Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Vegas Shooter on Psyche meds


Arpeggio

Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441
5 minutes ago, Sledgehead said:

I don't think the fact that people believe these silly conspiracy theories makes them right. Clearly they are a defence mechanism against the arguments for gun control (i.e. "American citizens don't really kill each other with guns. Power-crazy politicians like Hillary Clinton want to take our guns and enslave us and turn us into a third-world hell-hole, like Denmark!"). The popularity of such arguments along with the increased calls for gun control suggests that there could be some policy response. I still think it's not particularly, but it's silly to insist that someone who has lived for 64 years can know that it won't happen. Nobody knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1
HOLA442
2 minutes ago, Sledgehead said:

I just told you: squaddies are recruited when they are immature.

Besides, drone strikes are not ordered for the express purpose of killing innocents.

I'm not talking about squaddies. How many squaddies kills 50 people? I'm talking about those who kill far more.

We don't know why drone strikes are ordered. We only know their stated purposes.

We don't know Paddock's purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2
HOLA443
1 minute ago, Kosmin said:

The popularity of such arguments along with the increased calls for gun control suggests that there could be some policy response. I still think it's not particularly, but it's silly to insist that someone who has lived for 64 years can know that it won't happen. Nobody knows.

So who is suggesting that? Me? Where?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3
HOLA444
4 minutes ago, Sledgehead said:

So who is suggesting that? Me? Where?

4 hours ago, Sledgehead said:

By 'mature', I meant 'not a kid'. By which I mean, at 64, he would have enough experience to understand that, in the realm of societal development, policy and its implementation, rarely produce expected results.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4
HOLA445
1 minute ago, Kosmin said:

I'm not talking about squaddies. How many squaddies kills 50 people? I'm talking about those who kill far more.

We don't know why drone strikes are ordered. We only know their stated purposes.

We don't know Paddock's purpose.

You asked if drone pilots suffered remorse. I said I did not know. I said I did not know if they were psychopaths. All I knew was that they were recruited at maybe 17 and spent their short careers being told they were killing baddies in the name of good, so even normal guys might suffer no remorse.

Paddock killed innocents after a lifetime of wide experience and no military indoctrination.

What part of that do you disagree with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5
HOLA446
2 minutes ago, Kosmin said:

 

So I can't quote that, but to paraphrase you are saying I'm asserting that Paddock knew with certainty his actions would not result in a call for gun control.

But that is not what I said. I said a rational man would recognise he had no way of knowing that his actions would result in a call for gun control.

Quite different things as a gambler like Paddock would well understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6
HOLA447
1 minute ago, Sledgehead said:

You asked if drone pilots suffered remorse. I said I did not know. I said I did not know if they were psychopaths. All I knew was that they were recruited at maybe 17 and spent their short careers being told they were killing baddies in the name of good, so even normal guys might suffer no remorse.

Paddock killed innocents after a lifetime of wide experience and no military indoctrination.

What part of that do you disagree with?

If all drone pilots were recruited at 17 and it is demonstrated that at 17 people are sufficiently under-developed and malleable that they can be brainwashed then you may be right. I think this is unlikely though. I think it's quite likely drone pilots and Paddock felt remorse. I don't believe remorse can be observed with certainty.

 

Do you actually know that about Paddock? Isis claimed that indoctrinated him. Do you know that's untrue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7
HOLA448
Just now, Sledgehead said:

So I can't quote that, but to paraphrase you are saying I'm asserting that Paddock knew with certainty his actions would not result in a call for gun control.

But that is not what I said. I said a rational man would recognise he had no way of knowing that his actions would result in a call for gun control.

Quite different things as a gambler like Paddock would well understand.

So Paddock may have thought if I kill some innocents there may be some gun control.

Various politicians thought if I kill innocents in normal warfare, or drone strikes, or sanctions that may prevent further loss of life.

I don't think Paddock, Madeleine Albright, Bush, Blair, Truman or Churchill or countless politicians were immature or irrational because of these actions. Few actions have certain results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8
HOLA449
50 minutes ago, Kosmin said:

If all drone pilots were recruited at 17 and it is demonstrated that at 17 people are sufficiently under-developed and malleable that they can be brainwashed then you may be right. I think this is unlikely though. I think it's quite likely drone pilots and Paddock felt remorse. I don't believe remorse can be observed with certainty.

 

Do you actually know that about Paddock? Isis claimed that indoctrinated him. Do you know that's untrue?

No. I know nothing.

But that's what you know as well.

The difference is this:

I see a guy with these traits:

 - possible genetic heredity of psychopathy;

- a massive risk taker;

- a guy who displays arrogance;

- a guy who is claimed to like violent sex with prostitutes;

- a guy who meticulously plans and executes 58 innocent people, injuring many more.

And I say, "hey, this guy fits the profile of a psychopath."

You say, "humm, I think this guy is trying to make this a better world!"

 

I'm really not sure you are doing yourself any favours. Some folks might unkindly thank the 'lord' you aren't one of our detectives, imagining you being faced in the interview room with a guy who says:

"I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti."

To which you reply:

"As a protest against world famine?"

:P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9
HOLA4410
2 hours ago, Sledgehead said:

No. I know nothing.

But that's what you know as well.

The difference is this:

I see a guy with these traits:

 - possible genetic heredity of psychopathy;

- a massive risk taker;

- a guy who displays arrogance;

- a guy who is claimed to like violent sex with prostitutes;

- a guy who meticulously plans and executes 58 innocent people, injuring many more.

And I say, "hey, this guy fits the profile of a psychopath."

You say, "humm, I think this guy is trying to make this a better world!"

I don't think I said he was trying to make the world a better place. I just think you made silly arguments against the position I quoted. We don't know if he was trying to make the world better or not.

And I wasn't disputing whether he fits a "profile." I just think it's silly to claim that you know he didn't feel remorse, based on your claim it's impossible to do something so terrible if you feel remorse and have a conscience. Even sillier was your leap to the defence of others who have committed atrocities based on the claim that they are not trying to kill innocent civilians.

You seem to imply he was unable to control his violent impulses, but acknowledge he planned for months before acting on them.

I hadn't heard he was a big risk taker. I thought the common knowledge was that he was betting on poker machines which paid out 99.17%, so if he were average he would lose about $9,000 if he bet $1m. But as he was a good player he was able to get close to 100% and in combination with the free accomodation, food and drinks etc. from hotels it was a net benefit for him and not very risky.

Also he had planned to shoot at another festival weeks ago and is thought to have decided against it because it was risky.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10
HOLA4411
1 hour ago, Kosmin said:

I don't think I said he was trying to make the world a better place. I just think you made silly arguments against the position I quoted. We don't know if he was trying to make the world better or not.

And I wasn't disputing whether he fits a "profile." I just think it's silly to claim that you know he didn't feel remorse, based on your claim it's impossible to do something so terrible if you feel remorse and have a conscience. Even sillier was your leap to the defence of others who have committed atrocities based on the claim that they are not trying to kill innocent civilians.

You seem to imply he was unable to control his violent impulses, but acknowledge he planned for months before acting on them.

I hadn't heard he was a big risk taker. I thought the common knowledge was that he was betting on poker machines which paid out 99.17%, so if he were average he would lose about $9,000 if he bet $1m. But as he was a good player he was able to get close to 100% and in combination with the free accomodation, food and drinks etc. from hotels it was a net benefit for him and not very risky.

Also he had planned to shoot at another festival weeks ago and is thought to have decided against it because it was risky.

 

 

Okay, that's your view. In your considered view I am silly, and the guy you originally quoted, a guy of some merit.

Fine. And I said he argued his post well.

That was politeness.

And you aren't.

So fyi, the guy you posted is clueless. Firstly, his "joke" is as old as the hills. he says we can learn something from it. Turns out he meant you can. Nobody else can, because the rest of us noticed he made it a lesson about hiding in plain sight. What you didn't notice was the most obvious hiding in plain sight. The hiding of paddock's psychopathy. It was hidden from you, and remains so. You won't accept he is simply not like the rest of us. But that's the fact of the matter. There's you fact hidden in plain sight.

Secondly, you may be impressed by his pseudo intellectualism, quoting Marshall Mcluhan, but surprise, nobody else is. And fyi for "the medium to be the message", he would have to have shot each and every person he wanted to communicate with. Only then would the medium have coloured the message. Only then would the medium have been bullets. But was I shot? Were you? No. We 'consumed' his 'message' as you see it, via tv, radio, cellphone and internet. When Mcluhan says the medium is the message he means that the way the mesI sage is conveyed to you matters. ISIS know this and use socila media, borrowing its "new order" meme. That's what Mcluhan meant.

Now go tell your pseudo-intellectual friend what a 'silly' person told you and while you are at it ask yourself exactly what on earth the douce-bag on the 32nd floor could have done to convince you he was not normal.

I just wish I could wheel out Paddock like Woody did:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11
HOLA4412
9 hours ago, Sledgehead said:

By 'mature', I meant 'not a kid'. By which I mean, at 64, he would have enough experience to understand that, in the realm of societal development, policy and its implementation, rarely produce expected results. So, for instance (and this is a bad example, because we would all question its true intention), so called 'Help to Buy' has done nothing of the sort.

That definition of mature is not anything we have to wait on.

As for his irrationality, again, seeing he had 64 years of experience to the contrary, what explanation can we otherwise attribute to a supposedly held belief in his ability to change society with a single act of questionable motive? History is littered with such acts, repeated over and over to no effect.

I don't believe that you think it was a joke.

Above you are arguing that someone aged 64 is clearly mature enough to realise that shooting won't influence the law. This is only worth arguing if you acknowledged that there is a possibility that it would influence the law (and assuming that law with improve things) and that this possibility could arguably make his actions morally defensible. Maybe you truly believe there is no possibility that this shooting would influence the law (maybe you don't have his 64 years to draw upon). Maybe you didn't know there were restrictions on guns in Britain after the Dunblane massacre and in Australia after a shooting in Tasmania. But maybe Paddock did, and maybe he had a different set of beliefs about the likelihood of gun control.

 

I don't know why you keep saying things like "... ask yourself exactly what on earth the douce-bag on the 32nd floor could have done to convince you he was not normal." I don't think he was normal! Where did I say he was normal? Also I don't think his action is particularly likely to lead to any good consequences. I just think it's possible that he thought it would do some good and at least on a Utilitarian conception it's possible he could be right. You claim to know that he wasn't attempting to do any good and that he couldn't have felt any remorse. You don't appear to have given any evidence for your claims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12
HOLA4413

You've gotta love this:

Quote

They are hunting a prostitute seen with him on CCTV in the days before.

It earlier emerged how Paddock acted out violent rape fantasies with a hooker and bragged: “I was born bad.”

He boasted in text messages about his father Benjamin being a bank robber who escaped jail in 1969.

He wrote: “I didn’t have anything really to do with him but the bad streak is in my blood. I was born bad.”

The escort described him as “obsessive” and “paranoid” and said he would rant about conspiracy theories, including claiming 9/11 was an inside job by the US government.

The woman, 27, saw Paddock, 64, around nine times from November 2015 to June 2016 when he would visit Las Vegas without his girlfriend Marilou Danley, 62.

Paddock — who made £3.5million in 2015, mostly from gambling — would pay her up to £6,000 a time.

and from the same article:

Quote

Paddock contacted Armstrong about buying a BMW from him two months before he opened fire from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay hotel – killing 58.  

The killer had been prescribed an anti-anxiety drug that can lead to aggressive behaviour, according to reports.

Scott Armstrong said: “After seeing a photograph of Stephen Paddock, I realised he was the same man I had met and interacted with regarding a BMW about two months ago.

“From the beginning of our interaction, I sensed he was distressed in some way. I'm very intuitive and pretty good at reading people.

"During the course of our conversation we somehow started talking about relationships and he confided his had just ended and that he was terribly depressed over it."

"I don't think I've seen a man as down as he was .

“I offered words of encouragement and shared some of my relationship experiences and tried to console him. I explained things would eventually work out.”

Don't you just love that?

This guy saw at least one prostitute 9 times over the course of 8 months, paying her $6000 a time (so regular sex - NOT!), and then guess what? He's 'upset' when she leaves him. Like FTW? What kind of reaction is that? Probably predictable for guy who then goes and guns down 58 innocents. "Oh she left me! SHE left ME!." Persecution complexes aren't uncommon for narcissistic sociopaths.  Just another piece of the puzzle?

PS : bet Mr "I'm used to groping beautiful, young, women w/o solicitation" Weinstein is equally 'down' now his wife has left him! Yet another sociopath that shatters the Dickensian belief system that the rich are somehow morally superior to the poor.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13
HOLA4414
On 10/8/2017 at 11:48 PM, Kosmin said:

4. The people he chose to kill supports the hypothesis on 'guns'. Country and Western fans are virtually guaranteed to own or at least to defend the ownership of guns. By a certain logic this provides the gunman with two sound moral positions (because it is not beyond possibility he has a conscience):
First - While killing a very large number of innocent people is an horrendous crime it is nonetheless entirely justifiable - in moral terms - if it causes a restriction on guns. Because such a restriction would - it is widely held - save innumerable lives in the long run. There is no evidence for this but it is still a widely and passionately held belief.
Second - Since the people he is shooting are actively or passively defenders of guns and an obstacle to gun control they are by definition responsible in part for all the people who have been and continue to be killed by guns."

 

What isn't said here is that ever since rednecks started making barbecue stoves out of old fuel drums, ...

915fdcec4e93e4553eaa69d7430eb71b--homema

... good 'ol Country & Western fans have found themselves almost magnetically attracted to fuel tanks, which helps explain why Paddock equipped himself with and fired incendiary rounds at a nearby fuel tank.

:rolleyes:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14
HOLA4415
15
HOLA4416
4 hours ago, Errol said:

Brandon Smith: A Tactical Analysis Of The Las Vegas Mass Shooting Incident

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-10-11/brandon-smith-tactical-analysis-las-vegas-mass-shooting-incident

 

I like this bit:

Quote

As an avid tactical shooter and long distance shooter,

 

So not exactly neutral in the gun-control debate. :D

Maybe I'll bother to take the rest of it apart. But why bother when he studiously fails to cite stuff like:

'I was born bad': Las Vegas prostitute who romped with mass killer Stephen Paddock says he enjoyed violent rape fantasies as she reveals he boasted he had always been evil

Just re-read BS's piece with a critical eye. He doesn't see Paddock as being of a mental state capable of doing this. BUT then he muddies this by saying he didn't do it alone. Then he muddies it by saying perhaps he was radicalized (ie of a mental state capable). Then he muddies it bay saying maybe he didn't fire a shot.

It's not a critical, thoughtful appraisal at all. It's all muddled. And what's worse, he fails to address fundamental stuff.

Stuff like that note:

Source: Las Vegas shooter left behind calculations for targeting crowd

If he wasn't of a mind to kill, why do the math?

What BS should have asked was "is that Paddock's handwriting?"

The fact he doesn't is just another nail in the coffin of his conspiracy theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16
HOLA4417
On 10/10/2017 at 6:14 PM, Sledgehead said:

 

I see a guy with these traits:

 

 - possible genetic heredity of psychopathy;

 

 

However:

Stephen Paddock: Las Vegas gunman's autopsy results released

Quote

 ...

the results of an analysis of his brain revealed no abnormalities and therefore no clues as to what motivated his behaviour.

The results appear to quash circulating in the wake of the attack, that Paddock could have been suffering from a brain tumour or a mental disorder. 

Right.

Well, that's me up the creek w/o a paddle then! :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17
HOLA4418
3 hours ago, Sledgehead said:

It's not a critical, thoughtful appraisal at all. It's all muddled. And what's worse, he fails to address fundamental stuff.

It's muddled, just like the 'official' police version of events is. They keep on changing the time-line, the facts, the evidence list, what actually took place etc etc.

There is a lot that is unclear at the moment and the authorities really aren't helping themselves or the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18
HOLA4419
11 minutes ago, Errol said:

It's muddled, just like the 'official' police version of events is. They keep on changing the time-line, the facts, the evidence list, what actually took place etc etc.

There is a lot that is unclear at the moment and the authorities really aren't helping themselves or the situation.

agreed

my thoughts b4 the autopsy were:

 - he's mad/ bad

- the cops are muddled cos they took ages to respond to the first report of active shooter and are backside covering

- the casino is muddled (ie no footage) cos they turned a blind eye to a high roller bringing in weapons.

The first of these is now thrown into all sorts of doubt. The last is poss explained by his use of the service elevator.

But who really cares about the middle and last points if the first is wrong? "Why?" is all people really want to know, after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19
HOLA4420
On 10/9/2017 at 8:37 PM, Goat said:

Have you got a source for those numbers or are they your own workings?

If the latter I suspect you're off by about 5 times.

Not to mention the fact he would have needed to have charged over 3300 magazines at an average max fill of 30 rounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20
HOLA4421
2 hours ago, geezer466 said:

Not to mention the fact he would have needed to have charged over 3300 magazines at an average max fill of 30 rounds.

That would imply about 100,000 rounds fired.

My point was that the maximum practical R.O.F for an AR-15 is about 200 RPM, and to achieve that over more than about 1 minute requires multiple spare rifles (which the shooter had, but that isn't going to push him above 200 RPM).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21
HOLA4422
18 hours ago, Goat said:

That would imply about 100,000 rounds fired.

My point was that the maximum practical R.O.F for an AR-15 is about 200 RPM, and to achieve that over more than about 1 minute requires multiple spare rifles (which the shooter had, but that isn't going to push him above 200 RPM).

My bad maths and a zero in the wrong place.

 

330 magazines then..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22
HOLA4423

FBI 'Hand-In-Hand' With Vegas PD, Begin Damage Control: "There Is No Conspiracy... Nobody Is Attempt to Hide Anything"

As Intellihub details, in the ‘no questions’ conference, which members of the independent media were not allowed to attend, the sheriff said that he’s “well aware” of the timeline dispute released by MGM Management on Thursday which claims that Stephen Paddock fired his weapon into the crowd just seconds after Mandalay Bay security guard Jesus Campos was struck by a bullet in the 32nd-floor hallway outside the shooter’s end suite.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-10-13/shot-vegas-security-guard-cancels-media-goes-missing-i-can-confirm-his-family-has-ga

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23
HOLA4424
1 hour ago, Errol said:

 

More interestingly from that article:

Quote

Additionally, the sheriff told reporters that so far there has only been a “visual inspection” done of Paddock’s brain and said that Paddock’s brain was shipped to a facility that will conduct a “microscopic analysis of the brain” to see if there were any signs of mental illness.

That undermines the assertion made in the article I posted above:

Stephen Paddock: Las Vegas gunman's autopsy results released

that forced me to question my view of Paddock being mad or bad.

However, 'visual inspection' is not the method that researchers at the University of California use to identify brain abnormalities in psychopaths. They use MRI. On live subjects.

Because Paddock is dead, such tests are unavailable, so it seems that the jury must remain out over the crucial question of whether he had the physiological markers of mental illness one might expect in a mass murderer. I await to see what these "microscopic" tests reveal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24
HOLA4425

"I'm Concerned... It's Highly Unusual" - Vegas Massacre Security Guard Remains Missing

Following reports of his disappearance late last week, after numerous timeline changes and 'fact' clarifications by The Mandalay Bay, The FBI, and Vegas PD; Jesus Campos, the secuirty guard, who may or may not have been shot by Vegas Massacre shooter Stephen Paddock,remains missing and friends and family are concerned.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-10-16/im-concerned-its-highly-unusual-vegas-massacre-security-guard-remains-missing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information