Just listen to the gunshots in the video where the cab driver is driving out of the front of the hotel. You can't tell me those shots are 32 floors up . You can clearly hear closer shots, and farther ones
The Daily News is the only source I can find for this 280 rounds in 31 seconds, did they count this themselves or do they have an official source for it. Seems rather exact for something like this.
Looking at the picture of the main door to the suite.... the door is off the hinges and laying on its side with bullet holes shot from the hallway , not from the room inside
You keep making these wild assumptions to prove what? The door is lying on its side - do you know if you're looking at the inside or the outside of it? What is the purpose of all your questioning? It was reported on day one that he had ten or more suitcases and did not allow anyone to help him get them to the room. He had at least three days to get them up there. Virtually everything you asked can easily be answered with information already available and any question you ask really means nothing without an answer that points to something nefarious, not a vague cloud of suspicion. I'm not sure why there is so much focus on "people dressed as security guards" - That's what security guards wear. If you have anything at all that points towards imposters, bring it on. You have asked many questions that have simple answers, here's some for you: What do you think happened that is materially different from information that has been released? Do you have any reason based in fact or evidence that Paddock did not act alone? What purpose would be served by the authorities in creating a false scenario? Who then would be behind this, and to what purpose?
No he wouldn't have. My explanation has nothing to do with my opinion but a basic understanding of the English language. That section you stated clearly requires intent by the shooter to causes intimidation and coersion, which inherently means beyond the specific act. You have no idea what his intent was and therefore can't declare it terrorism Any other argument would mean all crimes could be deemed terrorism -- from random isolated stabbings to home invasions.
simple answers? see,here you are claiming it all has simple answers ,when people who were there are reporting differently than this official story you trust so much. what purpose? no idea. but as its been posted above,authorities still have questions on whether paddock was alone. based on receipts,key cards, etc. but from your arm chair its all simple. The security guards were reported from eyewitnesses on day one,and like the person telling people in the crowd they are all going to die,have become a non story. Now how the fuck would I have anything other than what I have seen or heard? I'm going by what I see,and I'm trusting eyewitnesses and other ideas just as much if not more than an "official story",that next week will be completely falsified when a cop shoots someone committing a crime.
in this picture,you can that the longer inside "frame" piece,is at the top of the door. also,where the doors meet,there is a gap and a thinner piece of door on the inside between the frames than on the outside.the video below is the best picture I can find of the doors after the shooting, but you can see that the way it is laying it is showing the longer frame and the thinker outer edge on the bottom. leaving the door only one way to stand up correctly. i think it's safe to say what is seen are entrance holes, not exit holes based on what would happen to a door that was shot up
As a Vegas police officer this attack struck at the very fabric that is Vegas. I don't post much due to work and family but Vegas is my home away from home in NY. I will just say this, the strip was turned into a war zone, there was blood all over the place. It truly was a horrific scene and I am disgusted beyond belief that this has happened. For all the friends and families of the people murdered my prayers go out to them. For Chuck, the off duty LVMPD officer killed. He was an awesome man and even better officer. He truly will be missed. I would just tell people, pay attention to everything going on around you, these are sad times we live in.
It needs to be a combination of those things. Not just one and done. If that were the case a home invasion is a form of terrorism, bro. Cmon now.
Whether guns are easier to control than some are alluding to or not, it seems clear that this was executed in an incredibly tactical military style way. I find it very hard to believe that this dude did it himself. The phrase war zone keeps coming up in this case. War zones indicate that there are more than one shooters. But wouldn't all of these things be able to be easily debunked with the hotel video footage? Unless they operate like some smaller businesses and simply record over the prior footage. Something tells me a hotel/casino as lucrative as the Mandalay Bay save footage for a bit longer than 24 hours and have servers and storage capacities that can handle footage for up to a week at least. It doesn't have to be a conspiracy theory to think that there was more than one shooter. It can simply be a fact yet to be uncovered. You're a Vegas police officer? God bless you, man. I'm glad you're safe. Prayers to everyone who was affected and RIP to all of the victims including the off duty officer you knew.
No. As written (and read by anyone with a "basic understanding of the English language") the intent is "clearly" not required (your word) and does not need to be proven but only appear (from the law) to exist.
First, I never claimed "it has all simple answers." Please tell us what it is that you see that presents a problem for you. You do understand that eyewitnesses, particularly in stressful situations are very unreliable, right? I have no idea what you are trying to say in the second part of your last sentence. Let me ask again: What do you think happened that is materially different from information that has been released?
If, by "a combination of those things" you mean those parts labeled i, ii, and iii, please note that iii is preceded by "or", not "and" therefore requiring only one element be present, not all three. I can certainly understand a home invasion designed to intimidate or coerce rather than simply to rob or plunder or even kill a given target. Again, I'm not sure of why some here are so concerned about the distinction between an act of terrorism or simply an act of mayhem particularly since it does not appear, for now at least, that anyone will go to trial over this insanity.
You keep leaving the most important part of it out, "in the pursuit of political aims.", the lack of a political aim is what keeps it from being terrorism
If you look at the definition, take out the, "especially against civilians" Noun; the unlawful use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
Nope. "Intended to" only means that it is the perpetrators intent to cause intimidation and coerce the civilian population. There is no other meaning and anyone who argue otherwise doesn't understand what they are reading, as you have proven. Home invasion robberies cause intimidation and coersion in the population, as evident in people having home alarm systems in response to them to protect themselves, but that's not the intent of robbers, whose intent is to simply steal property not cause any widespread intimidation or coersion. That's why the intent of the perpetrator defines terrorism, not whether the act results in intimidation and coersion. Otherwise all crimes would be terrorism. And once again you proudly wave your ignorance.
Glad you are safe, and sorry for your loss . I can't imagine not only having this happen in my city, but being a first responder and what they had to deal with and see.
