Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By millerized:
Originally Posted By SkunkTop:
Honestly, I think deep down the Chief knows that in the next week or so, when people start carrying, crimes will go down. She knows this will make her job easier. Yeah, not so much.
Imagine what happens when your staff is reduced because there are fewer crimes to 'investigate' (meaning sweep under the rug) "all" those people out of a job I doubt it. It means less stress for the officers. I don't foresee the Metro Capitol Police reducing in size by any sizable amount. And if it proves to be a Cost Saving Measure, well...Less stress on her. She's probably got plenty of people she wants to fire and plenty of people who deserve a raise or a promotion, anyways. And just because those officers leave their jobs doesn't mean there aren't better opportunities out there. Im sure Capitol Metro PD can get you a lot of places in the LE world, having that on your resume. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/4/2014 3:26:34 PM EDT
[#24]
Anyone care to share their opinion of what "qualified non-resident" or "qualified individual" means?
"In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia's total ban on the public carrying of ready to- use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia's complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.4 Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District." "As stated above, with respect to Plaintiff Raymond's Second Amendment claim, the District of Columbia may not completely bar him, or any other qualified individual, from carrying a handgun in public for self-defense simply because they are not residents of the District." |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 8/4/2014 7:10:09 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mrtoolman:
Anyone care to share their opinion of what "qualified non-resident" or "qualified individual" means? "In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia's total ban on the public carrying of ready to- use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia's complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.4 Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District." "As stated above, with respect to Plaintiff Raymond's Second Amendment claim, the District of Columbia may not completely bar him, or any other qualified individual, from carrying a handgun in public for self-defense simply because they are not residents of the District." Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mrtoolman:
Anyone care to share their opinion of what "qualified non-resident" or "qualified individual" means? "In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia's total ban on the public carrying of ready to- use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia's complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.4 Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District." "As stated above, with respect to Plaintiff Raymond's Second Amendment claim, the District of Columbia may not completely bar him, or any other qualified individual, from carrying a handgun in public for self-defense simply because they are not residents of the District." ^^ I believe this clears up your question, whilst not defining the terms. Individuals from other states with licenses can carry, according to the document. However, this document is void due to the 90 day stay. Thus, the ruling means nothing as far as who can or cannot carry. Merely that in 90 days, either a law will be passed, or it will be Constitutional Carry. (And likely this document will take affect.) |
|
|
KY, USA
|
Posted: 8/12/2014 10:13:53 AM EDT
[#26]
Wondering if the DC area natives have heard of any movement from the DC council about this?
Are they actually working on picking a scheme from another state that works or is SAF going to have to sue them again? |
|
|
MD, USA
|
Posted: 8/14/2014 5:57:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Cooper1]
[#27]
They'll have to sue again. . The city will continue to ignore the ruling, as it does with everything else. Eventually they will make it next to impossible anyway. For example, they had to concede the fact that heller required them to have an ffl in the city. .. After pulling the dealer's ffl they gave him a temporary office inside pd hq. Lol. So they come up with a bs zoning reg that states sure, you can open a shop but it has to be xyz feet from any school, church, residence, fed building, park...etc.... leaving 0 places to do so..
. See the writing on the wall people. Regards |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2014 2:40:28 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RotaryJihad:
Wondering if the DC area natives have heard of any movement from the DC council about this? Are they actually working on picking a scheme from another state that works or is SAF going to have to sue them again? I keep asking about it and no one can give me a straight answer. I get the feeling that they're exploring every available option to continue preventing people from carrying (legally) here- big shocker, right? Everyone I know from the city council seems to buy into the argument that DC is "special" and should be regarded as such in these kinds of matters. I guess it's true that they're "special", just not in the way they think they are. If they do actually come out with a licensing procedure, it will probably be unnecessarily difficult to apply for one and the carry laws will essentially force you to not carry past your own yard, etc. Something like "no carrying within 2000 ft of a school, PD, Fire Station, or other government building" wouldn't surprise me. That would be easy enough for this government to rationalize passing; and also prevent people from carrying almost everywhere in the district. It's a 36 square mile district with about 550 city-owned building spread throughout so you do the math. I'm so glad that I'm moving to Virginia soon. I'll look into this more over the weekend and post any City Council-related stuff I turn up. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/23/2014 8:13:40 PM EDT
[#29]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2014 12:29:12 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SteveM223:
Breaking News: Washington DC Will Appeal Carry Case http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFNBVo3cx2k . I heard about it earlier today. I guess they really do hate freedom that much 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2014 12:41:38 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cooper1:
They'll have to sue again. . The city will continue to ignore the ruling, as it does with everything else. Eventually they will make it next to impossible anyway. For example, they had to concede the fact that heller required them to have an ffl in the city. .. After pulling the dealer's ffl they gave him a temporary office inside pd hq. Lol. So they come up with a bs zoning reg that states sure, you can open a shop but it has to be xyz feet from any school, church, residence, fed building, park...etc.... leaving 0 places to do so.. . See the writing on the wall people. Regards Don't forget that the MPD, because of this, now holds a monopoly on the firearms trade here and has set a standard rate of $200 per firearm transfer. You can look it up on the MPD website. I was going to get a Hi-Point or something else cheap just to have something at the house... until I found out firsthand just how difficult and pricey it really is to obtain a gun here, legally anyway. I guess it's probably not that hard if you have lots of money, but I'm a young guy who's barely above an entry-level job and money is too tight to shuck out all the extra cash it would take beyond the price of the firearm. It's just a little bit disgusting the way this city works. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 1:20:23 PM EDT
[#32]
It is clear that the DC committee is only passing the law because they have to. They have openly admitted this. Alan Gura, the lawyer who fought DC on the issue, is going to go after the new law. The new law essentially mirrors Maryland CHL law. You have to have a "good reason" and it is a may issue state.
Personally, Im going to try and use ISIS targeting of military for my 'good reason'. Might not fly, but its the best I got...unless someone suddenly decides to start stalking me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 3:00:33 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SkunkTop:
It is clear that the DC committee is only passing the law because they have to. They have openly admitted this. Alan Gura, the lawyer who fought DC on the issue, is going to go after the new law. The new law essentially mirrors Maryland CHL law. You have to have a "good reason" and it is a may issue state. Personally, Im going to try and use ISIS targeting of military for my 'good reason'. Might not fly, but its the best I got...unless someone suddenly decides to start stalking me. I'll stalk you a bit for enough money, as long as you don't shoot me or have me arrested or anything. 
It is pretty disgusting the way they wrote the new law. It obviously doesn't really meet the requirement of the ruling, but it'll take another lawsuit to change anything. It's a war of attrition. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
