Mass shooting at Mandalay Bay Casino in Vegas

[JediSkipdogg]

I heard on the news he first start buying the rifles starting in Oct. of 2016, one at a time according to ATF. Was he even taking the medication at the time of the shooting? Just because he was prescribed it doesn't mean he was taking them as he was supposed to.

As far as restricting gun ownership based on psychological issues, who decides what issues or what medications? Should a woman who has been the victim of a sexual assault or DV be prohibited from owning a handgun because her Dr. prescribed something for anxiety, for example?

I once heard an anti gunner say that anyone who wanted to own an "assault weapon" (not defined) had to be mentally ill, because a "normal person" wouldn't want such a thing.

Or how about a diabetic that is prescribed Cymbalta for extreme neuropathy (nerve pain.) It's other #1 treatment outside of diabetes is major depression. So how can one tell the difference?

[M-Quigley]

Jedi,

Good discussion.

One point though as far as 1,100 FEET. That is 335 meters. With an M16 in the Army Rifle Qualification, the farthest target was 300 meters. Most shooters are iffy or about 25-50% at that range. Personally I could hit it almost every time with open sites. Most of the qual courses are shooting up a hill. Worst shooters hit man at 25-50% rate, good shooters hitting better, worth shooting at him if for no other reason that to get his head down or interfering with his proficiency at shooting. I did usually qualify as an expert but I was one of many who did. These shots were VERY reasonable and makeable. As to collateral damage, you have to weigh 22,000 in a kill zone under full automatic weapons fire compared to 20 or so subject to errant shots.

Don't forget, in addition to the 1100 feet of horizontal distance, there was probably about 400 feet of vertical distance. While that only changes the distance to about 1170 feet, the upward angle makes the shot much more difficult to compute.

I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm not confident that I'd be able to make the shot under all those circumstances. If I did make the shot against the shooter under those circumstances with a basic AR carbine, I might have to miracle it in, as the Gunny would say. As far as missing so badly that I'd hit other rooms however, IDK. I definitely wouldn't want to accidentally hit innocent people. I do however know a couple of people who, with the proper equipment, might've been able to make the shot without hitting innocents, because they've done other real world shots far more difficult. (including at night, at elevated positions, etc)
I say "might've" because they'd have to decide on scene whether they could make the shot or not, and when. If they were there and decided they couldn't, you're no worse off than you were before, and they at least might be useful as spotters I guess.

[carmen fovozzo]

300 yd. shots were common in the service....very common...and a lot of guys did qualify Expert, I can attest to that...BUT we were in the prone position or used sand bags while in a fox hole...so prone is out and I don't think there were any fox holes available at the concert.

[TSiWRX]

I do however know a couple of people who, with the proper equipment, might've been able to make the shot without hitting innocents, because they've done other real world shots far more difficult. (including at night, at elevated positions, etc)
I say "might've" because they'd have to decide on scene whether they could make the shot or not, and when. If they were there and decided they couldn't, you're no worse off than you were before, and they at least might be useful as spotters I guess.

Exactly my feelings as well.

I'm not going to question the fact that no-one attempted to shoot in from the outside.

And even if they did, but didn't harm innocents in the backdrop? I would not fault them, either.

But to sit here and Monday-Morning-Quarterback the thing, suggesting that law-enforcement or another good-guy/girl should have, and moreover that some magical amount of collateral damage in human lives was somehow OK?

Yeah. No.

[JustaShooter]

I'm not going to question the fact that no-one attempted to shoot in from the outside.

And even if they did, but didn't harm innocents in the backdrop? I would not fault them, either.

But to sit here and Monday-Morning-Quarterback the thing, suggesting that law-enforcement or another good-guy/girl should have, and moreover that some magical amount of collateral damage in human lives was somehow OK?

Yeah. No.

Preach it, brother.

I'm a pretty darned good shot with my AR, and feel confident that that I could make the shot - if I had the ability to settle in behind cover and establish a good shooting position, with my range finder that has compensation for shooting angle, and if I knew for sure where the target was, in daylight, with no stress other than my own ego. But add all the rest of that in, and I bet there aren't that many people who could reliably make the shot without worrying about collateral damage - and most of them work for LEAs or the military and don't spend their time in gun forums lamenting that nobody was there to try to take him out, collateral damage be damned. And I'm sorry, anyone who tried, and killed some innocents in a neighboring room would be absolutely *crucified* - you think the anti-gun crowd has fodder from this event, add in "and a gun-wielding vigilante added to the carnage by killing a father of four and a young couple on their honeymoon in the rooms above and below the shooter's room" and watch the feeding frenzy.

[Brian D.]

Imagine yourselves being in a room a few doors down from the shooter's: You hear the noise, call 911, look out your window, and figure out what's going on 50 feet away from you. Gonna just hunker down, or maybe try to intervene?

I've been in one situation that was vaguely similar to my hypothetical and questions, and did what turned out to be the correct thing. I'll get back to this and tell you about it after reading some responses, if anyone cares to palaver about it.

How do you know which room to intervene at? Most hotels you can't see much out the windows. And if you do pinpoint the room, do you really make a decision to bust the door in yourself and go in guns blazing? Sorry, but I'd just stay in my room and hunker down till the chaos ends. I don't carry enough items to go against an AR and from that elevation, one would know it was definitely an AR.

Okay, those who commented on my hypothetical missed something important: You have figured out that the shooter is firing into a giant crowd of people across the street. Pretty sure if you were staying at Mandalay, you'd have been aware of the big concert taking place nearby. Within the parameters I listed, I would be trying to get through to the shooter's room.

[Javelin Man]

This would've been the ultimate fear of the anti-gunners; to be caught in the crossfire of a shootout. No, I'm very glad nobody shot back and filled the hotel windows with holes.

Does anybody want to look to the future to see if they tear down the Mandalay Bay Casino and put up a monument? Or just close the resort down indefinitely?

[bignflnut]

While we argue about what the proper response should have been (and that IS a conversation that needs to be had), can we just note that all the databases, all the "legal" surveillance done on citizens and non-citizens, all the phone records collected, all the fusion centers, DHS, all the budgeted cash thrown at various SWAT units and all that we're told is absolutely, fatally necessary for us to be separated from our Liberty because it will bring us greater Security---ALL FAILED and continues to do so?!

Jesus Campos had no firearm when he found Stephen Paddock and approached his room on the 32rd floor of Mandalay Bay on Sunday night.

SNIP

When Campos was hit, he radioed casino dispatch and told them his location—and Paddock’s.

THE. STATE. CAN'T. PROTECT. YOU.
Stop giving it your Liberty.

[TSiWRX]

THE. STATE. CAN'T. PROTECT. YOU.
Stop giving it your Liberty.

+1.

[djthomas]

Does anybody want to look to the future to see if they tear down the Mandalay Bay Casino and put up a monument? Or just close the resort down indefinitely?

Oddly enough yesterday I was talking to a guy with a company in Las Vegas that I do business with from time to time. This very subject came up. Vegas is very much a "show must go on" town. He stated that Mandalay Bay is back to full time operation, with the exception of that wing of the 32nd floor. Many locals think that's a good thing because it's a big middle finger to those who do evil. We will pause to remember those lost and then we will carry on.

Las Vegas Village is still an active crime scene and there will be no more shows there in the foreseeable future. In due time decisions will have to be made concerning that space. There's two concerns with reopening it as is. First, obviously is the significance of what happened at that very spot. Second is security considerations. Knowing what is known about this incident, can public gatherings continue to be held there as if nothing happened or will the lawyers and insurance companies say no way Jose? (First time it's an accident, second time it was reasonably foreseeable and thus preventable).

Back to Mandalay Bay, the next question will be what to do with that particular room. Several years ago we had a police situation at one of the local no-tell motels where the guy ended up fatally shooting himself. To this day the hotel gets requests to be assigned that room; all sketchy characters. There have been a few people who were suicidal and the police ended up taking them to the hospital. That's just from one local incident. This one has far more notoriety. My guess would be that Mandalay Bay will either wall it off or turn it into some kind of a storage room. I doubt it will be available to the public again.

[bignflnut]

I've read a suggestion that a $1500 drone can be purchased which carries a 5lb payload.
The suggestion was to take one or multiple of these drones and fly them into the room (straight through the window if need be) with tear gas canisters to end the assault, and gain entry or apprehend the assailant...

[JediSkipdogg]

I've read a suggestion that a $1500 drone can be purchased which carries a 5lb payload.
The suggestion was to take one or multiple of these drones and fly them into the room (straight through the window if need be) with tear gas canisters to end the assault, and gain entry or apprehend the assailant...

Lots more in the cost of drones than just that. And not sure what $1500 drone can carry that much payload. Our $10,000 drone can only carry 5 lbs. Also there are tough regulations and training requirements on drones. We have had our drone 1 for a year now (finally upgraded to drone 2) and just this past summer obtained the ability to fly at night. We still can't fly over populated areas yet, which I would say any hotel would be one. And some may say sure, just go against FAA regulations once, but you risk losing your drone license along with losing all insurance liability for not violating laws.

Drones are awesome, but regulations on them are tough. Home hobby drones, most don't care about regulations and violate them all the time.

[Javelin Man]

I doubt the hole in the window was large enough for the drone to fly in and deposit the payload, also how does one set off the teargas canister remotely?

[Bianchi?]

I doubt the hole in the window was large enough for the drone to fly in and deposit the payload, also how does one set off the teargas canister remotely?

Uhh... If you have communication with the drone, it's child's play to remote ignite a gas canister.

[JustaShooter]

Not sure how the drone would have helped - by the time you got drone on-site and deployed, you are in the same time frame as the police response that ended the shooting in the first place.