Questions about Las Vegas (Guest Post)

Loading


 
The investigation of the shooting in Las Vegas continues. A crime scene so massive and with so many different scenarios will be completely covered and no question will go unanswered. Sheriff Joseph Lombardo is doing a masterful job and both he and other investigators have worked countless hours attempting to find out the what and why of what happened.

As always, we will not get all the answers that the American people are seeking. In the aftermath of the worst mass shooting in American history it is imperatives that the answers are clear, concise and honest. I am convinced that at the end of all the investigations, and the media has moved on to the next major story, there will still be questions about why this happened and how did it happen.

Questions remain, some may be just conspiracy and some may be factual. In either case, they are questions that need to be answered. One question is that the authorities are stating that Paddock did not check in until September 28th. A question arises when individuals who work at the Mandalay Bay assert that Paddock ordered room service on the 27th for two people. Who was that other person and why are authorities stating that Paddock did not check in until the 28th? Sources at the Mandalay Bay are claiming that Paddock actually checked in on the 25th.

Paddock, an out of shape former accountant with no military training is not capable of pulling this off by himself. With no experience in guns, how could he have fired as rapidly and accurately as he did. As a military veteran and have experience with fully automatic weapons, they can be hard to control, jam easily and tend to overheat. Using an automatic weapon effectively takes extensive training and experience in the use of such weapons. Being a retired accountant senior citizen, I do not understand how Paddock had the skill or the stamina to fire for so long.The overheating is also a reason why suppressors (silences in Hillarys vernacular) are never used on such weapons. They have a tendency to melt and more quickly jam the gun.

How is law enforcement convinced that there was only one shooter? There are pictures that clearly show rifle fire from a lower window. And why are there recordings of law enforcement talking of another possible suspect on the fourth floor?

At the scene of the crime, why were all the exits blocked. Those 22,000 happy concert goers found themselves trapped, with ability to get out or to seek cover. The ten foot walls kept the multitude of people in the fire zone with no way out.

I have been to Las Vegas many times, living in Southern California and I can not understand how anyone, much less Paddock can carry so many weapons and ammunition into a room without being seen.

Even Trey Gowdy, the no nonsense Representative from South Carolina is skeptical. In Rep. Gowdy’s words, he is skeptical that the amount of premeditation and can not believe that a single person could have done this without assistance.

Further questions include: why so many rifles and weapons if there was only one shooter. Were the rifles that were there for another shooter? Were they all Paddock’s weapons and was he funded by others to have that so many weapons?

Paddock was found dead in his room by a self inflicted gunshot wound. Law enforcement states that he shot himself when they blew the door open to his room. Is there a ballistic report on the bullet that killed him that will close out that part of the investigation?

The broken windows on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay are the supposed site where the firing of the bullets that killed 58 people took place. Automatic weapons have a very pronounced flash, why were there no flashes from the 32nd floor? I have not heard whether flash suppressors were used, but even then there would be some flash. There are purported to be flashes from the 4th floor, but that has not been confirmed. The audio of the online videos and other videos it clearly be heard overlapping gunfire from two different weapons. Barring any further explanation, how can Paddock be responsible for all the carnage.

Paddock has no criminal history in either federal, state or local law enforcement.  He had no affiliation with any activist group that is known of, although there are reports that Antifa literature may have been found in his room. Paddock was not politically active, or even religiously affiliated. Paddock did not have the ability of the meticulously planning, coordination or funding an attack such as this.

The final question I have is – has the Australian man,  Brian Hodge,  who was in the room next to Paddock been interviews and will that investigation be made public? He as stated “There were multiple shooters, and this same gentleman also provided information about the shooting that took the life of a security guard, supposedly shot by law enforcement.

Or another witness also from Australia, Wendy Miller who was staying next to the Mandalay Bay at the Luxor, where she described the security police chasing a Security Guard, or someone dressed as one, down the escalator that comes from the Mandalay Bay to the Luxor. Is there any information about this being given to the public about this.

These are questions that may be factual and need to be cleared by the end of the investigation. There are those that are already declaring this a “false flag” operation that is meant to lead to further gun control and eventually to a civil war. Hopefully Law Enforcement, both local and federal are aware of all these anomalies to the description they want the public to believe. Attention must be paid to those who are doing the investigation.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
22 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

As you can guess the mass Las Vegas shooting has cuased the usial mindless reaction from the mindless Dumb-O-Crats More Gun Control,Repeal the 2nd Amendment Tear Up the U.S. Constitution liberals are like a chicken with its head cut off Liberals are too dumb to be alllowed to think thats becuase liberals dont think until they have read the New York Slimes(All the Sludge that’s Fit to Print)or watched the daily news

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-vegas-shooting-20171009-story.html

We need another Waren commission to splain all the magic bullets. If you are on the commission and dont agree with the findings, dont let Bill Clinton drop you at the airport.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.crime/yRXavu8d-4s/xmybjdbO550J

Paddock, an out of shape former accountant with no military training is not capable of pulling this off by himself. With no experience in guns, how could he have fired as rapidly and accurately as he did. As a military veteran and have experience with fully automatic weapons, they can be hard to control, jam easily and tend to overheat.

give me a break such comments

If you say he cant do that himself, then you have no idea what humans can or cant do. what he did was EASY… maybe to neer do wells who cant do much or build thigs or organize and require others to (enlisted vs officer)…

Basically what your saying is that a person who can use guns cant pack guns and roll them into a hotel…

i think thats pretty easy – people by the millions do that every day for other things than firearms… not much different.. heck, as a photographer i can bring in boxes that would be the same that i use to protect such equiment. rifles and such can be broken down to be claned OR transported

his shape has nothing to do with anything…
alexieve looked fat and lazy, but
He set 80 world records and 81 Soviet records
he was the first man to clean and jerk 500 pounds (227 kg) in competition
Total: 645.0 kg (clean and press + snatch + clean and jerk), in 1972-04-15, in Tallinn, official world record

you would look and say, no that fat man couldnt do THAT

no experience with guns? he collected them over 20 years..

and yes, he fired fast.. not hard.. its easy…
you hold your finger and let the gun move
ever see that funky upside down end of a gun? that keeps it down
but your ASSUMING he aimed.. he didnt
he shot into a crowd..

the whole point of automatic fire is you dont aim, you shoot in the general area
sniper rifles are for aiming
automatic rifles are for spraying
if you can aim carefully and hit target you dont need 450rounds per minute
(7.5 a second)

your really a veteran?
my son is an officer… did a stint as weapons officer
i dont have any guns, and live in the city
and know what you said about automatic weapons is not that accurate

you have lots of people making this claim
and you can watch videos of people making the claim false

and lots have changed since you were in the military
i know as you are commenting as if things dont change.
here, read
Slide Fire Solutions introduced a replacement rifle stock called the SSAR-15 that, for $369, allows you to bump fire your AR-15-style rifle from your shoulder while still retaining accuracy and control. The stock, in the simplest terms, is the part of the rifle you hold and brace against your shoulder. According to the Slide Fire website, “unlike traditional bump firing, the Slidestock allows the shooter to properly hold the firearm and maintain complete control at all times. As a result of the forward movement required to discharge each round, the shooter naturally corrects their point-of-aim for each shot and prevents recoil from pushing the firearm’s muzzle upward in an unsafe direction.” Or, as the subhed more concisely puts it, the SSAR-15 lets a shooter “unleash 100 rounds, in 7 seconds.” A product review at a site called Guns America notes that the SSAR-15 “installs in one minute with no special skills.”

@Artfldgr: Good points, Artfldgr.
I’d only add that many guns he had DID jam.
When that happened he threw that gun aside and grabbed another one.
All of them were preloaded, so, back to his nasty work.
At one briefing I heard there were over 12 guns he had used and cast aside either because they jammed or because they ran out of ammo.

THIS is inexplicable.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-vegas-shooting-20171009-story.html

Paddock fired 200 rounds at a security guard that was checking on a door that was jammed open, wounding the guard.

6 minutes before he started his massacre.

No alarms were raised. No cops were called. No one investigated.

W T F

I have a feeling there will be more “revisions” to the timeline and story as time goes on. BTW, was there ever any explanation about why his girl showed up in a wheelchair? Play for sympathy-Asian/handicapped victim?

@Deplorable Me,

Honestly, it’s not only explicable, but probably a relatively simple series of events. The following narrative is not “what happened”, but one of the many reasonable ways this might have played out. IMO, the guard probably did not act “heroically”, per se, but I suspect his involvement (however it actually transpired), drastically interfered with Paddock’s gameplan and timeline – likely saving dozens, or even hundreds, of lives…

Paddock steps into the hotel hallway to make final adjustments to his security camera.

A security guard, doing an otherwise uneventful patrol of hotel corridors, spots a patron messing around with something on one of the hotel carts. The man sees him, and (suspiciously) runs into a nearby room, shutting the door. Thinking he walked up on some sort of petty theft (but is not in any real danger) the guard knocks on the door and demands Paddock open it up.

Paddock, cursing to himself, checks his security camera, and sees the guard reaching for a set of keys. Paddock runs to the the door and engages his barricade. He goes back to his camera, and sees the guard now reaching for his radio.

Realizing that his entire plan could unravel if the guard radios for help – sending armed lobby police officers to his room – Paddock grabs a handgun and fires a burst of bullets at the door. He checks the camera. It appears the guard was hit, but is limping down the hallway (the guard’s first lucky break: the fire-safe door absorbed/deflected most of the bullets).

Paddock realizes he can’t chase the guard because his door is now barricaded… and there’s only one hope of stopping the guard from radioing in his location. He picks up one of his fully automatic weapons and sprays a torrent of gunfire, 50 rounds in all, in the guard’s general direction.

Meanwhile, the wounded guard has stumbled to the ground – another life-saving twist of luck. Before he can hoist himself up, he’s surrounded by a deafening roar of gunfire and bullets whizzing overhead and striking the walls around him. He lies as flat as he can… The gunfire stops, and the guard begins crawling toward the exit, grimacing in pain at his wounded leg.

Paddock checks his camera: the guard is still alive! He grabs a second automatic, aims lower, and sprays another torrent of gunfire. Another lucky break for the guard – the camera distorted his position in the hallway, and Paddock’s third attempt to kill him – this time unleashing another 100 rounds of ammunition – rakes the hallway floor several feet shy of where the guard was laying.

Again, silence falls. The guard to realize that he’s probably going to die: there’s no way he can make it to the exit before his killer simply steps into the hallway and finishes him off. His only defense is that of the opossum: “if the killer thinks I’m already dead, maybe he won’t shoot me any more.” He strikes a “dead” pose and lies perfectly still… just as Paddock rechecks the camera.

Paddock stares at his camera for 30 seconds – no movement. It appears that the guard is dead. He does some quick arithmetic. The gunfire will soon be reported; the police will be on their way much quicker than planned.

Time is now of the essence. He *could* remove the barricade and finish off the guard, but that will eat up even more time. Plus, he can’t be that the guard didn’t already call in his room-number. Perhaps a lobby police officer – armed – was on his way, heard gunfire, and was about to enter the hallway at any second, weapon drawn: a much fairer fight than Paddock had any desire for.

He decides his only option is to proceed with his killing spree, a bit ahead of schedule (he hadn’t yet lined up his shot at his explosive-laden car), and hope for the best. He breaks the window, grabs his sniper rifle, and takes a couple shots at the jet fuel tanks.

Nothing happens.

The clock is still ticking! Worse, Paddock sees that some of the crowd is already responding to the rifle shots, and has started fleeing. Paddock briefly considers his options. He considers that his “create mayhem” step, an important but not crucial part of the plan, may need to be abandoned. The jet fuel explosion seems to be a bust, and it could take at least 5-10 minutes to find and shoot his explosive-laden car (giving the crowd even more warning and time to disperse).

Paddock makes his choice. He grabs another automatic, aims at the center of the crowd, and pulls the trigger.

The guard, meanwhile, remains “dead”. He hears a couple sharp reports of another gun… then silence… then a long, loud burst of automatic gunfire. As that burst ends, the guard realizes that this new gunfire is muffled: “My killer may still be shooting, but he’s no longer shooting at me”.

Hoping the killer remains distracted, the guard quickly resumes his painful crawl to the safety of the stairwell at the end of the hallway, where he can (finally) radio in for help.

MGM puts guard Jesus Campos exclusively on “Ellen” with instruction he not be asked about timeline.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4996918/Hotel-insisted-Jesus-Campos-appear-Ellen-fearing-lawsuites.html

Multiple shooters? What don’t people understand about the damage one shooter can do to a crowd from an elevated firing position with a dozen semi-automatic rifles equipped with bump-fire devices and high-capacity magazines?

We’ll either effectively address the availability of the accessories that make such a thing easy, or see it repeated.

@Greg: We need the issue of dim-witted liberals being instigated to violence addressed even more. Instead of continuing to ramp up the hatred and violence, the left, which of course includes the liberal media, could do a lot to tone down the rhetoric. But they don’t; they simply keep supporting it.

It doesn’t really matter what motivates such a person, does it? His specific motives didn’t kill people. His homicidal intention and his accessorized firearms did that. The collection he put together should have been a red flag.

Would this be an example of a “dim-witted liberal being instigated to violence?”

White nationalist shot at protesters after Richard Spencer speech in Florida, police say

Maybe you think the protesters had it coming, for annoying some fascist jackass who only came to town to cause trouble?

@Greg: The peaceful protestors smashed out the back window of his vehicle with a baton occasionally scuffling with some white nationalists who walked through the crowd.. No one was shot and it sounded like close range as an argument had ensued. Sounds like a warning shot, also sounds like he was chased from the event. Now what shall we do if these Violent Antifa attack with deadly weapons, yes a baton is a deadly weapon. The warning shot gave him and his friends time to reenter the vehicle and leave without further incident.

@Greg:

It doesn’t really matter what motivates such a person, does it?

Are you f**king crazy? The MOTIVATION is everything! NO rifle, no pistol, no machete, no ax, no baseball bat ever sought out and killed anyone. It is always a human being MOTIVATED by some impulse. The motivations that cultivate in the diseased mind is unpredictable and unstoppable, but the motivation that is PROVIDED by your sick, liberal media and your liberal representatives is most certainly avoidable. All they need to do is act like civilized AMERICANS and stop inciting and promoting violence against others simply because they lost an election and disagree with the party in power.

Good Lord, are you deaf, dumb and blind?

Would this be an example of a “dim-witted liberal being instigated to violence?”

No, but it is exactly what I am talking about.

Three supporters of the prominent white nationalist Richard Spencer have been charged with attempted murder after police said one of the men, egged on by his friends, shot at protesters “with the intent to kill” following Spencer’s speech at the University of Florida on Thursday.

Except, in my example, the violence is egged on by Democrat politicians, Hollywood liberals and the liberal media. Kind of see the issue? Maybe? Just a little? You will see far less violence provoked by three rednecks than by liberal politicians, Hollywood air-heads and leftist pontificators on national television broadcasting their calls to violence. If you don’t believe me, ask Steve Scalise.

Now, we have not yet learned Paddock’s motivation. However, and this is my personal speculation, if he was motivated by anything right or far right, we would be well aware of it. Therefore, if he had a political motive, I am guessing it is related to the demonizing of conservatives and the calls for punishing, harming or killing those who MAY be guilty of supporting Trump.

@Deplorable Me, #13:

Are you f**king crazy? The MOTIVATION is everything! NO rifle, no pistol, no machete, no ax, no baseball bat ever sought out and killed anyone.

I don’t think he would have killed 58 people and wounded over 500 from a 32nd floor window at a range of over 1000 feet with a pistol, machete, ax, or baseball bat. Or without multiple firearms equipped with bump-fire devices.

You’re putting forward the same tired old bullshit about guns not killing people. It never made sense to begin with. A baseball bat is not a tool that facilitates mass murder. Nor do homicidal intentions alone make it possible.

Therefore, if he had a political motive, I am guessing it is related to the demonizing of conservatives and the calls for punishing, harming or killing those who MAY be guilty of supporting Trump.

There are indications that he may have wanted to target the Life is Beautiful music festival or Lollapalooza, which aren’t what anyone would consider to be assemblies of conservatives or Trump supporters, but those opportunities might have fallen through because he couldn’t book the optimal firing positions he wanted. There’s no reason to think his motives were political.

All that can be assumed is that he was intent on mass murder. He gathered the equipment needed to do that, calculated his distances and trajectories, and cut loose working through a dozen bump-fire equipped rifles. One wouldn’t have sufficed, as it would have overheated and malfunctioned.

Is there any legitimate reason someone needs 12, let alone one?

We’ll do nothing, and then there will be a similar terrorist attack on another music crowd or open-air sport stadium. Because it’s easy. Terrorists might opt for a nationally televised event.

There’s no good reason for the sale of high capacity magazines and bump-fire accessories. They’re a needless public hazard.

@Greg:

I don’t think he would have killed 58 people and wounded over 500 from a 32nd floor window at a range of over 1000 feet with a pistol, machete, ax, or baseball bat.

He could have killed more with a truck plowing through a crowd. In case you missed it, it’s been done. They had firearms as a secondary means of massacre.

You’re putting forward the same tired old bullshit about guns not killing people.

You provide me with one single example where a gun, on its on volition, killed anyone and I will agree to your “bullshit” call.

Is there any legitimate reason someone needs 12, let alone one?

One. They wanted them. Is there any legitimate reason anyone needs a 200 HP car? 300 HP car? Does anyone need a 10,000 SF home? How about a 40,000 SF home? Does anyone need 5 pairs of shoes? More than one suit?

There’s no good reason for the sale of high capacity magazines and bump-fire accessories. They’re a needless public hazard.

Are you going to hold Obama responsible for allowing the bump-fire stocks to be made legal again? They were illegal… legalized under Obama. Or, like guns opening fire all by themselves and killing innocent people, did those bump-fire stocks just legalize themselves?

@Deplorable Me, #15:

He could have killed more with a truck plowing through a crowd. In case you missed it, it’s been done. They had firearms as a secondary means of massacre.

Trucks are an unavoidable potential hazard, because they’re an essential part of everyday modern life. You can’t the same for high capacity magazines and bump-fire accessories. They have NO legitimate purpose that isn’t overwhelmingly outweighed by the serious hazard they demonstrably represent.

Most people understand that. Over 8 out of ten, in fact, favor banning bump-fire accessories. It’s an understanding that doesn’t fall only on one side of a partisan line. People have seen what can happen, and it’s easy to imagine far worse. Far worse is almost predictable.

You could argue that anything that’s a serious hazard to public safety should be entirely legal, owing to the fact that there’s always some other thing that could be used to inflict a similar level of harm. Clearly there a problem with the logic, because there are obviously some completely unnecessary hazards that simply shouldn’t be allowed to persist.

@Greg:

Trucks are an unavoidable potential hazard, because they’re an essential part of everyday modern life. You can’t the same for high capacity magazines and bump-fire accessories.

Your theory is that without “large capacity” magazines or bump-fire stocks, killers would simply give up. What I proved to you is that innumerable common objects or machines can be weaponized. Your theory further contends that there is nothing that can be done about using items with utility as weapons, but there is no utility to semi-automatic weapons.

There is utility; they make excellent self defense and home defense weapons. That someone somewhere decides someone else somewhere doesn’t “need” one is not only pointless and immaterial but stupid. There are, as I showed, innumerable things that are not “needed” that we are able to have because we want them. Notably, in the wrong hands, many of those items can also be quite deadly.

Most people understand that. Over 8 out of ten, in fact, favor banning bump-fire accessories.

They were banned. Tell me who is responsible for the ban being lifted. Tell me, Greg.

Sadly, you liberals are your own worst enemies. You have proven that “sensible” gun control will not satisfy you. No matter what is enacted, since you cannot control the mind of the killer, they inevitably fail, for it is not the gun, but the killer that kills. However, whenever your last gun control measure fails, you use that as an excuse to demand further restrictions, and the restriction always are inapplicable to the problem at hand.

The “give you an inch and you take a mile” rule applies. The left, as with so many other issues, can no longer be trusted. THAT’S why something sensible like banning bump-stocks is opposed. It will inevitably be in a bill that includes poison pills which will ensure it is voted down by 2nd Amendment defenders and the left will use it as another weapon.

But, again, WHO is the person in charge that is now responsible for the ban being lifted? If a ban is not reinstated, WHO is responsible for creating this issue? I, an avid hunter, owner of an AR-15, several pistols, rifles and shot guns, had never heard of bump-stocks until Paddock used one. Now they have national prominence and advertising. If I could afford one and the ammunition I would burn through, I would love to have one… they look like fun. I doubt I am the only one; probably one of hundreds of thousands, and many of them are scarfing these things up before they are banned… again. Upon whom does this exposure fall upon?

Say the words, Greg. It’s always the same. It’s always a liberal making the situation worse.

There is utility; they make excellent self defense and home defense weapons.

Yeah, sure they do. Especially if you live in a densely populated trailer park or apartment complex.

Here’s an idiot who’s going to lose some fingers or part of his face. It’s the sort of b.s. that makes the responsible owners of firearms cringe. He’s got a legal firearm that shouldn’t be, equipped with a high-capacity magazine that he shouldn’t have—and you shouldn’t really need to ask why, because it ought to be totally obvious.

@Greg: It isnt hard to find darwinism on youtube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpcG_QKv-mk

@Greg:

Yeah, sure they do. Especially if you live in a densely populated trailer park or apartment complex.

You DO understand what thieves steal, right? Do they rob trailer parks (by the way, quite a bigoted, prejudiced response on your part, but who is surprised?) or an affluent neighborhood? No wonder liberals have no idea why guns are needed.

A left wing twit’s experience shooting an AR-15
http://defund.com/ny-daily-news-writer-got-temporary-ptsd-from-shooting-an-ar-15/?utm_source=fnot2&utm_medium=facebook

Piers Morgan doesn’t believe we should have AR’s but he needs them

Irony Piers Morgan’s Security Detail Has AR-15s He Doesn’t Want You To Have

IRS training with AR-15’s
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/jeff-duncan-irs-rifle-training-92662.html?hp=f2

Homeland Security declares AR-15 a good personal defense weapon
http://www.examiner.com/article/homeland-security-seeking-to-purchase-7-000-assault-rifles

AR-15 used for hunting
http://www.alloutdoor.com/2013/06/12/hunting-ar-15/

But, again, WHO is the person in charge that is now responsible for the ban being lifted? If a ban is not reinstated, WHO is responsible for creating this issue?

Are you going AJ on me? Can you not bring yourself to answer the question?