Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
Iamwhomiam » 10 Oct 2017 00:02 wrote:Thank you for your insight, Willow. stickdog's ridiculous questioning frustrates me no end, because it has no relevancy whatsoever. This is indeed a unique mass murder in all its aspects, and just as with many who do these shootings who wind up dead - their true motive is known only to them. Some shootings have clues, breadcrumbs to follow while others do not.
stickdog, another reason your question about finding another similarity to this shooting is ridiculous: How many of the other mass shootings would have killed more or wanted to, who don't pass the 4-murder mass murder limit? Certainly the fellow did who killed my kid, along with five others before killing himself. He shopped around for months before, looking for 'the perfect venue' and would have been able to take-out at least as many at the rave as Paddock is alleged to have killed, armed as he was wearing two bandoliers of bullets with an AR-15 with 3 - 30 round clips taped to its stock and another loaded into the receiver, a .40 Cal Ruger semi-automatic pistol, and a pistol-grip 12 Ga semi-automatic shotgun, but he was deferred more by the number of well armed security hired by the well run community center hosting the dance/rave then the local police headquarters just across the street and down on the corner.
Lastly, really! In that you claim ignorance of a Muslim rebel organization operating in the Philippines makes me believe you haven't been reading the comments in the thread. Back on page 9 I mention possible involvement of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. (It was only funny because I said it before AJ, but he rarely disappoints. He finally got there!)
I also provided you with other possible motives - he's sympathetic to Bundy and pissed off at his treatment by our government. These two possible motives you didn't even recognize were raised when asking for other possible motives and old wealthy guy goes on a standing killing spree before killing himself. While some want to see the hotel hallway videos and I want to see Paddock's.
And with your undying pursuit of repeated asking the same question, well, I've just gotta ask you and this I do most politely - stickdog, are you a bot?
OP ED » Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:31 pm wrote:Sidenote two. Some of what I skipped was whatever derailing led to discussion on pornography. I know of a couple companies in California, (one of them is run by my wife's friends) that do [communist] pornography that while certainly objectifying, is significantly less exploitive because everything is owned collectively and participating isn't mandatory. Basically commie swingers who film some of the encounters and use the money to support the commune/revolution. This is about as close as you can get to ethical objectification that I know of.
stickdog99 » Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:29 am wrote:The "crazy" thing abut this is that the police can come out 8 days after the fact and completely change their story while opening up a whole huge set of totally obvious new questions such as:
[b]Why didn't Campos contact the police or at least his hotel security coworkers at 9:59 to tell them he had been shot?
If he did so, then why wasn't this information reported on any police scanner?
Did the supposed 200 rounds shot at Campos also happen at 9:59?
How could this occur without other hotel residents hearing the shots and calling 911 or at least the front desk?
Why weren't any of the 17 armed hotel security guards immediately dispatched to investigate?
Why was it a complete surprise to the cops when they found an injured Campos on that floor some 13 minutes after he was shot?
What didn't the hotel security cameras catch Paddock drilling expensive hotel property?
Why didn't other guests report any of this drilling or shooting to the front desk or the police?
In my estimation, you have some sort of vested interest in believing that Paddock did this regardless of the evidence presented. That is totally understandable considering what happened to your child. So please just consider my role here as that of the very Devil's advocate. My perspective is that Paddock is a patsy until we are presented some sort of physical evidence of his guilt or at least some sort of evidence for a motive that is not the product of a quantum vacuum. I don't believe that Paddock did this because our "authorities" have not yet provided any reason whatsoever for me to believe Paddock did this other than their say so, and we all know exactly what that is worth.
stickdog99
In my estimation, you have some sort of vested interest in believing that Paddock did this regardless of the evidence presented.
In my estimation, you have some sort of vested interest in believing that Paddock did this regardless of the evidence presented. That is totally understandable considering what happened to your child.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_suppressor
A flash suppressor, also known as a flash guard, flash eliminator, flash hider, or flash cone, is a device attached to the muzzle of a rifle that reduces its visible signature while firing by cooling or dispersing the burning gases that exit the muzzle, a phenomenon typical of carbine-length weapons. Its primary intent is to reduce the chances that the shooter will be blinded in low-light shooting conditions. Contrary to popular belief, it is only a minor secondary benefit if a flash suppressor reduces the intensity of the flash visible to the enemy.[1]
Military flash suppressors are designed to reduce the muzzle flash from the weapon to preserve the shooter's night vision, usually by diverting the incandescent gases to the sides, away from the line of sight of the shooter, and to secondarily reduce the flash visible to the enemy. Military forces engaging in night combat are still visible when firing, especially with night vision gear, and must move quickly after firing to avoid receiving return fire.
Limiting the amount of powder to what the length of a barrel can burn is one possible solution, but differences between individual cartridges mean that some cartridges will always have too much powder to be completely consumed, and the reduced powder load produces a lower projectile velocity. Muzzle flash can be controlled by using cartridges with a faster-burning propellant, so that the propellant gases will already have begun to cool by the time they exit the barrel, reducing flash intensities. Faster-burning powders, however, produce less projectile velocity, which reduces the accuracy due to introducing a more parabolic bullet flight path in place of a "flat" trajectory while also reducing lethality of the weapon by reducing the energy delivered on target.
Flash suppressors reduce, or in some cases eliminate, the flash by rapidly cooling the gases as they leave the end of the barrel. Although the overall amount of burning propellant is unchanged, the density and temperature are greatly reduced, as is the brightness of the flash.
DrEvil » 10 Oct 2017 02:41 wrote:And I still don't get your obsession with him being a millionaire. To be blunt: so fucking what? He was rich, good for him, but it's completely irrelevant. Rich people are people too (no, seriously), with messy human brains that can go fatally wrong in all kinds of fucked up and disturbing ways. Being a millionaire isn't some kind of guarantee that someone will never go completely ape-shit and kill a bunch of people. The only thing it guarantees is that they will have access to better hardware.
Iamwhomiam » 10 Oct 2017 03:34 wrote:In my estimation, you have some sort of vested interest in believing that Paddock did this regardless of the evidence presented. That is totally understandable considering what happened to your child. So please just consider my role here as that of the very Devil's advocate. My perspective is that Paddock is a patsy until we are presented some sort of physical evidence of his guilt or at least some sort of evidence for a motive that is not the product of a quantum vacuum. I don't believe that Paddock did this because our "authorities" have not yet provided any reason whatsoever for me to believe Paddock did this other than their say so, and we all know exactly what that is worth.
stickdog99
stickdog, I don't know if you're just trying to piss me off asking that same damned stupid question or if you still seriously want it answered. Because if you seriously want it answered, clearly, you're not reading my comments.
This mass murder is unique - never has there ever before been such an event with such loss or one using automatic gunfire. Never before has such a crime been committed by anyone of any age or income bracket, and never before has any mass murder been carried out from the 33rd floor of any building of any sort, anywhere, by a shooter of any age. Never before has a suspected or alleged mass murderer had so many weapons found with them.
So asking for another common event is unreasonable as well as unproductive.
(I couldn't help to notice you still have not recognized the various alternative motives I've offered you, which certainly must be as valid as your claiming Paddock's a patsy, you know, because I said they are.)
Hell, I don't even know if a Paddock really exists! But you already know he's a patsy. What possible evidence do you have indicating Paddock to be a patsy?
Project Willow » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:09 pm wrote:I wasn't going to post this, but I've changed my mind. Obviously I am not a criminologist, but in order to understand better the minds of the people who tortured me when I was kid, I've read a number of texts proposing theories on the causes of violence. These range from feminist analysis, cultural and biological anthropology texts, to those containing extensive interviews with abusers and murderers and describing the process of their psychological treatment.
Violence is a form of communication. The internal process of a violent man goes something like this, he perceives he, or "his people", have been brought down, infringed upon, his status or power challenged in a way that has "gone too far", so he asserts himself to rectify the balance, reclaim his Self and/or manhood. Even though it may appear senseless to us, violence makes sense to him, as a form of self or community defense, especially if other ways of coping and mitigating are limited or cut off, due to socialization, psychological weakness, beliefs, and other factors. It may be helpful to remember that throughout our evolutionary history, to be outcast from the community meant certain death, and that is why perceived status is directly linked to fear on a life threatening level.
Violence is a tool of control. Men use violence and threats of violence to keep their partners and families in a place of subservience. While many abusers claim they "lose control" when they assault, analysis of their acts shows they are entirely aware of what they're doing. Rates of violence among the mentally ill are no higher than those among the general populace. Mentally ill people tend towards self injury more than outward violence. People don't "snap", it is more like a gradual boil, a series of perceived injuries that build to a point where the man believes he cannot preserve his Self or status without violent redress. There is almost always a pattern of using violence as a means to an end before a major event, or a record of violent fantasy.
Given this understanding of violence, wealth is definitely a factor in profiling Paddock because with wealth comes status, power and control. Did Paddock hate the very system that he milked to make himself and his family rich? Lots of wealthy people are abusive to their wives and kids, for the same reasons I outlined above. Paddock is also a loner, while he certainly has social contacts, family and his girlfriend, he did not target these people. So whom or what does he perceive it was that brought him down? What is the source of his resentment? What is his injury? He targeted strangers. If he had a severe, psychotic break, how did he manage to conceal this break and to remain functional enough to plan out the shooting? If he were a straight up sociopath who enjoyed hurting people, there'd be some hint of past incidents. Sociopaths on that level want to savor the suffering, to make it last, to enshrine it in ritual. He doesn't fit the profile of a hitman either.
The profile is just a big void at this point. Trying to fill that void with "it's possible" makes nonsense of everything I thought I knew about violence.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 164 guests