One simple glaring incongruency.....

15  2017-10-05 by Soapysoaperson1

If Stephen Paddock were planning a mass shooting, why did he need 18 guns? It would make way more sense to bring only one or two guns and a ton of ammo.

This to me lends some validity to some of the theories on here.

43 comments

1  skorponok 2017-10-05

Maybe he was worried about them overheating but that's a reach because then you would bring 4 or 5 and not like 347

1  Soapysoaperson1 2017-10-05

He had 20 guns. That is suspect af imo.

1  skorponok 2017-10-05

I thought it was 42

1  Soapysoaperson1 2017-10-05

Not to mention he shot himself in the heart and the head, died with his arms above his head, the gun was a few feet behind him, there were only a handful of shell casings on the floor, there was far from enough blood under his body and a complete lack of brain matter, and the blood looks like prop blood.

I'm not a crime scene investigator, but I feel like Columbia would have a few questions at this crime scene.

1  skorponok 2017-10-05

Yeah but none of that will matter when you bring it up to someone. Those are facts....can't have those

1  Soapysoaperson1 2017-10-05

My wife is a million percent sure there were shootings at other locations too. The internet is being scrubbed of reports, but I saw another post by a Vegas resident who said everyone he has talked too isn't buying the so for shooter story.

We both saw posts on Twitter of people at other casinos talking about multiple shooters in LV

1  skorponok 2017-10-05

Yeah I have seen those as well. But there's nothing left to follow up on, just a few video posts or testimonials, the verification sources have been scrubbed

1  OGCASHforGOLD 2017-10-05

Also a rifle leaning on his leg from the hotel room shots. How the fuck does that actually happen?

1  M4GICM1KE 2017-10-05

23 in room 19 at home

1  Harbinger707 2017-10-05

Looks like arms deal..smells like arms deal....

1  noooonan 2017-10-05

Explain?

1  Soapysoaperson1 2017-10-05

The main theory on this sub is the Paddock was a spook, and was making an arms sale to ISIS (who did claim responsibility for the attack) similar to the failed Fast and Furious program.

Isis learned it was a setup, killed Paddock, and then proceeded to use the weapons on the concert crowd.

1  dncisapsyop 2017-10-05

That's not the main theory

1  Soapysoaperson1 2017-10-05

That's at least one of the floating variations of the arms dealer theory

1  maskofdamask 2017-10-05

What's the main theory?

1  rookie1212 2017-10-05

And then escaped? Are you saying a bunch of middle eastern men got out of the Mandalay without even being seen following the chaos of this attack?

I think you're arriving at conclusions without evidence simply because you want that outcome to be true.

1  Soapysoaperson1 2017-10-05

I literally never said that was in any way my own personal opinion. I was answering a question on the arms dealer connection

1  rookie1212 2017-10-05

Fair enough.

1  drbarber 2017-10-05

Who said Isis=middle eastern?

1  rookie1212 2017-10-05

Great way of buying straight into their narrative of "everyone can be isis, lone wolf attacks, be afraid", as an arab, chances are ISIS=someone middle eastern, somali, or chechen

1  vensorvi 2017-10-05

Not like they'd travel in a group with white garbs on though.

1  noooonan 2017-10-05

I mean I know what an arms deal is but at which point does an arms deal involve killing concert goers? Jw

1  Zarathasstra 2017-10-05

When you are selling arms to ISIS

1  kittenbananaphone 2017-10-05

Yeah except there is zero proof of that other than the ramblings of this subreddit. Rambling isnt proof

1  Zarathasstra 2017-10-05

This subreddit is for theories not proof. Feel free to discuss this topic on /r/politics or /r/news if you want an MSM fact based discussion.

No need to come to this subreddit if you aren't willing to contribute to speculating.

1  kittenbananaphone 2017-10-05

No shit. That doesn’t mean all theories are valid based on primary source evidence. Are you a flat earthier? Seem like the type

1  Zarathasstra 2017-10-05

The scientific method involves coming up with a hypothesis first.

1  Soapysoaperson1 2017-10-05

If you were a comic strip character I imagine your name would be Shillbert.

1  kittenbananaphone 2017-10-05

Yeah and how do you know what an arms deal looks like?

1  snypesalot 2017-10-05

An arms deal where they leave the weapons they came for?

1  dncisapsyop 2017-10-05

To push for legislation regarding stockpiling weapons. If you see "No American needs more than 4 guns" or something like that start getting pushed this is why.

1  jdcav 2017-10-05

It's an orgy of evidence

1  invisiblepinch 2017-10-05

Questions: were they his guns or was he going to sell them?

1  kittenbananaphone 2017-10-05

No it wouldn't make more sense. Are you suggesting he would have killed more people with less guns? Bullshit. Such utter bullshit. He was wildly successful as a lone wolf and was very smart about it. I am so sorry that that fact scares you so much you will do any mental gymnastics to not face it. Astounding.

1  Genex44 2017-10-05

No, I imagine he's suggesting that it would have been a lot less riskier bringing up two guns to his room, rather than a shitload? Would he have been able to take that many in one go? Plus all the ammo? Just seems strange to have taken a ridiculous number of guns like that when one or two would suffice.

1  kittenbananaphone 2017-10-05

There’s no risk either way. We don’t live in a police state, yet. He brought up the bags 2 at a time over several days. He was a high roller he was often there. Read more before you make yourself look like a loon

1  Soapysoaperson1 2017-10-05

I just can't think of any playable reason to bring that many guns. That's like taking 8 pairs of shoes for a 1 day hiking trip. I feel as though you are doing mental gymnastics acting like it's a logical choice to bring nearly 20 guns for no good reason other than he could get away with it. Clearly he didn't use all of the guns, and the breaks in the firing suggest he was reloading. So if the plan was to have all 18 guns loaded and ready to go, why the long breaks when he was shooting?

1  kittenbananaphone 2017-10-05

Nothing about killing 59 people is logical. Thats why you are having a hard time putting yourself in his mind. Duh

1  Soapysoaperson1 2017-10-05

At this point there is no official version of events. The investigation is ongoing. The media since the event has been trying to pass off the lone gunman/acted alone narrative, and clearly that doesn't add up. I am just spit balling ideas, because the narrative the media initially painted doesn't add up. Even the LVPD Cheif of Police suggested a conspiracy involving others.

I am not pretending to know what happened. At this point all I can do is ask questions.

So are you saying there was a valid reason to bring that many guns? If there is, what is it, and why didn't he use most of the guns? Or are you saying he was too crazy to bring the logical amount of guns required to inflict mass carnage?

1  Soapysoaperson1 2017-10-05

I am suggesting that it's wildly impractical to bring 18 guns as opposed to a few guns with a lot of ammo.

1  kittenbananaphone 2017-10-05

Not that wildly impractical. Very very possible.

1  snypesalot 2017-10-05

What gets more shots downrange quicker....2 guns you need to reload or 20 guns preloaded and lined up to grab when you empty the one before it

1  ButtersStotch88 2017-10-05

I agree it makes no sense UNLESS other shooters were originally supposed to be there. For the record, I think he was the only shooter but that he did have a support team.

I explain this and other things in this post

1  kittenbananaphone 2017-10-05

Yeah except there is zero proof of that other than the ramblings of this subreddit. Rambling isnt proof