Mock

Some details -- like number of victims and the number of minutes from x to y -- change and get tightened up as investigations progress; that happens all the time and is understandable.

But, the changes in the details of the Vegas massacre sequence/timeline are perturbing to me. Sheriff Lombardo and his team had much better means by which to verify timeline and sequence of events than in most other cases. They have a living eyewitness to interview and a crime scene with timed surveillance cameras recording almost every inch of the place. It makes me wonder if the sheriff was pushing a false narrative that favored his team rather than just having some things shake out with time. I sure hope not.

First, the sheriff said Jesus Campos was working with Lombardo's Metro Police officers to locate the shooter, Campos somehow got separated, and Campos got shot a minute before his police officers got to Paddock's room. The sheriff said police took over an hour to breach the room because Paddock wasn't shooting anymore so his team had opportunity to clear the floor of guests and put in protections for themselves before acting.

Then......President Trump visited and gave Sheriff Lombardo and his team all kinds of congratulations and kudos. That night, Sheriff Lombardo was all over the map at the press conference and the FBI Special Agent was elevated in the public eye. I think something shady about the previous narrative came to light between Trump's visit and that night's press conference.

The next day, the under-sheriff clarified that Jesus Campos wasn't working with police but instead doing routine rounds when he was shot. Under-sheriff McMahill said that Campos's interruption and radio call for help is what stopped Paddock's shooting spree and enabled Metro Police to get to the exact room quickly, within 12 minutes.

Now, it turns out............Campos got shot during his routine rounds a full 6 minutes BEFORE Paddock started shooting at the concert crowd. Very regrettable that police didn't show up to help Campos within those 6 minutes; perhaps Paddock would have been thwarted altogether.

Anyway, if the current LE story is correct (and I sure hope it is considering there's been way more than enough time to verify the timed surveillance footage), Paddock had stopped shooting when police officers showed up, 18 minutes after Campos was shot and 12 minutes after Paddock started shooting at the crowd.

One of the timeline reports stated that the fire door by his room had been screwed shut

Individual room doors are not monitored, when he screwed the stairwell (AKA emergency exit) door shut it must have misaligned the door and set off the alarm. He was addicted to Valium and that is some nasty shit to be addicted to...The only thing Vegas politicians and police care about is making it sound like Vegas is safe, SAFE I TELL YOU! Once again BUMPSTOCKS did NOT contribute to a higher death toll here. In fact several of the guns jammed most likely due to using them. I will wait for the apology...probably forever.

LAS VEGAS — Police have dramatically changed their account of how the Las Vegas massacre began on Oct. 1, revealing Monday that the gunman shot a hotel security guard six minutes before opening fire on a country music concert — raising new questions about why police weren’t able to pinpoint the gunman’s location sooner.

Officials had previously said that gunman Stephen Paddock, 64, of Mesquite, Nev., shot Mandalay Bay security guard Jesus Campos after Paddock had unleashed his deadly volley at the Route 91 Harvest country music festival, an assault that began at 10:05 p.m.

Officials had previously credited Campos, who was shot in the leg, with stopping the 10-minute assault on the concert crowd by turning the gunman’s attention to the hotel hallway, where Campos was checking an alert for an open door in another guest’s room. (this is false)

But Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo said Monday that Paddock shot Campos before his mass shooting — at 9:59 p.m. — and they now don’t know why Paddock stopped his attack on the crowd.

(10-09-2017, 10:39 PM)BigMark Wrote: [ -> ]The only thing Vegas politicians and police care about is making it sound like Vegas is safe, SAFE I TELL YOU! Once again BUMPSTOCKS did NOT contribute to a higher death toll here. In fact several of the guns jammed most likely due to using them. I will wait for the apology...probably forever.

I agree that Vegas politicians very much want to position Vegas as a safe place, for all of the obvious reasons (primarily $$$). They actually say it every time they're interviewed and it's clear they're talking to tourists. Personally, I don't necessarily disagree that Vegas is as safe a place as any to see a show. The element of surprise gives mass murder perpetrators an advantage, no matter where the venue.

But, come on Biggie. It's highly likely that the bump stocks enabled Paddock to fire off far more rounds into the massive crowd/target in the given time frame. As you previously stated, EACH bullet had the capacity to do damage. Thus.....the more bullets, the more damage.

Plus......a couple of the rifles were jammed when LE finally breached the room, but Paddock still had lots of unused ammo and several functional rifles available to him -- some with bump stocks, some without bump stocks, some with scopes and some without scopes (according to LE and photos).

So, please give me your very own intelligent and rational explanation (stubbornness + lack of common sense don't count) as to how you KNOW the bump stocks didn't help Paddock inflict maximum damage before he stopped shooting.

P.S. I'm glad you've at least revised your previous contention that the bump stocks could actually have been 'life savers', that was Derp with a capital 'D'.

Did you watch the video zerospheres posted above, he took minute long breaks between shooting. So all it did was give him some smoke breaks in between, He could have been firing semi auto the whole time instead of taking breaks. You claimed earlier he needed that time. Changing your narrative again to suit your beliefs? How Trump of you...

(10-09-2017, 11:13 PM)BigMark Wrote: [ -> ]Did you watch the video zerospheres posted above, he took minute long breaks between shooting. So all it did was give him some smoke breaks in between, He could have been firing semi auto the whole time instead of taking breaks. You claimed earlier he needed that time. Changing your narrative again to suit your beliefs? How Trump of you...

You're the only one in this discussion claiming a narrative as fact Biggie.

I'm saying that bump stocks exist for a reason. Paddock chose them to carry out this carefully planned attack for a reason. It's a fact that bump stocks enable semi-automatics to function like fully-automatics and fire more rounds per minute (given equal ammo capacity) than semis. So........it's far more likely than not that the bump stocks enabled Paddock to injure and kill more people.

You have no idea why Paddock stopped shooting for brief periods or what he was doing during those times. But, I guess one-minute smoke breaks is as sure a bet as bump stocks being life savers.

I correct myself on the board when I'm wrong, honor bets that I've made here at Mock, etc. Always have. So, when you can actually make a solid case and back it up, I'll apologize for poo-pooing your unsubstantiated claims.

This is a video worth viewing.

(10-09-2017, 10:39 PM)BigMark Wrote: [ -> ]Once again BUMPSTOCKS did NOT contribute to a higher death toll here. In fact several of the guns jammed most likely due to using them. I will wait for the apology...probably forever.

This is out and out lunacy Biggie, its simple math and physics. Should have, could have, would have...That's all Bullshit.

What we have is a guy, probably untrained, took a bunch of weapons up to an elevated position and in 9 minutes of fireing burned off several hundred rounds (how many?) of (poorly) aimed fire onto a crowd, this was done using Some weapons equipped with bump stocks.
Had this same guy in the same mindset same room same day not had a bump stock weapon there is no way in hell he would have been able to burn that much ammo and thereby not been able to hit so many people. Period. The bump stocks did not save any lives, they did not limit the carnage or any of that bull shit. No one knows yet why he only fired for those 9 minutes, maybe he just snapped and blew his brains out and was dead long before the cops got in, no one knows.

(10-10-2017, 01:52 AM)ZEROSPHERES Wrote: [ -> ]This is a video worth viewing.

This guy is full of shit
Good Science
Good Math
Good Ballistics and data
Good analysis up to the point where all that diverged from his pre formed opinion.
About the middle of the video he touches on the central issue and then blows past it to expound on and repeat his opinion as he did with all the other solid analysis.
The central issue is the time signature differences. He says the shots with the long time signature came from the mandalay...ok. Then he talks about the short time signatures and how they cannot come from the mandalay and therefore must have come from somewhere else.
He is correct in that the time signature tells you the distance but the far more likely explanation for the difference in the time signatures is that the recordings were made from different distances from the single shooter. He did mention doing the calc for each recording on the ground and overlaying them on the map...Good Idea. He has no fucking idea where the recordings he has access to were made and that makes ALL the difference. My $$ goes on all those distances working out to the same point of origin

What he has is a Flawed Theory because he is ignoring important data, he does not have proof.
I also do not believe that the FBI are idiots, this is the kind of stuff those guys do

There was a shooting at Texas Tech last night - a 19 year old student shot and killed a university police officer at the campus police station. The student had been brought in for questioning after drugs and drug paraphernalia had been found in his dorm room.

Here's the subhuman:



https://www.dallasnews.com/news/news/201...s-lockdown

Texas Tech sent out its first warning of the incident at 6:23PM. Then, on cue, the Texas Democrats jumped on the shooting to politicize it before the gunman was apprehended, or any facts were known. They commented at 7:14PM, 'Allowing concealed guns on college campuses was a dumb and dangerous idea. Stay safe, Raiders.'

This is in reference to the newly enacted law that allows firearms to be concealed carried on campus at public colleges. The clear inference of course is that the shooting was because of concealed carry being allowed on campus.

Except the subhuman above was only 19 years old, and is already restricted from buying a handgun because he's not 21. He's also restricted from carrying a firearm because he's not 21 (which is the age requirement in Texas to take the license to carry course, get certified, complete the background check, and apply). So he shouldn't have had a gun in the first place, and was too young to have qualified for campus carry. He was also in possession of drugs, which are also restricted and illegal.

Criminals don't follow laws. They never have, and they never will.

As far as the Texas Dems go, what a bunch of douche canoes. But really I'm so sick of it from both sides. Fuck all of them.

I don’t believe the Vegas shooter was a criminal and he legally purchased 30+ guns and now owns the highest body count by a single mass shooter in history.

All done by the book.

Way to go!

The gun this kid used was probably his parents firearm and was most likely legally obtained.

Should they be held responsible if this turns out to be the case?

Yes

(10-10-2017, 11:59 AM)SIXFOOTERsez Wrote: [ -> ]Yes

I agree.

It won’t prevent all gun deaths or even most, but, it could be a start.

Simply hold gun owners responsible, particularly if it’s a friend or family member that uses it.

Proving culpability may be challenging at times, but it puts the onus on gun owners to treat their guns as weapons, not tools.

Agreed, your kids should not have access to your weapons. As a gun owner you should be responsible for it at all times. My room mate and I both own a lot of guns and they are all over the house. But when there are people coming we talk about it and make the decision to gather up and lock up or not.

(10-10-2017, 01:22 PM)SIXFOOTERsez Wrote: [ -> ]Agreed, your kids should not have access to your weapons. As a gun owner you should be responsible for it at all times. My room mate and I both own a lot of guns and they are all over the house. But when there are people coming we talk about it and make the decision to gather up and lock up or not.

Your comment reminded me of a story I read this morning Six. A 13-year-old boy in Massachusetts shot a 12-year-old classmate the other day, apparently over alleged Facebook bullying. Fortunately, the 12-year-old is expected to survive.

Police say the shooter used his mom's gun. It doesn't look like any charges have been filed against mom. I don't know if that's because she reportedly had the gun locked in a cabinet (police don't know if her son got a key or knew the combination).

But, the 13-year-old is charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a dwelling and carrying a loaded firearm without a license. His mom, who doesn't want to be identified, basically says it was self-defense and an accident by a good kid who'd been pushed to the brink. Her statement is included in the story linked below.

Story: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/taunton-sho...d-bullied/

(10-10-2017, 04:01 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-10-2017, 01:22 PM)SIXFOOTERsez Wrote: [ -> ]Agreed, your kids should not have access to your weapons. As a gun owner you should be responsible for it at all times. My room mate and I both own a lot of guns and they are all over the house. But when there are people coming we talk about it and make the decision to gather up and lock up or not.

Your comment reminded me of a story I read this morning Six. A 13-year-old boy in Massachusetts shot a 12-year-old classmate the other day, apparently over alleged Facebook bullying. Fortunately, the 12-year-old is expected to survive.

Police say the shooter used his mom's gun. It doesn't look like any charges have been filed against mom. I don't know if that's because she reportedly had the gun locked in a cabinet (police don't know if her son got a key or knew the combination).

But, the 13-year-old is charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a dwelling and carrying a loaded firearm without a license. His mom, who doesn't want to be identified, basically says it was self-defense and an accident by a good kid who'd been pushed to the brink. Her statement is included in the story linked below.

Story: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/taunton-sho...d-bullied/

This ^ is the exact scenario that should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Family member gains access to your firearm and shoots somebody.

The owner should be charged identically to the perp, and then let it go to trial.

(10-10-2017, 04:21 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: [ -> ]This ^ is the exact scenario that should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Family member gains access to your firearm and shoots somebody.

The owner should be charged identically to the perp, and then let it go to trial.

Yeah, it that were done consistently across states........it might actually motivate irresponsible gun owners to start locking up their guns and others who already do lock them up to do so more securely.