What kind of 'stricter sentence' do you recommend for the Aurora shooter?

12 dead and 59 injured.

Of course doing “HEAVY time…” AFTER the crime doesn’t bring any of the dead victims back to life. It would be nice to prevent things like this BEFORE anyone is shot.

Amen to that! Stop trying to disarm law abiding citizens! You gun-grabbers think for one minute criminals and lunatics care about your gun-control laws? Not on you life... and it may very well be your life too!

@Dexter: Here here. People seem to think that someone performing a criminal act with a firearm actually cares about gun control laws. Before holding up a convenience store do you really think they're going to stop and think "Oh wait. Nope. I haven't registered my gun yet. Shoot. I guess this will have to wait for another time"

I don't have a citation on hand but most firearms involving fire arms are obtained illegally anyway (often stolen). There was a story a short while back about a large cache of weapons from a SWAT team armory just "disappearing". So even if you were to ban civilian ownership it doesn't prevent firearms from being stolen. Better yet firearms are pretty easily manufactured these days. If you have a lathe, a milling machine, and some bar stock you can easily create a firearm. Plenty of hobbyists do it.

Looking around my office I can see approximately a dozen items could be used in a lethal way. Laws aren't going to change this.

Lee, Don't confuse a private property rule with the law. The issue here is the weaponry that the shooter used. While the assault weapons ban was in place, it would have been hard for the individual to purchase an AR-15 M&P as well as the 100 round drum. There is no reason whatsoever for a person to own such a magazine for sporting or home defence. Hell, the US military doesn't use them. In your line of thinking, we might just as well legalize all forms of exotic weaponry since people will find a way anyways. Hey, we should make drunk driving legal too, since people do it anyways.

J. The assault weapon ban was one of the silliest, most foolish laws ever passed. It did not make it harder to buy an AR-15 or anything like that. I have been around firearms all of my life and can tell you all it did was make people who don't know much about firearms feel better. All they did was take off the flash surpresser, limit the size of the clip to hold ammunition, remove the bayonet lug and made a barrel lenght restriction. What they did was outlaw ugly guns that scare people who don't know any better. . J, my point in my previous comment block is that a nut case like the guy in Colorado will find a way to kill if they set their mind to it , don't give up a right when it will only limits the rights of the law abiding, criminals will not follow the law and the police will only be responding once the law is broken and you have been victimized.

Lee, the AR-15 is a military grade assault rifle. It has no purpose in the hands of a civillian. Period. Was the assault ban perfect? No. And why is that? Because the NRA threw a hissy fit over any weapon being banned. (Please remember that at the time this bill was introduced, the NRA said that people should be allowed to own fully automatic weapons) So, their Republican lapdogs put loopholes in the law. Was that the right thing to do? No, but the NRA is a powerful, wealthy lobby group. The NRA has subverted the Bill of Rights for their own agenda.

J. the AR-15 is not any more leathal than a Remington Model 74 semi-automatic which is a standard hunting gun, it can be had in calbers from .270 up to .30-06, you can buy one in Portsmouth today if you wanted to. Why would you be so scared of a ulgy black gun and not a Model 74? A person with any amount knowledge about common hand tools could modify the hunting rifle to do the same exact thing as a AR-15 or an AR-4, and the gun would be legal. The Mod 74 even has a larger bullet. So, I am asking you J. do you think that the 74 should be outlawed also? And by the way the M-4 that can be bought is used as a varmit gun due to it's light weight and hi speed small bullet, used one in New Mexico not long ago.

Assault weapons were exactly what the founding fathers had in mind when they wrote the Second admendment. They had just finished fighting a war with a major super power and they new that if the people of this country did not have firearms this never could have happened. The whole perpose of the second admendment was that an armed citizenry had the power to overthrough a tyrannical government. assualt weapons are the perfict weapon for this purpose so the ar-15 and others are the arms refered to in the Constution.
"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
Thomas Jefferson
to James Madison

I just want to say I abhor the use of the phrase "ASSAULT rifle" particularly applied to he AR-15. There's no real consensus on what classifies as an assault rifle but generally it's a an _automatic_ weapon with an intermediate cartridge but the legal minutia varies from country to country. That's completely irrelevant however. It's mostly a fear mongering word tossed in to make a story more sensationalist.

The phrase "assault rifle" has its origins in the German Sturmgewehr 44 of WW2 which translates roughly to "storm rifle" or "assault rifle": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StG_44 It was the first of its kind.

I'd also like to point out that the AR-15 is a highly modular rifle. Depending on how you configure one. It can be built to chamber a .17 VarTag round for shooting varmints all the way up to a .50 BMG (I think that would be really impractical but I've seen it done).

@JLM: "we might just as well legalize all forms of exotic weaponry since people will find a way anyways. Hey, we should make drunk driving legal too, since people do it anyways." You need to brush up on your logical fallacies. Slippery slippery slope...

He didn't need an FFL. The assault weapons ban expired, remember?

What about the possibility of other concealed carry patrons opening fire and adding to the confusion? Darkness, smoke, shots being fired, people running and screaming. Heck, hitting a target when it’s clear and calm is difficult enough. You draw your weapon to shot the criminal. But another patron also legally carrying sees you with a firearm and in all the confusion thinks you may be working with the criminal and shoots you instead.

Wouldn't have really made a difference. The alleged shooter was wearing body armour.

According to the FBI, in 2009 there were 9,146 murders with a gun, an average of 25 per day with most all committed by someone who had a gun illegally. Further, tragedies like the one in Colorado are rare. Meanwhile US Dept of Transportation data shows that there are over 40,000 deaths by motor vehicle each year…over 110 per day, with most all by someone having a license to drive a motor vehicle! Where’s the outcry to control motor vehicles?

How many mass murders have been stopped by someone who had a concealed weapons permit? Zero.

Downtown you are wrong read the link I posted Down below.

The notion conceal carry permit holders do not help foil killers is completely false. The facts are clear, over 2 million or so cases are reported every year where just the presence of a gun in a would-be victim's posession was often enough to stop a crime. So the notion "no conceal carry gun ever stopped a massacre" is just not true... any one of the 2 million reported cases could have been a massacre if a lawfully armed citizen was not there to stop the criminal or lunatic. Wise up gun-grabber!

J. he had a rubber gas mask on, a pellet gun could go thu that.

"Holmes allegedly entered the movie auditorium wearing a ballistics helmet, bulletproof vest, bulletproof leggings, gas mask and gloves." According to Aurora, CO police chief.

J. I was refering to the fact that the only thing covering his face was a gas mask, easy shot.

You need to remember that getting hit in the vest is like getting kicked by a horse it won't kill you but it will take some of the fight out of you. What we should be calling for is a ban on body armor.

@J.Lane McMahon: It would have made a difference. Proof is in the pudding. Even if say you for instance was wearing body armor, the shear impact of a round would have atleast knock him down. When you see stories about police getting shot in their bullet proof vest, they are knock out of action. Results show intense bruising and such. Just because body armor will stop the bullet from penetrating, the force of the bullet still will knock that person down.

So you believe if he had a spear or hammer or big knifes that he would have still murdered 12 and injured 59?

Downtown he had bombs at his apartment he could have killed a lot more people with those the n he did with a gun.

DownTown, maybe he couldn't, BUT, if he had 50 pounds of fertilizer and a few gallons of diesel fuel he could have done what McVey did. McVey had no guns and how many people did he kill, you don't think the nut in Colorado wouldn't think of that? DowntTown you gonna ban diesel?

I agree with you. The ignorance about guns is profound and that's by design. Gun-grabbing politicians, corrupt media, our schools and the anti-gun lobby want to keep the public afraid of guns in a constent effort to turn public opinion against our right to bear arms. They'll stop at nothing to advance their deadly agenda. Gun laws only protect criminals and they kill. Yet the anti-gun crowd continues to advance a narrative that keeps people ignorant and fearful of guns. Of course they want the manufacturers to be accountable so they may eventually get rid of all guns by destroying the gun business. They use the same tactic the environmental lobby uses to destroy many of our great industries. Over regulation brought Detroit to its knees in exactly this way and it took a governemnt bailout (illegal I might add) to prop up GM. If not for the Chinese car market it would have closed its doors long ago (GM invests heavily in China now with our tax $, another Obama betrayal). Traditional domestic energy is another liberal-progressive victim. We need to educate the ignorant and push back on the left-wing narrative that "guns are evil." People need to respect guns,not fear it. They need to be educated in its proper use and its importance to our liberty. By keeping the public fearful and ignorant they want you to believe security can only come from government. Tell the truth and educate everyone you can. It will save ilves and preserve our freedom.

Sorry I was responding to what was written in the post which was a spear or hammer or big knifes. I didn't know I was responding to a moving target.

Hi Joe. I don't agree with a lot of things you say on the patch but this is one where we are in complete agreement. I would love to be able to carry a concealed weapon with me at all times. I don't want to be a helpless victim.

"An armed society is a polite society"

Tamori do you need a permit in order to exercise your right to free speach? do you need to take a test to prove that you can speak intelligently before you are allowed to open your mouth or post online. The right to keep and bear is a Constitutional right and has to be applied to all people equally everybody has the right to own a gun like it or not. Either you have to change the Constitution both Federal and State or you just have to live with the consequences.

Excellent point Robert E, each right spelled out is as important as the others and is to be defended as a whole Constitution. I should have known this, I swore to defend it many times.

Getreal I agree it is not easier to get a handgun in R.I. (legally) than a drivers license but it should be a drivers license is not a right it is a privilege owning a firearm is a right an as such should have no barriers to ownership.

In my opinion, it's pretty simple. If we're talking about "home defense" which most gun control proponents say is the most important part, then let everyone own shotguns. Handguns and long rifles are not even remotely adaquate for home defense. Sporting purposes can be derived from there. Rifles, on the way to and from the hunt, etc. Handguns have little or no value in self-defense.

Joe, are these courses offered throughout Rhode Island. I suppose I could check their website but you appear knowledgeable in this area.

Better go back to school
The Colt "Peacemaker" Also known as the M1873 SAA (Single Action Army) was NOT a semi-automatic...You need to pull the hammer back before each trigger pull to fire it.

A semi-automatic firearm, a firearm which automatically reloads, but will only fire one round per trigger pull The Colt 45 is a single action it does not auto load so it is not a semi-automatic. John looks like you don't know what "Semi-Automatic" means.

OK: You both got me on a techncality. I'm not a gun user. I think I made my point though. Pull the trigger and it fires. It's NOT a machine gun.

Good catch J., Do you shoot?

The Constitution of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations
ARTICLE I
Section 22. Right to bear arms. -- The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

John it does not include the first part that the U.S. Constitution does so that does not apply here in Rhode Island.

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
Richard Henry Lee
American Statesman, 1788

"The great object is that every man be armed." and "Everyone who is able may have a gun."
Patrick Henry
American Patriot

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that … it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; … "
Thomas Jefferson
letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824

Dexter the police arrived 2 minutes after the 911 call was made but the call wasn't made until 9 minutes after the shooting started. That means the police didn't arrive until 11 minutes after the shooting started.

So, Robert, if you are accurate that means had the response time been the national average of 20 minutes the Aurora massacre could have yielded 24 deaths and 118 injuries. (rediculous to assume the math but just to make a point). No doubt the fast response was helpful, but still the 12 who perished perhaps had a much better chance had someone been allowed to carry their legal weapon. Maybe even one of the military vets who would clearly have been proficient could have fought off the killer and saved lives. The objection that most of us who believe our Founding Fathers had it right is that the anti-2nd Amendment crowd deliberatly ignore the facts surrounding guns to advance their anti-gun agenda and their obstancy kills. The facts are clear, gun control laws protect criminals and renders the rest of us defenseless. The notion of targeting specific types of weapons or technologies off the table is simply a tactic of the gun grabbers to incrementally erode our rights. It's deliberately a slippery slope and they disgust me in how they "never let a good crisis go to waste."

The news report on the tv station for the Trolley square shooting does not mention an off duty police officer shooting at all. Thats the only one I have time to review right now but I'll get to the rest.

Oddly enough the blog does not have any citations to back up the 'stories'.

Joe peper spray would be fine in Rhode Island but in Massachusetts it is illegal to possess and use without an firearms identification card. If you use peper spray in Massachusetts without a firearms identification card you will be arrested.

Cape Crusader, look at my reponse to J. Lane today 28 Jul 2012. An AR-15 is not that big of a deal, as a matter of fact some of our guys in Iraq were using captured AK-47's because they were better weapons when you need a bigger bullet. The AR-15 uses a .223 Cal bullet, it is just a .22 cal bullet with a little spunk behind it. As A big Hunter/clay killer/home protector you should know that, scared of a ugly black gun because it's ugly, Cape?

Lee, I had also heard that they liked to carry around AK-47's because you can pretty much throw sand and dirt into a rusted bolt and the bloody thing will still fire. I'm told the bolt on the AR-15's (with the "star") are still really finicky.

You might find this interesting: Some soldiers are even finding old PPSh-41's in Iraq. As someone interested in WW2 history (particularly the eastern front) I thought that was kind of net: http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/3595/73493273284e2bb43dooi7.jpg

Unfortunately they're required to relinquish them. Drat...

Also (sorry to be pedantic) but most colonists had rifles not muskets. Muskets are smooth bore weapons and were only accurate to about 50 yards (the ball would even be made slightly smaller than the barrel so it would bounce around a bit). The advantage was that the weapon was easier and faster to load. Also easier to manufacture.

Rifles were barreled and accurate to up to 300 yards in the hands a skilled shooter. These were what most civilians would have used for hunting and personal protection. They are, however, more difficult to manufacture, harder to load, and weren't designed to hold up the the rigor of battle (they also could not fix a bayonet as they had a thinner wooden stock). The continental army generally used muskets while the sharpshooters (look up Morgan's Rifleman) used rifles.

Hi Cape, the 5.56 is the NATO measurement of the round, .223 is the caliber of the round. They are the same round, the Miltary 5.56(.223cal) has a little different powder charge and head space in the chamber but they are interchangable in the weapon, you didn't know that? I only used the term AR-15 due to it's use on this site, didn't want ot confuse any laymen. The M-16 was the older rifle which is now replaced by the AR-2,3, and 4 which are rifles. The M-2,3,and 4 are carbines. The orginal was the AR-10 which was NATO 7.62(.308 Cal) and was sold in limited amounts to the US but Cuba (Castro) bought a boat load. It was designed by E. Stoner for the Air Force on the 50s, later Colt copied it and sold it the the military as the M-16, NATO 5.56(.223). So...Cape do I make the grade?

This is a tactic the anti-gun crowd employs to incrementally curtail our 2nd Amendment rights. Holding the seller/stores accountable for conducting their business is tantamount to restricting free trade. Millions of law abiding citizens enaged in the shooting sports purchase thousands of rounds routinely. To them it's like filling the tank of the car to go on trips. They just take many more trips than the casual gun owner! To restrict ammo purchase is just another way to restrict our rights. You, sir, should be much more worried about why the Department of Homeland Security purchased hundreds of millions of rounds of Hollow Point ammo! Hollow Points are not for practice, its only purpose is to kill. Why? What is the government preparing for? That worries me much more than lawful citizens buying ammo for sport. Here's a link: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/why-is-homeland-security-buying-450-million-rounds-of-hollow-point-bullets/

Bill you said "The people who sold him the bullets should be held acountable !" if someone runs someone down with a car should the gas station that sold them the gas be held acountable? It's the same thing.

Actually, you can but it is not advised. The 5.56 Nato round has much more bore pressure than the civillian .223 Rem. Some, but not all civillian rifles marked .223 Rem are tested for the increased pressure.

As too the claim that .223 Rem (or 5.56 NATO) "is just a .22 cal bullet with a little spunk behind it." Is way outside the realm of reality. The NATO round produces over 1700 J of force at just over 3000 fps, while the largest non-magnum version of a .22 (The .22 LR) comes in at just over 200 J at 1700 fps. While I have not differntiated between .223 REM and the NATO round, they are within 5% of each other.

The City of Providence is in a combat situation with up to three people a day being killed.More people die in the inner cities of the United States than any war in Iraq or Iran. Rhode Island state officials are outlining strategies to "combat" violence in Providence. Providence has 10,000 property and violent crimes a year.

In 2009 there were over 15,000 murders in the United States.Over 18,000 murders happened in 2011.

It's a well known fact that major drug deals take place in small towns out side the major cities because the police forces are small and have no drug units like the large cities. You have a right to protect your family ,yourself and your property.

Isabel, you're probably a very nice person who has great compassion for others, but you're 'world view' is terribly naive. Gun laws only disarm law abiding citizens and render us defenseless against criminals who care nothing for the law. Overwhelmingly in US cities where guns are outlawed (or made near impossible to possess) gun crime rates are by far the highest. Chicago, Detroit and New York Are prime examples! Close to home, Providence gun crimes are getting out of control too. You liberals have an idealistic view which defies reality. When you impose your naive world view on the rest of us and you demonize guns and people who have legitamate uses for it, you are literally killing people... quite the opposite of your intent I'm sure. You should read up on history and the Bible as they will show you we live in an imperfect world where evil exists. Until such time as we can irradicate evil, I'll keep my guns to protect my family and those I love thank you very much!