Mass Shootings

Las Vegas Shooting Update: 58 Dead, More Than 500 Injured

Police say a 64-year-old Nevada man, Stephen Craig Paddock, opened fire on a crowd of more than 20,000 people from hotel balcony. They believe he acted alone.



At least 58 people have died and more than 500 were transported to hospitals in the wake of a mass shooting at an outdoor concert in Las Vegas.

According to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, a 64-year-old Nevada man, Stephen Craig Paddock, opened fire on a crowd of more than 22,000 people from a balcony on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel late Sunday night.The victims were attending a country music concert across the street from the hotel.

In a statement Monday morning, the LVMPD said a SWAT team responded to the call, breached the hotel room where Paddock was holed up, and found the suspect dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Former Las Vegas police officer Randy Sutton told CBS News that authorities found the shooter in the hotel because "the smoke detector in the room went off from the amount of smoke that came from firing that fully automatic weapon," though neither the story nor the weapons used by the gunman were confirmed as of Monday morning. Concert-goers who witnessed the shooting told CBS News they could see muzzle flashes coming from the Mandalay Bay hotel.

Videos posted online show scenes of confusion followed by panic and chaos as shots rained down on the crowd during Jason Aldeen's performance Sunday night at the Route 91 Harvest Festival. The singer later posted on Instagram that he and his crew were safe.

Police say Paddock acted alone, though a woman who lived at the same Mesquite, Nevada, address was sought by police earlier Monday, according to multiple media reports. Police now say she is not considered an accomplice, was out of the country at the time of the shooting, and the scene of the shooting is considered "static."

Unconfirmed reports said Paddock had between eight and 10 guns stashed in his hotel room. It is still unclear which weapons he owned, whether he owned them legally, or whether they were semi-automatic or fully automatic. As Nick Gillespie noted earlier today, machine guns (which are fully automatic weapons) can be legally owned, but it is extremely difficult for private citizens to possess them legally, so it's likely that if Paddock did use one to commit these murders, it was in violation of existing laws. Nevada has liberal gun-ownership laws, a reality that has already sparked calls for stricter gun control.


No motive on the part of the killer has been discovered so far, but local police have said they didn't have prior contact with the 64-year-old Vegas resident and no sources close to the investigation have suggested ideological, religious, or terroristic motivation. Public records indicate that Paddock had a hunting license, was a pilot, and had a lawsuit against a casino years ago.

The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported Monday that court records show Paddock does not have a criminal record in Las Vegas.

If the 58 dead are all the result of gun fire—as opposed to, say, the result of a stampede as people fled the outdoor concert space—it would be the deadliest mass shooting in American history, surpassing the 49 people killed last year at a nightclub in Orlando.

President Donald Trump is scheduled to give remarks about the shooting at 10:30 a.m.

LVMPD and Clark County Coroner's Office have set up a hotline for family or friends to report a missing loved one connected to this incident. The hotline is only to take reports on missing people. The number is (866) 535-5654.

NEXT: 3 Supreme Court Cases to Watch in Fall 2017

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “President Donald Trump is scheduled to give remarks about the shooting at 10:30 a.m.

    I hope to God John Kelly wrote the speech and he doesn’t go off script. How about Melania just comes out and gives it. That would be better.

    1. Prepare for lefty media to narrate that anything Trump says is not enough.

      in 3….2….1….

      1. Prepare for Trump to call for stricter gun control laws.

        1. Trump will not be calling for gun control.

          1. That is by no means a certainty.

            1. I think it is a pretty good bet. Feel free to gloat if he does. But I don’t think he will.

              1. I wouldn’t be too surprised if he says something about keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.

                1. NPR had a ‘mass shooting specialist’ on this morning who was rather blatantly anti-gun. One of the first things he did was describe the shooter as obviously pathological, but point out that the overwhelming majority of the mentally unstable aren’t violent. He also pointed out that possibly today but within a week, we’ll have at least 100 people dead as the result of shootings. 2/3-3/4 will be suicide but few to none of them would be otherwise ‘mentally ill’.

                  The whole framing seemed really weird and internally inconsistent. We have a mental health industry built around people who are overwhelmingly non-violent and that is incapable of diagnosing/predicting people who will be violent. I agree with the notion that we shouldn’t be taking away people’s gun rights. At the same time, I don’t disagree with the notion that we should be letting crazy people murder en masse, even if only to socially/culturally condemn the practice.

                  1. The only crazy people that murder en masse are politicians.

                    People who shoot at unarmed music festival goers are criminals.

              2. You know Trump’s a New Yorker with those New York values, right? Trump’s hardly a stout defender of the 2nd, he’s lived his whole life with relatively strict gun control as a normal part of his world. How many pick-up trucks with gun racks in the back window you reckon he’s seen in Manhattan?

                1. Yeah Jerry all them New Yorkers hate guns. That makes sense. No gross generalities there.

                  1. Well, let’s just point out that a voting majority of them are more than willing to elect mayors who DO admittedly hate guns.

            2. Didn’t he support the “No Fly No Buy” garbage during the election?

              1. I believe he did. He no hard-line absolutist on gun rights. He won’t call for any general ban or significant restrictions, but I won’t be surprised if he calls for some added restrictions/checks for certain classes of people (probably the mentally ill or people on various watchlists).

                1. I wouldn’t have been surprised if he gut-tweeted something about gun control, but he won’t actually pursue anything.

                  1. Trump does not drink or smoke.

                    That does not mean that he is okay with banning smoking and drinking.

                    Same things with guns.

        2. The police state seems inevitable. Each shooting inches us closer.

      2. well he didn’t request more gun control so they will be all about that

    2. “The crowd there was way smaller than my inauguration crowd.”

  2. Terrible tragedy.

    Condolences to the victims’ friends and families.

  3. Nevada has liberal gun-ownership laws, a reality that has already sparked calls for stricter gun control.

    Of course, even if Nevada had banned gun-ownership years ago, this would spark calls for stricter gun control.

    1. Commiefornia has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the USA and they several mass shootings over the past decades.

      The left just cannot take control by force as long as Americans have so many weapons.

      1. He could have just stolen a dump truck and ran into the crowd and killed just as many or more people. The problem is not the gun. It is the person with it. Anyone who wants to commit mass murder and is willing to die doing it is going to do it whether or not they have access to firearms.

        1. Guns make killing easier. Let’s not pretend guns aren’t specifically designed to kill people.

          1. Explosives make killing easier. Let’s not pretend explosives are specifically designed to kill people.

            Guns have many purposes, including but not limited to killing people. They are also used to kill animals, in sporting competitions in the Olympics, in reenactments, cold-cocking my niggas, and to scare politicians into gun grabbing.

            Guns are tools and like any tool can be used for a wide variety of purposes.

          2. I’m an owner of several guns–revolvers, semi-auto pistols, bolt-action rifles, shotguns, AR-15…–and who has fired literally thousands of rounds through them, and so far none of them–not a single one–has ever killed a living thing. If they are designed specifically for killing people, then why haven’t any of mine done that? Not even one bullet or shotgun pellet of the many thousands fired from any of my guns has ever been aimed at any living thing, let alone a person.

            Well, to be 100% fair, I can’t say that some bug might have flown through the range and got blasted, or maybe a worm in the dirt backstop.

            Indeed, the only animals knowingly killed by any weapons I own have been some rats that did not die instantly in the trap. These were executed via a BB/pellet gun.

        2. I wish this argument would die. I found it appealing until around age 18. There is no doubt in my mind that banning guns would eventually reduce gun violence. If you only value saving lives, it is a no brainer to repeal the 2nd amendment.
          Guns can do many things, but they are better for killing things. No one is calling for a ban on dump trucks.

          1. Is 18 when you had that massive head injury?

          2. Cause it works in France, right? If you outlaw all guns, then only the criminals are going to have guns. Look at the evidence comparing strict gun laws with more liberal gun laws. Texas has very liberal gun laws. If a criminal in Texas wants to use a gun to commit a crime, he or she is going to think twice knowing that a good number of the witnesses likely have a gun on them as well. It evens the playing field.

            Now, let’s look at New York, Chicago, Detroit, D.C.,etc; places with very strict gun laws. They also have the highest crime rates in the country. That’s a fact.

            Lastly, if guns are removed from private citizens, you can be sure that law enforcement and the military will be permitted to carry which leads us into the police state argument. How can the people fight tyranny when our tools for being able to fight on a level playing field are removed?

          3. Is that right?

            Take New Zealand; that peaceful little country where the Hobbits live. Where nuclear weapons are banned. Universal health care and accident coverage. A wealthy nation. A stable western liberal democracy. Gay marriage, legal prostitution, rule of law, land of milk and honey, etc.

            NZ has always had very restrictive gun laws. There’s no such thing as the right to own a gun. It’s considered a legal privilege. Upon application you will be interviewed by the police at your home. You will need to provide several references, who will also be interviewed. Those who live with you will be interviewed. If any objections are raised, you will not get a licence. If you’re stupid enough to intimate that your gun will be used for self-defence, you will be refused.

            Hand guns are only licenced to members of pistol clubs. A hand gun may only be fired at pistol clubs or events. Hand guns are effectively illegal in NZ save for this special use category.

            NZ is a Liberal wet dream of gun policy.

            Yet you are TWICE as likely to die in a mass shooting in NZ than you are in the US. In the past 35 years, 20 people have been killed in NZ mass shootings. In the US ( there have been 701 such killings. The population of the US is 71 times that of NZ (320m/4.5m). That’s an adjusted figure of 1,420 to 701. Again: TWICE

            The ratio looks even worse considering hand guns are as common in the US as sheep are in NZ.

            Your theory is wrong. Let it go.

            1. By way of reply to myself, I’ll go into a bit more detail on sources.

              The US mass shootings data comes from a detailed list provided by Mother Jones, a progressive, Liberal publication, not exactly friendly to the notion of the right to bear arms.

              They list shootings from 1982 to 2017, including the current Las Vegas shooting. The criteria is shootings involving more than 3 victims.

              The NZ data is taken from:

              …and includes only the victims at Aramoana (14) and Raurimu (6). To fit with the Mother Jones criteria, I should also have included the Panmure victims (3). This makes the figures even worse for NZ with a population-adjusted ratio of: 1,633 (NZ) to 701 (US).

              NZ is not a violent country. It deserves its peaceful reputation. But it goes to show that people have perceptions about countries that just aren’t true. The US/NZ comparsion holds true for many such countries. Population adjustments are crucial. Name one thing you can compare countries by and not adjust for population.

              Again, despite the restrictive gun laws, the almost total lack of hand gun ownership, and the paucity of crime-ridden urban landscape, your chances of dying in a mass shooting in the US are LESS THAN HALF what they are in sleepy little NZ. Go figure.

    2. And the hotel has a strict ban on guns, yet he somehow got about ten of them in there.

  4. According to RT IS just claimed responsibility.

    1. is Now claiming the 64 year old accountant, private aircraft pilot, and licensed hunter converted to Islam several months ago.

      Disclaimer: this may well be a bunch of bullshit but that is what is on the news feed at the moment.

      1. Soon, ISIS will claim responsibility if a gay person commits a shooting or stabbing.

        They are desperate for “wins”.

      2. If he converted to Islam, then this is Islamic terrorism. I seriously doubt he had any other reason to do it. Lets see if he really was a convert or not. RT is hardly a rock solid source, but even they get it right sometimes.

        1. I heard he was a frequent gambler maybe he lost a lot of money

          1. If so, he was robbing those music festival people incorrectly.

            1. The proper way to do it, in that case, is to fire on the high side and have tiny orphans and moppets in body armor then run through the panicked crowd, picking pockets and grabbing handbags.

          2. I wonder if his lawsuit was against the same casino he shot up. Mandalay Bay?

      3. Did anyone hear him yelling you-know-what over the din?

        1. If that is why he did it, I am sure he left behind plenty of evidence showing as much. If this is the case, we will know soon enough.

          1. Don’t hurt yourself as you eagerly anticipate being able to blame the actions of a 60-something white dude on literally everyone of the Muslim faith.

            1. Yeah Tony, that is exactly what I said. We all know the word “if”, has no meaning. You are almost as disgusting of a human being as Shreek.

              1. You’re crapping all over this thread about how you hope it’s Islam. Presumably so we don’t have to talk about white right-wing terror, which kills more people in this country.

                1. You are projecting and listening to the voices in your head again. I never said I hoped it was anything. Meanwhile, you are jumping up and down with righteous joy over it because GUNS or something. Go away. Really, let the bodies be buried at least.

                2. You’re crapping all over this thread about how you hope it’s Islam

                  Well, it was a country-western concert that he targeted, so the possibility that it’s a shitlib hippie burnout can’t be dismissed, either.

                  1. No it can’t Red Rocks. That was my guess when I first heard about it. And I still consider that to be the most likely possibility until I hear for sure this guy was a convert. I am not buying Russia Today’s word on it. Maybe he was, but I will believe when I see it.

                    1. No it can’t Red Rocks. That was my guess when I first heard about it.

                      I was honestly being sarcastic with that comment, but we’ll find out more when they get more info.

                      I suspect that it’s more of a James Holmes type of situation.

                3. No Tony, it doesn’t, except for the made up fantasy world in what passes for your mind.

            2. Right, collective guilt only applies to white men.

        2. “Leeroy Jenkins”?

          1. Leeroy didn’t pop himself in the head.

          2. Leeroy didn’t pop himself in the head.

  5. so it’s likely that if Paddock did use one to commit these murders, it was in violation of existing laws.

    I’m pretty sure it was a violation of existing laws whether Paddock used them or not. I understand the phrasing. The fact that it has to be said or said in this fashion strongly suggests that someone, probably the questioner, hasn’t been punched in the face enough.

    1. It is poor phrasing. Of course the use in murder was in violation of existinglaws. It should have said

      so it’s likely that if Paddock did use one to commit these murders, it was obtained in violation of existing laws.

  6. Can we get Tony in here to stand on the corpses and score a few political points?

    1. Tony forgot his copy of Das Kapital, so he will be a bit late.

    2. The aftermath of a mass shooting is clearly no time to talk about solutions to the problem of mass shootings.

      1. Certainly not solutions that won’t work.

      2. It really isn’t because a) all the facts aren’t out yet, and b) it is a poor time to make decisions when emotions are running high.

      3. The aftermath of a mass shooting is clearly no time to talk about solutions to the problem of mass shootings score a few political points for the Blue Tribe.

        1. And yet Team Blue is virtue signalling all over the place.

      4. Tony|10.2.17 @ 11:07AM|#
        “The aftermath of a mass shooting is clearly no time to talk about solutions to the problem of mass shootings.”

        As if you had anything of the sort.

      5. If only Tony could have been at the concert then at least there would some good to come of it.

        I’m not threatening or encouraging anyone to take you out, but I would be happier if your posts just disappeared. You have all the utility of a mosquito here.

    3. Something something white men!

  7. Steven Howard is a lawyer and firearms expert based in Lansing, Mich. Howard said the ban on machine guns is not quite as complete as Ferguson’s words might sound.

    “Most people can buy machine guns in lots of states,” Howard said. “But, and this is one of those classic big ‘buts,’ they have to get through a background check by FBI that is as thorough as if you are getting clearance to become a federal agent.

    More “fake news” citing so-called “experts”. The background check is no more thorough than that required to get a carry permit.

    1. Boheim cited politifact to bring us this gem

    2. Good to know he’s into classic big buts, though.

    3. Pretty sure he’s referencing the purchase of (real) automatic weapons ala the NFA through the ATFE and not just buying a semi-auto something-or-other from an FFL, ya dingus.

    4. Howard is 100% correct. Buying a fully automatic weapon is possible, but it requires a deep FBI background check and (registration with the BATF)

      1. In some jurisdictions it also requires a Sherriff to sign off on possessing said machine gun.

  8. This is not the time to talk about how we should talk about banning military-style assault guns. Nono.

    1. Glad you are on board with never banning any weapons.

      1. The real tragedy is that this shooter was just a plain nut and not an ISIS nut. Then, you could make your libertarian arguments about how we need to control immigration from desperately poor countries filled with religious fanatics.

        1. I will wait and see, thanks.

          Its does not really matter who or why this person did this regarding the 2nd Amendment.

          Gun control laws of any kind are unconstitutional and should be treated as such no matter what FEELZ situation whips up gun control nuts.

          1. Or, you know, get an amendment.

            But we don’t do that here.

          2. And where does the 2nd Amendment specify “guns”?

            Obviously as an arms-rights absolutist, you must endorse the freedom of an individual to own napalm. Or a nuclear weapon. Explain why not.

            1. Yes Tony. And it would be so much better if this guy had run over these people with a truck like they do in Europe. They would be less dead I guess. But don’t let that stop you from making whatever disgusting political points you think you can score off the deaths. How many orgasms have you had this morning since you found out this happened?

              1. it would be so much better if this guy had run over these people with a truck like they do in Europe

                Or shot them with automatic weapons like has happened in Europe even with strict gun control.

            2. Right, the second amendment only says “arms” so that means you can’t even legally use a fist to defend yourself against an attacker. Your right to defense only extends to strikes with the forearm and upper arm. No elbow strikes either.


            3. “Arms” means weapons that one person can carry and operate. And guns are unambiguously in that category.

              1. No it doesn’t.

                “You can’t hug a child with nuclear arms”

                1. Why the HELL would I want to hug a child? I’m not some pedi piece of shit, like Tony.

                2. In a RIFTS game once, as my full-conversion cyborg was embracing a scared toddler, I double-checked with the gamemaster that my robotic arms were indeed powered by an internal atomic power plant.

                  I then triumphantly exclaimed, “Look, I’m hugging a child with nuclear arms!”

              2. Zeb|10.2.17 @ 11:37AM|#
                “Arms” means weapons that one person can carry and operate. And guns are unambiguously in that category.

                That is not correct. Canons are not single person operated weapons and quite a few early American gave the Continental army their canons to use.

                The 2nd Amendment was designed to protect Americans right to protect themselves and violently end a tyrannical government. As a government gets more powerful weapons, so does its citizenry. Its genius really.

            4. Napalm… yes, if it were legal, loads of people would have the desire and means to own it… Nutjobs left and right, who own airplanes, or artillery, of course, would be able to deploy it everywhere… It would be the end of the world I tell you!

              Wait a minute, if I’m a criminal, I bet I can figure out how to make my own, or something close…

              1. Making napalm is nothing. That *is* one of those classic “made from household items” things. You’d see them in the shopping cart of your average American family on shopping day, which the libtards would think makes your average American family either terrorists or militia types.

                Then again, it probably *IS* what the libtards think.

            5. And yet, any retard who can read a book can make their own thermite. Did you know that the most dangerous shit around is under your sink, boy-o?

              To my recollection the most deadly attack on a school in these United States was a bombing.

            6. I eagerly await your posts on the next article about the militarization of police and how that’s a horrible thing.

              You know, since you’re against anyone that’s not in the military being armed.

            7. Tony|10.2.17 @ 11:09AM|#
              And where does the 2nd Amendment specify “guns”?
              Obviously as an arms-rights absolutist, you must endorse the freedom of an individual to own napalm. Or a nuclear weapon. Explain why not.

              All that. Good luck making your own nuclear weapon.

              Napalm is easy and it can be made from Reason’s favorite buttsex helper- Vaseline.

        2. Let’s see who he is. If he is a Muslim convert and did this for the jihad, that just shows that our problem is with Islam not with immigration per say. Anyone can convert to Islam. In fact, converts are usually the most fanatical and dangerous in any religion.

          1. Regardless of why this guy murdered a bunch of people, we have a problem with Islamist extremists. The fact the ISIS claimed responsibility for this incident, whether a lie or not, clearly demonstrates that we have a problem with Islam.

            1. Are you stupid? Do you not know how to read? You are smart enough to understand sarcasm, why are you not smart enough to follow the conversation. If the guy turns out to be a convert and did this for Islam, then it is further evidence of the enormous problem Islam is. If not, then it isn’t. That is pretty simple and obvious logic. Why do you have such a problem understanding it? Do you only understand things that fit your narrative?

              1. John, calm down. Don’t be so combative. I agree with you about 90% of the time, including this time.

                I was just pointing out that we have a problem with Islam irrespective of this incident. The fact that ISIS claimed responsibility validates that point. Nobody knows the guy’s motivation at this point.

                Yeah, I am stupid sometimes.

        3. The standard libertarian party position on immigration is open borders. It may be a good idea to at the very least, Wikipedia “Libertarian party” before rattling off projections.

        4. Then, you could make your libertarian arguments about how we need to control immigration from desperately poor countries filled with religious fanatics.

          Remember when Motel 6 was turning over registration information to ICE and we all denounced them for doing something not exactly bad or even really immoral? Good times!

          1. The best part of that was KMW saying she would never stay in a Motel 6 as a result. The idea that a top-shelf Yalie white girl like Mangu-Ward has ever so much as been in the parking lot of a Motel 6 much less would ever stay in one was one of the funniest things reason has ever published.

            1. That outrage by her did fall flat.

        5. “Robespierre Josef Stalin|10.2.17 @ 10:29AM|#

          The real tragedy is that this shooter was just a plain nut and not an ISIS nut. Then, you could make your libertarian arguments about how we need to control immigration from desperately poor countries filled with religious fanatics.”

          You do not know anything about libertarian view on immigration. Which is we want open boarders for everyone by the way. Maybe you should go and read up on the LP platform first before saying anything about the views of libertarians.

    2. This is an odd time to talk about banning armored fighting vehicles

      1. Does the Second Amendment cover the Voltron Lions?

        1. Similarly, would one be committing treason by becoming a Voltron Paladin (in terms of serving in a military capacity under the monarch of Plat Arrus)

    3. This is the perfect time to talk about the US government being the largest arms dealer in the world. By all means, let’s talk about how we can restrict the government’s access to military grade weapons.

    4. Let’s reduce vehicular homicide by outlawing jaywalking! Wait…

  9. Now being reported that some woman might have told the people waiting on line “You’re all going to die” about an hour or so before the show started.

    This should be taken with a grain of salt like all early reports, but if that actually happened… wow.

    1. I tend to believe that report. That doesn’t strike me as something someone would make up. It is certainly not something a reporter would make up out of the blue. So, clearly, someone in the crowd is saying that. I don’t see any reason to think they are lying.

      1. Probably a real psychic. Strangely, the person who was told they were about to die didn’t actually die.

        1. I do believe that sometimes we have dreams or premonitions that something will happen, and then it happens.

          I hope that’s the explanation here, because the alternative is a lot more chilling.

          1. I don’t think so. The account I read linked from drudge was very specific. The people said there were a man and a woman who pushed their way to the front of the crowd and were telling everyone they were all going to die that night. Security then kicked the couple out of the concert for harassing people. That doesn’t sound like something you would make up or a dream. I imagine it happened that way.

            1. Maybe they were time travelers…

          2. “I do believe that sometimes we have dreams or premonitions that something will happen, and then it happens.”

            It’s called ‘coincidence’.

            1. Try to remember the thousands or millions of occurrences on which something you thought about DIDN’T happen. Why ascribe more weight to those which did? This is nothing more than cognitive bias and statistical noise.

        2. Probably a real psychic. Strangely, the person who was told they were about to die didn’t actually die.

          Well, not yet. But just you wait thirty years…

    2. That makes no sense. Terroristic threatening before the actual shooting, which would alert police through likely reporting?

      1. Ever been told by a crazy person that you’re going to die? I’ve had it happen to me dozens of times. Somehow, I’m still alive. This is pure coincidence.

    3. Now being reported that some woman might have told the people waiting on line “You’re all going to die” about an hour or so before the show started.

      If that’s the case, it will come out in the eyewitness accounts later today or tomorrow; right now, there’s too much hysteria to take anything coming out of the media at face value other than what the sheriff’s office has reported so far.

      If it’s true, it won’t surprise me.

    4. Supposedly a smoke cloud of Jesus formed from the gunfire… whoa.

  10. Hair Trump is likely to blame Obama for this shooting.

    1. No he isn’t Weigel, you stupid fucked up asshole.

      1. No he isn’t Weigel, you stupid up-fucked asshole.


    2. PB, why don’t you and Tony get together and form a suicide pact?

    3. Well, if Obama had just outlawed predatory casinos this disgruntled gambler wouldn’t have done this, so there ya go. Deregulation strikes again.

    4. If Trump is going to ridiculously blame anyone for confusing reasons, it’ll be his old Atlantic City casino rivals at MGM (owners of the Madalay Bay) for letting this guys through the way a Trump property never would!

  11. Chickens coming home to roost. Every purge of the military of sexual undesirables, every black man inappropriately kneeling during civic rituals, every mass shooting escalates the culture wars. This crumbling of the empire from within is the best we can hope for.

    1. Rumors of the republic’s death have been greatly exaggerated.

      Let’s not start marking the aberrations as the statistical norm. Even with whatever choose your own adventure for the gunman, it is still at best a few data points for what is a general decrease in violence, and a culture war that has been ongoing since the first ambivalence over societal edicts.

      A tragedy to be sure, but let’s not create an even greater one in its wake..

      1. “Let’s not start marking the aberrations as the statistical norm. ”

        I don’t think there is much point in turning to a statistician to tell us about the escalation of the culture wars. The impact of an incident like this shooting may have consequences that a statistician is not equipped to analyze.

    2. Ok, pal, ok.

  12. Tillerson is in line to get fired next. Trump is too much of an idiot to know that he is the problem – not all the goons he hired.

    1. Thank you for your contribution to this story.

    2. Butt: Even funnier is that Trump got rid of another RINO from Congress.

      Tom Price gets reelected as Congressman in Georgia. Trump convinces Price to vacate House seat and become cabinet member. Price is fired from cabinet to never return to politics again.

      Georgia 6th District House seat never goes to Democrat Ossoff.

      That is some funny xth D chess.

  13. Trump’s hair is less greasy than normal. He must be have run out of Brylcreem.

    1. Fifty people just died and all you can do is make stale Trump jokes. You are nothing if not dependable. You really are a remarkably stupid and horrible human being.

      1. So he is more of the Vitalis type?

  14. People kill people with guns in this country because they can.

    1. Would you feel better if they was pushed out of windows?

      1. Meathead should have been pushed out a window.

    2. “People kill people with guns in this country because they can.”

      I think you’ll find people can kill people anywhere with guns. Are you suggesting other countries don’t have mass shootings? And that those countries don’t have far more strict gun laws than the US? That in most countries semi-automatic and hand guns are essentially illegal? Yet mass shooting still take place.

  15. Trump to visit Vegas on Wednesday – survey damage

  16. My warmest condolences and sympathies to the victims and families of the terrible Las Vegas shooting. God bless you!

    ? Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 2, 2017

    “Warmest condolences”!?

    1. What is wrong with that? A ton of people was just murdered and you are really going to engage in word parsing over whether the President gave the right condolences whatever that means? Really? Does Trump really live in your head to that degree?

    2. Would “I’m immediately going to institute an executive order for a nationwide ban on firearms” have been more appropriate in your opinion?

    3. “Warmest condolences”!?

      Stormy sends his coldest condolences.

  17. Nothing we can do about this. 30,000 gun deaths a year is an appropriate price for the freedom to own any gun you want. Life isn’t fair. Suck it up, it’s the risk we want to take.

    Also, pwease pwease don’t tax me even a single dollar more, it isn’t fair!!!!

    1. Yes Tony, jizz all over those bodies some more. Thanks for at least being honest that you are happy these people are dead. You could at least thank them for their deaths bringing you so much righteous joy, you hideous, sick little man.

    2. 30,000 gun deaths a year is an appropriate price for the freedom to own any gun you want.

      30,000 automobile deaths a year is an appropriate price for the freedom to own any car or truck you want.

      1. Indeed, the people seem to think so.

    3. Ban all gun purchases.

      Now tell me what you’re going to do with the 320 million+ guns already in American homes.

      1. Buyback programs work. Make it a serious crime to own serious guns. Just because the NRA has helped make this situation incredibly difficult to solve doesn’t mean we should just let them win and be OK with people dying needlessly by the tens of thousands.

        1. What’s a serious gun? One used to commit the vast majority of murders (and suicides)? In that case, it’s handguns and it’s not close. So you’d let us keep our rifles (including “assault” rifles, so named as there is no such thing under US law) since they’re used in a vanishingly small number of deaths? Or does serious mean scary-looking but used in a vanishingly small number of crimes?

        2. And gun buyback programs don’t work. The number bought back is in the thousands. There are at least 300 MILLION guns in the U.S. I doubt you’ll look at this, but I always err on the off chance:

    4. Setting aside the fact that the majority of those gun deaths are suicides and suicide is none of your damn business, yes, thousands of gun deaths every year *is* an acceptable price to pay for the widespread private ownership of guns just the same as thousands of automobile deaths every year is an acceptable price to pay for having automobiles. The alternative to everybody having lots of guns isn’t nobody having any guns as you seem to think, notice the gun grabbers never talk about taking away the government’s guns as a first step to getting rid of all the guns. They’re talking about banning the private ownership of guns, leaving government as the only ones with guns. Notice how oppressive the government is now when there’s still some risk that if they go too far they’re going to be facing an armed insurrection, you think disarming the citizenry is somehow going to make them kinder and gentler and less oppressive? I suspect getting rid of all the guns would lead to a higher number of gun deaths, but it’d all be nice and legal like with a blindfold and a cigarette and a bullet to the back of the head.

      1. To be fair, Tony believes that Her Furher will be in charge when that happens and the 1st Reich of Glorious Democrats will last for 100 years.

        1. Tony, I’d like to see a response to the FBI’s estimate that 50-75% of all gun murders in the US are directly related to the illegal drug trade and committed with illicitly obtained weapons. How will your beloved gun control policies end these killings? And if you’re not doing something to address the vast majority of gun murders, what is the point?

      2. This incident is quite disturbing, however between this and everything I have read by the agenda driven MSM for the last year none of it inspires me to even consider that now is a good time for me to be disarmed. Like the saying goes: When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
        The agenda driven MSM Globalist 5th. column marching to Perdition deserves at least honorable mention for inspiring the vitriolic conditions we are currently living with. After gun control there is still no more volatile weapon than race baiting better suited for the MSM Globalists divide and conquer strategy to sellout our sovereignty. The historic 4th. estate has been bought out by the Globalist 5th. column marching to Perdition. I am amazed by the numbers of the ALT LEFT that want to go. Beware of the 5th column, they never sleep.

    5. Hey, once the government has nationalized healthcare they will literally be responsible for all the deaths in this country, right?

      I mean if we can ascribe blame to the loose associations between gun users, gun makers, and gun voters, then government would be rather directly responsible for killing people with pretty much any national healthcare policy.

    6. Tony|10.2.17 @ 11:13AM|#
      “Also, pwease pwease don’t tax me even a single dollar more, it isn’t fair!!!!”

      Wave that bloody shirt, you pathetic excuse for humanity.

    7. Yes, by all means let’s have a replay of Prohibition. That turned out so fucking well, especially for the poor and minorities!

      1. Hey, it’s been working great to keep drugs out of the country! Yup yup.

    8. 630,000 deaths a year from heart disease is an appropriate price to pay for the freedom to stuff yourself with as many cheeseburgers as you can cram into your gullet. Suck it up, it’s the risk we want to take.

    9. 30,000 gun deaths a year

      2/3 of those are suicide and therefor not crimes. You are disingenuous from the start. Try again.

    10. You need help, Tony.

      1. What Tony has is that he is a socialist and the only cure is him croaking. He will of course want to take as many non-socialists with him.

    11. Hospitals and highways are still far more dangerous. And a large share of those gun deaths are suicides.

      1. Suicides that would have not happened without the efficiency of a gun. Most people who attempt and fail say they regret attempting.

        1. Hanging is 70% effective, compared to 86% efficacy for firearms.

          Most gun suicides are by older rural males.

          Guess what the favorite method of older rural males is outside of the US?

    12. Tony, I keep telling you to go drink some goddamn Drano. Now go fucking do it you loathsome pedophile traitor. No one could ever love you and you have no reason to be alive. The world will be better off without you in it.

  18. ISIS now claiming that he converted to Islam months ago and joined them.

    If even a hint of evidence turns up to support this claim, this will get buried by our jihadi-loving media so fast your head will spin.

    1. Step right up! Don’t miss your chance to be the first aboard the Mandalay Truther Train!

    2. I don’t think many 64-year-old American white guys convert to violent Islam.

      1. more than likely the shooter was a stooge for the left so that they could go all in for gun control.
        dead American country music fans is a small price to pay to get our guns.

        is it to soon for conspiracies

      2. It’s the newest thing in mid-life crises!

    3. Eh, I’m skeptical of this just because it stinks of attention-whoring. If he was a radicalized convert, it will eventually come out, but I don’t believe right now that this was the case. It’s not like the Orlando shooting where the gunman himself made his motives plain.

      1. Initially I was skeptical as well, but something about this doesn’t pass the smell test. There’s apparently a mysterious foreign-born female “roommate” who just conveniently happens to be somewhere outside the country (we haven’t been told exactly where yet) whose credentials he used, and apparently at least one other person warned some of the attendees that they were going to die right before many of them did.

        The more details that come out, the more it looks like something that was pre-planned.

        1. At pretty much any music venue with a few thousand people you’re getting to get some nut jobs at the front door. This time the drunko/druggy just happened to be accidentally right, I’d say, but y’never know. It seems like if someone actually knew anything they wouldn’t just go shouting about it in front of a concert with a few thousand people at it. That is, if you actually wanted to warn anyone that is.

          This strikes me as an unrelated coincidence. Probably the drunk ravings of a pissed off concert-goer.

          1. WHo gets drunk and tells everyone at a concert they are all going to die? I have been to a lot of concerts in my life and seen a lot of obnoxious drunks but I have never seen that. People get drunk at concerts and grope women or get into fistfights about the relative merits of the act, or over who has rights to get closer to the stage. They don’t get drunk and give apocalyptic warnings about how everyone is going to die.

            Come on, that is not a coincidence.

            1. At pretty much every music venue I’ve ever been to, actually. Watch how fast a lunatic alcoholic resorts to threats and madness after they’ve been ejected from the venue or if they show up already so drunk that they can’t walk a line. I was young once, I definitely recall doing this (without the threats, obviously, but I have seen it.) It gets even more fun if they dropped some acid.

              Maybe you’re just not going to the right concerts? I will say one thing, I’ve never been to a country music show where something like that happened. At the same time, the only one’s I’ve been to have been to are usually out in a field somewhere in the middle of nowhere with perhaps a hundred people. Very yokel.

              1. I must not be. And I went to concerts back in the day when people did heavy drugs at them. And I never once saw that. And I have been to a few country concerts and I really can’t imagine it happening there. Maybe some death metal show or Marlyn Manson, but the big country concert in Vegas? No way.

      2. Yeah. Like I said above, I will believe he was a Muslim convert when I see it. It is possible. But, it is going to take more than one unconfirmed report from Russia Today for me to believe that.

    4. Fortunately, 4chan will never let it go. The truth will out.

    5. Better yet, if *no* hint of evidence of it turns up, it will expose ISIS as taking credit for attacks which aren’t theirs, which can then be used to question *other* attacks they take credit for, which we can use to suck the air out of ISIS hysteria.

      1. Have they ever done that before? I’ve never heard of them taking credit for something they weren’t connected to in the past.

  19. I’d be interested in exactly which of the new, more strict gun control laws the anti-gunners will be demanding in the wake of this shooting would have stopped or seriously hindered a lone gunman like this guy.

    I’m predicting that none of their suggestions–short of door-to-door confiscation–would have stopped him.

    1. I’ve seen that suggestion of door to door confiscation on other sites already

    2. I’m pretty certain the New York Times and Samantha Bee will be calling for just that.

      1. You mean “have called for just that”?

  20. the media keeps pointing out that the shooter had a hunting license, I’m still trying to figure out how that is pertinant its as pertinant as saying he shopped at Kmart

    1. Suspect is hatless. Repeat, hatless

    2. It is pertinent because it shows that even hunters can be mass killers and thus can’t be trusted with guns!! No shit. That is what they are thinking.

      1. And was an accountant, and had a private pilots license. Amazing he didn’t just gas it up and fly into something.

        1. I’m glad someone else finally brought this up about him being a pilot and owning two planes. If he was an Islam convert, wouldn’t flying the plane into something (like into the concert crowd) be more their MO? The only way I can see them changing their MO in mass killings like this is if there is a purpose. With the influx of Muslim refugees coming into the country and infiltrating our political process, it’s not unfathomable that the extremists may be pushing for more stricter gun laws. What better way to enact Sharia law when they completely take over our politics?

      2. Yeah, guilt by association would be my guess. I’m surprised they haven’t reported he’s a registered Republican yet.

      3. I agree thats the goal John even a few years ago Cal fire blamed a major fire on a Hunters camp fire not just a campfire which was the issue but a hunters camp fire. the hunter part eventually turned out to be false accusations with no evidence but was barely reported a year later

    3. In a hunter’s life a half dozen riffles in October would not even raise an eyebrow.

  21. After seeing a video from the concert, I can’t tell if that’s full auto gunfire or bump fire. I’m not familiar enough with the sound of either to tell. Maybe one of you hardcore gun nuts can weigh in.

    1. If you listen carefully to the reverb, you can tell it’s got a folding stock and a pistol grip and one of those things on the front that goes up.

      1. Don’t forget the compass on the stock as well that thing is dangerous

    2. I don’t know what he was firing. M16s don’t go full auto. They only fire in three round bursts. The thing the media never understands is that unless you have a heavy machine gun that is anchored to something, fully automatic fire is not the most lethal way to kill people. You end up wasting too much ammunition and the recoil of the weapon ruins your sight picture. This is why the military got rid of the fully automatic setting and went to a three-round burst setting when they built the M16A2.

      So, I don’t think it mattered whether he had a fully automatic weapon. He could kill just as many or more with a good semi-automatic rifle.

      1. Spray and pray is perfectly effective if you’re shooting into a dense crowd of 10,000 people.

        1. To some degree but you are going to spray up and away with the recoil. Also, you can’t just pull the trigger and hold it. You run out of ammunition and have to reload. More importantly, the barrel heats up and becomes unusable pretty quickly. Can you kill a few more people with a fully automatic weapon in such a situation? Maybe, if you know what you are doing and don’t overheat the barrel and have some ability to control the weapon. But, you won’t kill that many more. Semi-automatic fire is pretty rapid too and won’t overheat the barrel and will as a whole be much better aimed.

          1. I heard he had ten rifles and two rooms to work with and he did go through a heck of a lot of rounds. You would have thought someone would get suspicious of the heaver than normal suit cases he brought into the hotel. but then if your care full it can be done but I’m sure the law suits will be soon

            1. You would have thought someone would get suspicious of the heaver than normal suit cases he brought into the hotel. but then if your care full it can be done but I’m sure the law suits will be soon

              This was my thinking. Even if you brought up 10 lighter cases individually that someone would’ve stopped to ask, “Hey, what’s with all the cases?” I suppose, if you were staying for a week and brought a couple a day, no one would notice. Also, it wouldn’t surprise me if, in Las Vegas and/or NV, you do get guys advertising around gun shows who’d rather have a room full of locked guns rather than leave them wherever.

              1. I’ve worked a lot of hotels. You learn not to ask questions like that. Maybe in some cowtown where the staff is all into your business in Vegas? No way.

                1. “but” in Vegas

              2. In a hunter’s life a half dozen riffles in October would not even raise an eyebrow.

            2. He carried in his own bag(s).

      2. John, the older ones do fire full auto. When I was active duty Army, my M16 was Vietnam era and was capable of fully automatic fire.

    3. If is was “bump fire” he must have had a lot of practice. Very consistent rate of automatic fire, at least from what I heard in the video.

      1. I don’t know the type of gun used but AR’s are easy to shoot with little recoil and the bullets will travel far but with little accuracy which isn’t needed in a crowd of people

        1. Actually, the bullets don’t travel that far. I really wanna know the range at which this dude engaged at. With a full length AR-15 (20.5″ barrel) you’re already getting substantial drop at 300 meters. Maximum effective range with normal ball ammo and that barrel is 550 meters but hitting anything at that range with 5.56 is mostly lucky as the round has poor ballistics.

          Also, range really plays a role in the accuracy here. Well built ARs in 5.56 traditionally fire 0.5 MOA or so which is actually quite good but, again, the anemic round quickly wrecks the precision of the rifle past 300 meters.

          The key is knowing the range, calibers, and firearms he used.

          1. Google maps shows the lot the music festival was right across Las Vegas blvd from the hotel and between the hotel and the airport. Estimate 500-600 feet not including downward angle.

            1. Yeah, I did some calculations and from his window, using the Pythagorean Theorem, it came out to a little over 320 meters.

              Weill within range of even 5.56.

          2. He was shooting at a large crowd of people, so accuracy wasn’t a factor.

          3. Also, range really plays a role in the accuracy here. Well built ARs in 5.56 traditionally fire 0.5 MOA or so which is actually quite good but, again, the anemic round quickly wrecks the precision of the rifle past 300 meters.

            Uh, not to get too uppity but the Civilian Marksmanship Program M16 EIC at Camp Perry is 3-positions at 200 yds. both slow and rapid fire. The X is three inches across and the 10 ring is 7. The effective point target range for the round/rifle is 600 yds. with maximum effective range against an area target at 800+ yds.

            If you can’t hit a target with a 5.56 at 500 yds. it’s on you.

          4. At 300m you should be dead on with an m16, if you have it sighted properly. Anything beyond, yes you will have bullet drop.

    4. It’s tough to tell whether it is a fully automatic weapon from the sounds in the video. I know from extensive shooting experience that you can pretty easily replicate a 300-400 round-per-minute rate of cyclic firing with a semi-automatic rifle if there is a light trigger in the rifle. If the guy was shooting at a giant, packed, crowd of 22,000 people from 300 yards away it is not like he would have needed to really aim. Just point the rifle at the crowd and start mashing the trigger.

      1. Sadly, this is going to bring up some huge and pointless debate about the evils of fully automatic weapons. The truth, as you point out, is that semi-automatic fire can be just as deadly. So whether he had an automatic weapon or a semi-automatic one is beside the point.

        1. What it will do is cut attendance at open air events where the surrounding high ground can’t be cleared by security in advance.

          1. Its like people rebuilding next to the ocean in hurricane zones.. they will continue to do it.

    5. After seeing a video from the concert, I can’t tell if that’s full auto gunfire or bump fire.

      The difference is moot.

      Not to say that there aren’t performance differences, but you’re going to have to know what guns he used, what modifications were involved, and/or what sort of experience he had in order to definitively distinguish between the two. At which point, you’ll know which guns he used, what their modifications were, and how much experience the shooter had.

    6. That was full auto gunfire.

      Its a dead give away when the shot sounds get mixed like that. Check out a WWII video of a German MG42 firing. They called it a buzzsaw for two reasons and one reason was because it fired so fast that all the bullet firing sounds ran together.
      MG42 video

      1. Huh? The rate-limiting step in both cases is how quickly the bolt carrier group can fly back into firing position after a single shot. The bump stock mechanism operates much faster than this, as it has a significantly shorter distance to travel.

        You won’t be able to hear the sound produced by the action of the bump stock over the noise of the explosions happening right next to it. In a perfectly operating bump stock, you could not register an acoustic difference by ear. You might be able to do it by sophisticated post-processing (I can think of ways to do it with variants of Fourier analysis).

  22. like Stanley implied I’m startled that people able to profit $5278 in one month on the
    computer . Find Out More


    Trump”s New Opprunuties See Here

  23. FYI: Mandalay Bay is adjacent to the Las Vegas airport. If this guy wanted he could have lit up an incoming or outgoing airplane and cause many more deaths and mayhem.

    1. The story wording about a “balcony” isn’t accurate either. He just shot out the windows.
      And it looks like 2 non-adjacent windows are broken. Why is that?

      1. The closest part of the hotel to that lot is high end suites based on Google maps of Mandalay Bay hotel.

        Big suite equals more windows to look out of but don’t open.

        My bet is on a shotgun to “open” windows that don’t open and then put a fully automatic firing rifle with bipod on a piece of furniture. And away he went.

        He could have shot at the Las Vegas airport which was past the lot he was shooting into.

      2. Probably wanted two different shooting angles or he messed up and one of the windows didn’t provide good shooting angle.

      3. He had a corner suite, apparently knocking out one window in each of the two rooms to increase his choice of firing angles.

  24. “It is still unclear which weapons he owned, whether he owned them legally, or whether they were semi-automatic or fully automatic.”

    And it will probably remain unclear for some time. The News Media have proven, time and time again, that they cannot tell the difference between a semi-automatic pistol and a revolver, or a bolt action rifle and an assault rifle. Not won’t, mind. CAN’T.

    1. He had magic boomsticks which were imbued with GREAT mojo…

  25. The oil cans: He hates the oil cans.

    Stay away from the oil cans.

  26. So glad to see that open-carry worked so well at allowing law-abiding to self-deputize and neutralize the shooter.

    1. 32 stories up? Who could make that shot?

  27. Another mass shooting. By somebody who would have passed all the requirements for owning a gun in almost every state.

    But let’s get this in perspective. In spite of the headlines that these mass shootings get, your chances of dying of gun violence are pretty small: about 1 in 7,000. You’re more likely to die in a motor vehicle accident: 1 in 114.

    But your most likely cause of death? Natural causes. Heart disease (about 30%, slightly under 1 in 3). Cancer (about 28%, slightly over 1 in 4). Lower respiratory diseases(*): about 1 in 28.

    The top non-natural cause of death is accidents: 1 in 12. Then suicide: 1 in 95. In terms of preventing premature death — death by anything other than old age at 70+ — you’d get much better results with traffic safety improvements than worrying about firearms! Require cellphones to not work in a moving car — that would save a WHOLE lot more lives than restricting gun ownership and open carry. [Given everything, you could probably build something that would work in the hands of a passenger but not in the hands of the driver, and not if the voice comes from the driver’s seat.

    Not that I’m suggesting any such thing, just pointing out that we would do better expending energy on auto accidents than on firearms.


    (*) flu, emphysema, etc.

    1. The speed limit should be dropped to 40 mph. If it saves even one life….

    2. Your link says assault by firearm is 1 in 370. Where does the 1 in 7,000 come from? The closest I can see is “firearm discharge”. I would take this to mean something like accidentally shooting yourself.

      1. I did the math. The 1 in 370 number checks out with the FBI’s numbers for gun murders per year and the life expectancy.

  28. Not the deadliest mass shooting in US history. Look it up on Wiki or any other reliable source.

  29. I realize the media operates on deadlines but this whole story is as barren of any research beyond a body count as it could possibly be and still fill a single column.. All be it everyone with a TV set knows until the CSI people finish their forensic examinations every story is pure speculation.
    I can’t help but wonder if the upcoming SCOTUS case has anything to do with the killer’s motivation, whoever it was. In a hunter’s life a half dozen riffles in October would not even raise an eyebrow.

    Supreme Court’s next big gun control case? Post-Newtown laws face …
    Aug 4, 2017 – A Maryland law could be at the center of the next big precedent-setting gun case at the Supreme Court.
    Jay Porter, an attorney for the plaintiffs, complained about a patchwork of rulings in the wake of the landmark 2008 Heller decision upholding the individual’s right to own a gun. He called on the Supreme Court to clear up the confusion.
    “We would like to see a reversal in the trend of the lower courts,” Porter said. “At best, there is a lot of confusion in the lower courts about the Second Amendment. At worst, lower courts are ignoring and resisting the Heller decision because they didn’t like the outcome. That resistance needs to be mediated.”

  30. Las Vegas Shooting Update: 58 Dead, More Than 500 Injured – Hit & Run : Reason.comis the best post by imo for pc Please visit imo app imo app snaptube for pc snaptube app

  31. “the suit is won, it would render inviable any future civil suits against MGM over the massacre”


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.