rigorousintuition.ca

Check out this slip up by the Sheriff at a press conference from three days ago:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JyeqqIV5bk&t=11m30s

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.

Can you name a single millionaire other than Paddock who ever shot any number of complete strangers in a premeditated fashion and then killed himself (or herself)? Can you recall a single news report of this ever happening before in the history of the world?

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?

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.

No commentary from anyone here on today's radical, bizarre, and completely unexplained change in law enforcement timeline?

Or is discussing obvious law enforcement and corporate media mendacity just not as much as fun as filling the explanatory void of Paddock's totally senseless and complete unprecedented actions with completely speculative putative motives and psychoanalyses?

Signed,

Your favorite stickbot (botting for patsies since 9/11/2001)

Dog isn't a bot. He joined in here long before that tech was sophisticated enough to fake paranoia.

I'm definitely a bot though. Elon Musk sent me.

...

My thoughts aren't fully formed around all this yet, still reading.

Also, hi everyone. Nice to see you still doing your thing.

A few notions.

I don't know what was on police scan because I don't have one and the details would be difficult to verify. However if he was well equipped to fight the police it may have been assumed that he would have a scanner himself. I heard years ago about the arrest of McVeigh that the scanner was left silent for this reason. But that was so long ago that I don't even remember where I read it.

Hotel Guests can generally be assumed to have been oblivious from intoxication or busy gambling.

(Also nice hotels tend to be somewhat sound proofed)

In addition to whatever else weird, I assume it's safe to imagine a complete breakdown with both hotel security and police. My personal experiences lead me to believe that the police will avoid danger before confronting it more often than not. They would've waited for more cops and fudged excuses. (which is better than my neighborhood where they might not come at all)
....

Sidenote one. Reading this was depressing and tedious so I skipped about half of it. If I say something already addressed please forgive.

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.

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.

Yeah, I also knew some people who worked on Bernies campaign. Communist pornography, oh yeah baby.

Assuming that we can believe the latest and greatest timeline, we are supposed to believe that a security guard named Campos got shot at 200 times by Paddock whom caught drilling hotel property. Then Campos got away safely six minutes before Paddock started shooting up the crown at 160 decibels.

However, when the first two cops finally arrive on the floor 18 minutes later and a full 12 minutes into Paddock's unleashing thousands of crowd below, they are surprised to find Campos and Campos alone there shot once but still healthy enough to help them evacuate hotel guests for another hour.

Come on. Wouldn't Campos at least have called his own boss to mention that he was shot at 200 times and hit once by some old dude he caught destroying hotel property, breaking out his room windows and shooting at a crowd below? Wouldn't Mandalay Bay's own armed security have then responded immediately, if only to limit future lawsuit liability?

How could the police have arrived 18 minutes later to find Campos and Campos alone as the only hotel security presence on that floor?

And what about all the other guests on the floor as well as the floors above and below? Are we to believe that not one of them heard all that 160 decibel gunfire and then notified the front desk and and/or the police about it?

Stickdog - I don't know about the specific alleged changes in the official story today, but would be happy to consider them if you wish to re-cap which you deem relevant.

To respond generally to some of your comments, whether or not it applies to this case, one legitimate reason for official stories to change is to incorporate new information and new evidence, or to re-evaluate it as the information is dissected. Just as you are doing throughout this thread.

Speaking of which - it would be nice if you would make notes on your edits if you're going to make as many of them as you seem to be doing.

Also, wouldn't repeatedly asking unanswerable rhetorical questions be a poor strategy for divining truth or engaging in productive discussion? Are we to believe that any response we give other than tacit agreement will be met with anything but derision? Isn't that technique the last bastion of rhetorical scoundrels and sophists?


...

Like I said before I don't have any answers, and I do smell funny things -- but I fail to see how reasonable analysis or discussion can take place with people who form conclusions first and then search for supporting evidence, rather than the other way around.

Meanwhile:


Reminder: Declassified JFK assassination records October 26, 2017. There was a fire at the JFK Library right after the Boston marathon bombing where those records are kept.

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/com ... n_records/

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:

Why didn't Campos contact the police or at least his hotel security coworkers at 9:59 to tell them he had been shot?

Do we know that he didn't?

If he did so, then why wasn't this information reported on any police scanner?

Again, do we know that it wasn't? We've only heard bits and pieces from after the shooting started.

Did the supposed 200 rounds shot at Campos also happen at 9:59?

Wild guess: Campos wasn't dumb enough to go back for seconds after getting shot the first time, so yes.

How could this occur without other hotel residents hearing the shots and calling 911 or at least the front desk?

And again: do we know that they didn't?

Why weren't any of the 17 armed hotel security guards immediately dispatched to investigate?

My guess:
Campos: Some crazy fucker just unloaded several clips at me with an assault rifle!
Security guards: Umm... wait for SWAT? **vigorous nodding all around**

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?

We don't know what information they had going up there. Could have been "we have a report of a shooter at location X", without any details about where that report came from, or they could just have been surprised that Campos was still there after being shot.

What didn't the hotel security cameras catch Paddock drilling expensive hotel property?

Pretty sure there aren't cameras inside the rooms (OK, there probably is, at least in luxury hotels, but not legally. What better way to get blackmail material than to record the rich and famous sniffing coke off a hooker's ass?).

Why didn't other guests report any of this drilling or shooting to the front desk or the police?

And once more: do we know that they didn't?


What you're really asking is "why hasn't X been reported", not "why didn't X happen".

As you yourself have said, the press is doing a piss poor job of asking questions. There's probably all kinds of details that haven't been reported either because no one asked, or because the cops aren't telling.

As a side note: Nothing is stopping you from being a freelance investigator and emailing or calling the various people, businesses and authorities involved and asking your own questions. You might even get a few answers.

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.

The ed opperman video is worth a listen. I can believe that what happened or did not, at caesars and bellagio etc...could be due to the open carry survivors/swat teams/police, instead of people in on it, if shots were fired at all. At the mandalay bay and surrounding areas like tropicana, the overlapping bursts of gunfire in videos and eyewitnesses like Gio Rios, imo, point to the possibility of more than one shooter. I'm not so sure that we should rule out eyewitness testimony altogether. Rio states that he clearly heard and saw other shooters with his own eyes (including muzzle fire), including what he believes was a shady man with a suitcase. All near Mandalay, Tropicana, and NYNY/Excalibur. He just posted a video going into detail, as well as Q&A: https://www.facebook.com/GioRios
Could these shooters be open carry civilians, or over zealous cops shooting?? These shootings seemed to more brief. Gio seems pretty legit to me, despite some of his hypothesizing. The police scanners that day talk about an active shooter at NYNY/Excalibur that day

Also, the police scanner audio of that evening supports him:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xAcTKNpDeY

00:56 – Shots coming from half way up
1:12 – Active shooter INSIDE the fairground
3:44 – Shots coming FROM Gate 7
5:38 – Shots from middle of casino, west tower, towards the center, middle floors
6:59 – flashing 1/3 of the way up
9:02 – about 15th floor
14:47 – Civilian witnesses saying possible 3 shooters
14:54 – Multiple witnesses saying multiple people shot or were shooting
16:26 – White car going the wrong way towards Mandalay Bay
17:39 – Security reports shots fired on floors 29 and 32
18:30 – Security guard shot on 32nd floor
18:51 – Blockade established on 32nd floor, will need the 29th floor, “CONFIRMED there are at least 2 shooters with fully automatic weapons”
19:20 – Get cameras (cctv?) to see the 29th and 32nd floor
27:08 – On the 29th floor with a 4 man element
34:02-34:50 – Older white man with fatigues and a black bag went into motor home on Tropicana, witnesses say he came from shooting area
35:13 – Civilian stole patrol car at Giles, need medical
35:33 – One WMA (White Male Adult), Man in fatigues in white RV
36:17 – Giles and Alibaba, several, several casualties

37:03 – We believe it’s the northern most room on 32nd floor, unknown on the 29th
37:26 – Putting a shotgun on the suspect in the RV, by Motel 6 behind a Clark County Fire engine
38:30 – CONFIRMED - Giles and Alibaba, casualties, East of the Catholic Shrine (not in the line of fire from Mandalay) “SO WE HAVE 2 SCENES!”
40:35 – Set up North of the Motel 6, NW area
40:52 – We have several 419s on the main stage.
41:04 – Need more units at Reno and Tropicana, we might have a possible
41:50 – Be advised, there is a subject on the heli-pad
43:10 – Just FYI, we are posted on Cobalt, just North of the target RV at Tropicana
43:49 – Moving in on a possible, right on the side of Motel 6, there’s 3 of us out here
45:05 – “CONFIRMING, the Mandalay Bay and Alibaba/Giles are the 2 shooting locations!” “Do we have a 3rd?”
57:33 – Report of possible shots fired inside NY NY
58:56 – Shooter at the front desk of NY NY, and everyone is in the kitchen
59:23 – Vehicle, black Audi, at the Luxor valet, possibly 445 (bomb), wires sticking out
59:50 – Witnesses saying there is someone at the NY NY
1:00:58 – They are advising the active shooter is coming down the escalator from NY NY to Excaliber
1:04:04 – Asking for confirmation “Do we have a 415a (assault with a gun) at NY NY?!”
1:04:14 – “It originally came in saying many subjects were down… there’s one that came in at 23:06 hours saying there’s a shooter at the front desk at NY NY… and there’s approximately 150 subjects sheltered in place inside the kitchen area there, and 2 shots were fired inside casino floor. And there is several subjects down at NY NY / Zumaniti.”
1:05:13 – “Send, if there’s not already 2 strike teams in route, send 2 strike teams in route, they need to advise their call signs, and we need an update as soon as they get there.”
1:06:24 – “Ok, whoever is responding to NY NY through control side, I need someone to get in and see if this is a diversion”
1:06:54 – “Ok, now I’m getting information about an active shooter at Tropicana”
1:07:12 – “Be advised there is an active shooter at the Tropicana”
1:07:19 – “Be advised, we are getting multiple calls of active shooters at multiple locations. May or may not be diversions”
1:09:23 – “at Tropicana, they are advising there is was a Hispanic male, dark skin with an afro, unknown clothing with a backpack, said he squatted in a driveway at Hooters and looks like a suspect.”
1:10:47 – Explosive breach conversation before entering main suspects room
1:11:21 – “Breach, breach, breach!”
1:12:05 – Shots reported fired in park area of NY NY, and also Aria. Immediately dispelled for NY NY. Clearly a diversion.
1:13:15 – “We’re sending 2 teams into Excalibur right now based on that earlier detail.”
1:13:22 – On Boulevard and Tropicana, “Be advised, you got a Jeep coming up that way, going through the roadblock of cones, headed E bound on Tropicana at the Boulevard…”
1:13:51 – “I got medics reporting that they’re getting shot at, at the Tropicana!” “We have a strike team available, send them to the Tropicana”
1:14:33 – “We need the air clear for Zebra-20, they have one suspect down inside the room”
1:15:20 – Reporting negative shots fired from inside the Tropicana. (another diversion)
1:15:55 – 1:16:26 - Confirmation of main shooter down by Zebra-20 (SWAT)
1:19:33 – Reports of shots fired at Cesar’s and Bellaggio
1:20:22 – Zebra-20 asking no more people on floor 32. One officer shot “that did fire”.
1:21:21 – “We have reports of a guy with a gun here!” “75 Victor what’s your location” “At the Paris”…
1:21:41 – “Is that reported or confirmed?” “We have people running (a phone call wouldn’t do that), we have security trying to point out where the gunman is, and we can’t find him!”
END OF RECORDING


Paddock's father sounds suspicious/spooky based on how lenient the feds treated him. Paddock himself seems to have led a lifestyle that someone connected to that world would lead.

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 certainly have not seen any evidence whatsoever convincing he is a patsy.

In my estimation, you have some sort of vested interest in believing that Paddock did this regardless of the evidence presented.

Shear projection on your part. It is all but immaterial as to who the shooter is, the tragedy's done and there's no changing that. Whatever its purpose, a great many are changed forever and now know the pain of sudden trauma and loss.

But gun stocks are healthier than ever and sliding stocks are back-ordered in anticipation of the sure to come ban.

Insofar as being presented with evidence - please get real. If you consider whatever you're finding online as evidence, well, I'm glad you're no a lawyer.

Seriously, stickdog, you want to believe he's a patsy - that's just fine with me. But please don't then feed us "official" police recordings, cause one would think those concocting this great conspiracy might already have that covered, feeding you whatever they feel.

(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?

Your first sentence I've addressed but in the quote below include it again for context but your next sentence is a doozy:

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.

WTF? You need to better explain yourself. What possible vested interest could I derive from this mass murder aside my empathy for survivors and the pain I know they feel, that you can only imagine? Please expound on your projection.

The reason I went into detail about my son's murder was only to demonstrate to you that other mass murderers sought to kill more, many more than they did, and nothing more should be read into it or projected imaginarily upon me, especially not to attach me emotionally to any supposed mass murderer I do not even know exists. Really, dude, wtf?

So, you get to play "devil's advocate" proclaiming Paddock patsy and I'm the guy with the "vested interest" because I have no idea what the truth is or whether a Paddock even exists and because my kid was killed in a mass murder 12 years ago.

Stickdog — thank you for bringing all the data, stating your case so stickdoggedly, and holding the communal feet to the fire, as it were. I don't think the "millionaire" thing is relevant, much, and today I'm inclined to think Paddock did what he "appears" to have done. At the same time I must remember that JFK's killers created an ideal legend for Oswald as the "obvious" lone shooter, and this is not out of the question here. Nagging questions and shifting information leave plenty of doubt.


Mac — didn't you read your Anteefuh ops manual? Smart snipers stand back from the window; muzzle flash is only seen from directly downrange, more or less. That could explain why the kid below the hotel points his phone cam to the upper floors and says "it's coming from up there!" but no muzzle flashes seem to be visible.

Also, maybe the shooter(s) used flash suppressors:

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]

Also, muzzle flash is greater on short-barreled rifles, and the guns seen in the hotel room photos have quite long barrels (not "AR-15s" which keep being mentioned in the press; I think it's the only semiautomatic rifle CNN and NPR correspondents know the name of, so they like to say it).

And fwiw, other means of reducing flash:

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.

One random note: the LV hotel exec in a video above told Chris Wallace that they never saw Paddock or his girlfriend buy an alcoholic beverage. (That seems notable in LV, and maybe they drank in their rooms?)

While the exec is likely truthful about that, many people who knew Paddock, including random folks like bartenders, have called Paddock a "heavy drinker" (I'll have to get the link to the "profile" article, LA TImes maybe?); because the remarks come from ordinary and disparate people, I'm inclined to believe them. Whether that counts as a 'strike' against Paddock's "happiness" or mental health, or is irrelevant, I'm not sure.


Now. Whatever we each may hold certain, or however we may lean toward one interpretation over another, we should all be willing to consider the available evidence fairly and not condemn anyone for holding a view different from our own. Thanks, everyone here who's contributed to solving the mysteries. Hopefully more information is forthcoming. Intuition counts.

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.

Then surely you should be able to name a single millionaire other than Paddock who ever shot any number of complete strangers in a premeditated fashion and then killed himself (or herself). So who dunnit?

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.

Is criminal profiling not considered the "third wave" of investigative science? Are you actually saying that profiling criminals is useless because each one lives in a different house on a different street?

(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.)

Because I think inventing fake motives such as THE MUSLIMS DID IT (tm) and WE PAID A HOOKER TO SAY HE WANTED TO OUTBAD HIS DADDY (tm) out of thin air is beneath this forum. I would expect such drivel from an Inside Edition forum. I am interested in whether I am being lied to (yet again) by my own government concerning who perpetrated this event. We can invent putative motives for mass murder out of thin air for you, for me, and for everyone else on this thread. That doesn't make any of us mass murderers. Your speculative motives have no bearing on anything. That you continue reiterating them as if they were meaningful in any way is what leads me to believe that you have a vested interest in believing Paddock is guilty.

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?

If he does not exist, is he not still a patsy? The police are obviously lying. And if Paddock actually did this, they have reams of security camera footage showing him in action. Is it too much to wait for a shred of this evidence to be released before inventing reasons to believe wholly unsupported accusations out of whole cloth?

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.

Thanks Willow. This is very illuminating and well written, thank you for making the effort to post it.