How the Las Vegas mass shooting unfolded

How the Las Vegas mass shooting unfolded

Consigliere

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2010
Posts
12,690
Reaction score
26,567
The gunman who police said sprayed bullets into a crowd of people at a country music festival in Las Vegas was an avid gambler who lived in an upscale retirement community about 80 miles outside the city.

Stephen Craig Paddock, 64, opened fire from his hotel room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino around 10:15 p.m. on Sunday, during a performance by Jason Aldean at the Route 91 Harvest Festival, authorities said. At least 59 people were killed, making it the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history. Over 500 others were injured.

A SWAT team blew open the entry to Paddock’s hotel room with an explosive and found him dead, police said. The hotel was across the street from the outdoor venue. Paddock had been registered as a guest there since Sept. 28.

Authorities found 23 weapons in the room, including assault-style rifles and some arms that may have been modified in an attempt to convert them into machine guns, Reuters reported. The cache included AR-15-style and AK-47-style rifles and a large amount of ammunition.

Another 19 firearms, some explosives and thousands of rounds of ammunition were found at Paddock’s home in Mesquite, Nevada, totaling 42 weapons in Paddock’s possession, Reuters reported.

Paddock is reported to have smashed hotel windows prior to the shooting with a hammer-like device. A law enforcement official said two rifles with scopes on tripods were found positioned in front of the broken windows.

The violent scenes comes at odds to what Paddock’s family and friends say they knew about him.

Eric Paddock, Stephen Paddock’s brother, told reporters that the alleged shooter was a multimillionaire who invested in real estate and previously worked in accounting. Eric Paddock, who lives in Central Florida, said his brother was retired and described him as “just a guy” who frequented Las Vegas hotels, gambled and attended shows.

We are completely dumbfounded,” he told The Orlando Sentinel. “We can’t understand what happened.”

He added that his brother was never violent and had no history of mental illness. He had “no religious affiliation” and “no political affiliation,” he said.


CBS video

Paddock and his three brothers were raised by a single mother who moved the family around the country to places like Iowa and Arizona, another brother, Patrick Paddock II, told the New York Times. The boys’ father, Benjamin Paddock, was a bank robber who made the FBI’s Most Wanted List after breaking out of prison. Their mother told them their father had died, Patrick Paddock said.

Stephen “was the least violent in the family during my childhood,” he said. “So, it’s kind of like, ‘Who?’

Eric Paddock told reporters that his brother had lived in Viera, north of Melbourne, but left Florida in 2015 in pursuit of better weather and more access to gambling. He said that he spoke to his brother earlier in the month about how their elderly mother was faring in the aftermath of Hurricane Irma.

Stephen Paddock gambled more than $10,000 a day numerous times in recent weeks at Las Vegas casinos, according to NBC News, which cited a casino executive and a source who had seen reports to the government on cash transactions. Some of Paddock’s transactions topped $30,000, NBC said. It was unclear whether Paddock was a winner or loser, according to the network.

Paddock bought his current residence in Mesquite in 2015, according to USA Today. The Sun City Mesquite senior complex features 1,400 homes, an 18-hole golf course, swimming pools and a recreation center. Paddock lived with his girlfriend, Marilou Danley. Law enforcement initially named her as “a person of interest,” but later said she was not believed to have been involved with the attack, and is not currently in the country.

Subscribe to the Lifestyle email

Life hacks and juicy stories to get you through the week.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

A former Florida neighbor said Paddock described himself as a professional gambler and was “very trusting,” the Palm Beach Post reported. Don Judy recalled how Paddock handed him a house key on their first meeting in 2013, asking him to check on his home and welcoming him to use any new equipment inside.

Paddock had also owned rental properties in Southern California and in Texas, the LA Times said.

Paddock owned two airplanes and had a private pilot’s license, according to public records. He no history of criminality that would raise red flags, police said.

“All of the checks that we have been able to do other than a routine traffic violation here in Nevada and nationwide working with our local FBI partners have been able to find no derogatory history on that individual,” Undersheriff Kevin McMahill said. “It’s one of those really sad, tragic things that a man that’s 64 years old that really had no other reason that we can find at least in his history here to go out and wound that many people.”

Paddock had twice been married and divorced, CNN reported, citing court records. His former brother-in-law, Scott Brunoehler, told the LA Times that he “seemed like a normal, good guy.” Brunoehler said Paddock’s marriage to his sister Sharon ended amicably.

Los Angeles Sheriff’s Sgt. Cort Bishop told the Daily Mail that his other ex-wife, Peggy Paddock, “hasn’t had any recent contact with him at all.”

Two Nevada gun stores told NBC News that they had sold firearms to Paddock within the last year, and that he passed all required background checks. It is unclear if those guns were used in the mass shooting Sunday night.

“Mr. Paddock was a customer and purchased firearms from our store; however, all necessary background checks and procedures were followed, as required by local, state, and federal law,” said Christopher Sullivan, the general manager of Guns & Guitars, Inc. “He never gave any indication or reason to believe he was unstable or unfit at any time. We are currently cooperating with the ongoing investigation by local and federal law enforcement in any way we can.”

Authorities said they didn’t know what motivated the shooter.

ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack, but a law enforcement spokesman said in a press conference there is no indication of that.

Eyewitnesses in Vegas said the gunman fired continuous bursts of automatic gunfire onto the crowd, then paused for 10 to 15 seconds and began shooting again.

Mesquite police assisted Vegas cops in securing the suspect’s home and assisting in the search, a Mesquite Police Department spokesman told HuffPost.

Hayley Miller contributed reporting.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

Infos de dernière minute et opinions sur | Le Huffington Post
 
It seems the US authorities have not described the shooter's motive. Why then not name him a terrorist? The gunman would have been quickly labelled a terrorist had him been an Arab or Muslim,
 
It seem the US authorities have not described the shooter's motive. Why then not name him a terrorist? The gunman would have been quickly labelled a terrorist had him been an Arab or Muslim,
Don't you think that naming one a terrorist would need the motive to be known?

Why do you want the authorities to conclude something before their investigation is sufficiently done?

What if he just went stir crazy and wanted to kill people before he killed himself, how is that terrorism?

Do you know what terrorism is?
 
Don't you think that naming one a terrorist would need the motive to be known?

Why do you want the authorities to conclude something before their investigation is sufficiently done?

What if he just went stir crazy and wanted to kill people before he killed himself, how is that terrorism?

Do you know what terrorism is?
Boy! don't say that terrorism must be bound with religious fundamentalism. Despite all definitions they may offer, the terminology terrorism is still founded on the nature of incidences. To me, Terrorism means and includes mass killing for whatever reason.
The Las Vegas gunman must be labelled a terrorist despite of his motives. The US authorities are shy to name their fellow American citizen a terrorist. They fear the venom of their own kind. Shame on them.
 
Boy! don't say that terrorism must be bound with religious fundamentalism. Despite all definitions they may offer, the terminology terrorism is still founded on the nature of incidences. To me, Terrorism means and includes mass killing for whatever reason.
The Las Vegas gunman must be labelled a terrorist despite of his motives. The US authorities are shy to name their fellow American citizen a terrorist. They fear the venom of their own kind. Shame on them.
Terrorism must have the motive of achieving a certain goal by means of terror.

Using terror to gain something external, a political goal, a social goal etc. The goal must be beyond the terror itself. Terror must be the instrument used to gain that goal.

When Carlos The Jackal was hijacking planes and kidnapping oil ministers for the cause of Palestine liberation, that was terrorism.

That is why it is called "terrorism" and not just "terror". The "ism" denotes a whole philosophy of using terror to gain other goals.

Do not confuse "terror" with "terrorism". One can cause terror without being a terrorist.The distinction lays in the motive.

One can take your money without being a thief.

In the case of Carlos The Jackal, you have a motive (liberation of Palestine) and the terror is geared at achieving that motive.

That was terrorism.

An example of a madman killing people en masse just because he is mad and hates humanity is not terrorism. This madman is not using terror to achieve any external goal. This madman would be just satisfying his/her madness and acting in accordance with his madness.

That would be madness, not terrorism.

Therefore, for something to be labelled terrorism, the motive must be known. The authorities must have a very good idea of what the motive is.

Somebody killing 59 people because he lost a lot of money in a bet at Las Vegas is not terrorism, that is just a loser taking out his anger on everybody without using terror as an instrument.

For something to be labelled terrorism, there must be a motive and terror must be used as an instrument to reach that motive.

So the question remain, how could the authorities label this terrorism if the motive is still unknown?
 
How is it unfolding? It has remaineda an old news, what was the motive?
 
IMG_2298.jpg
 
This terrorism thing meiiin!!!
Just because he killed a lot of people, he's a terrorist?!

Mi ney comprendo!
 
Haijalishi ni gaidi au sio gaidi ila cha msingi kukiangali ni madhara ya tukio alilofanya.
 
Terrorism must have the motive of achieving a certain goal by means of terror.

Using terror to gain something external, a political goal, a social goal etc. The goal must be beyond the terror itself. Terror must be the instrument used to gain that goal.

When Carlos The Jackal was hijacking planes and kidnapping oil ministers for the cause of Palestine liberation, that was terrorism.

That is why it is called "terrorism" and not just "terror". The "ism" denotes a whole philosophy of using terror to gain other goals.

Do not confuse "terror" with "terrorism". One can cause terror without being a terrorist.The distinction lays in the motive.

One can take your money without being a thief.

In the case of Carlos The Jackal, you have a motive (liberation of Palestine) and the terror is geared at achieving that motive.

That was terrorism.

An example of a madman killing people en masse just because he is mad and hates humanity is not terrorism. This madman is not using terror to achieve any external goal. This madman would be just satisfying his/her madness and acting in accordance with his madness.

That would be madness, not terrorism.

Therefore, for something to be labelled terrorism, the motive must be known. The authorities must have a very good idea of what the motive is.

Somebody killing 59 people because he lost a lot of money in a bet at Las Vegas is not terrorism, that is just a loser taking out his anger on everybody without using terror as an instrument.

For something to be labelled terrorism, there must be a motive and terror must be used as an instrument to reach that motive.

So the question remain, how could the authorities label this terrorism if the motive is still unknown?
You just killed it man. A couple of months ago we had these thugs killing police and other innocent civilians at Kibiti, we did not name them terrorists or call their acts as terrorism because their motive of killing people was unknown. Likewise authorities in USA can not name this killing of 59 people as terrorism because the motive of the killer is unknown.
 
Back
Top Bottom