NV - 59 Dead, over 500 injured in Mandalay Bay shooting in Las Vegas, 1 Oct 2017 #7

[drama_farmer]

Found this article that examines the reality of "blowing up a fuel tank" It mainly addresses the fictional/special effects automobile gas tank explosions, but further down the article, jet fuel and aviation fuel (Avgas) is also discussed.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShootTheFuelTank

excerpt:
In fiction, shooting a fuel tank makes it explode. This myth was busted by MythBusters as [video=youtube;w4n--xOOoWE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4n--xOOoWE[/video] that in most cases it simply will not work. A real life fuel tank explosion was only possible when they used a minigun armed with incendiary rounds which, suffice to say, is generally unlikely.

excerpt:
Diesel pretty much won't blow at all unless you light a fire under it and keep it burning until it causes a BLEVE (Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion), which will take a while to accomplish. Jet fuel's extremely-high ignition temperature causes it to behave a lot like diesel.

Avgas (aviation gasoline, the super-high-octane blend used in piston-engined aircraft) can blow up like this (with a very Hollywoodish fireball), which is why airplanes since the 1920s have things like self-sealing fuel tanks and inert-gas-pressurization for their tanks.

...and this. . .
It is important to note that, while conventional bullets or even tracer bullets do not often generate the heat or have enough surface area to diffuse this heat fast enough required to ignite fuels like diesel or jet fuel, white phosphorus rounds, like those shot from the Lahti L-39 Finnish 20mm Anti-tank/Anti-aircraft sniper rifle (more commonly known as the "Elephant Gun") or the minigun wielded by the Mythbusters, are more than capable of both penetrating the outer shell and fuel-tank wall of the vehicle they are hitting and delivering enough heat to cause an explosion.

MOO
Not sure of the specific blend of fuel in the targeted tanks, or if SP had an "elephant gun" or "minigun" available in the room.

 

[Deleted member 158085]

This is really not shocking. I don't think they have found any information about SP to remotely show his motive for doing these mass shootings so there is no additional information to report by doing another PC.

I dont expect them to ever find a reason to explain his motive for doing so.

I don't think they have found any illegal dealings or other criminal activity in his background either before he did these mass shootings.

The motive will remain unknown and only in the mind of the dead murderer long silenced.

People don't even have to have a motive other than a motive to want to shoot innocent others in mass. That IS the motive imo, just like many others who have killed for the thrill of it and to prove to themselves they could do it.

Imo, LE will never be able to uncover anything to explain why SP did what he did.

imo

I agree. This will remain largely incomprehensible in terms of motive.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Jennifer17]

He's not a comedian.

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

He is a talk show host and a known supporter of conspiracy theories that support his political agenda.

 

[bluesneakers]

I agree. This will remain largely incomprehensible in terms of motive.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I think we expect it to make sense if we know, but how often has the motive for a mass shooting like this ever made sense?

 

[Betty P]

Link



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/10/las-vegas-gunman-six-minutes-mass-shooting

The sheriff said the security guard, Jesus Campos, heard drilling from Paddock’s room

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

From your link:

Stephen Paddock, 64, shot and wounded a security guard who came to his floor at the Mandalay Bay hotel to investigate an open door near Paddock’s suite, Clark county sheriff Joseph Lombardo said at a news conference, providing new details on what occurred immediately before the mass shooting on 1 October.

The rest of the statement in reference to drilling is pretty much the same as what JC said today. He heard drilling while in the stairwell area, it turned out to be gunfire. You're inferring that he was being dishonest when it was just rephrasing of his statement by the news media. LE reported no drilling in the room, so it was gunfire. Things change as the investigation proceeds. What difference does this make? Paddock was the lone gunman. JC was shot by him, reported it and helped LE investigate the crime afterwards.

 

[canadiangirl]

From your link:



The rest of the statement in reference to drilling is pretty much the same as what JC said today. He heard drilling while in the stairwell area, it turned out to be gunfire. You're inferring that he was being dishonest when it was just rephrasing of his statement by the news media. LE reported no drilling in the room, so it was gunfire. Things change as the investigation proceeds. What difference does this make? Paddock was the lone gunman. JC was shot by him, reported it and helped LE investigate the crime afterwards.

You asked for a link the sherrif said that, I provided it. That is all

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

 

[Spice]

You asked for a link the sherrif said that, I provided it. That is all

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

As we know, information has changed since October 5th, as is normal in a fluid investigation. It helps the conversation when we use the latest information in its totality. IMO

 

[canadiangirl]

As we know, information has changed since October 5th, as is normal in a fluid investigation.

Yes and as we know it has changed HOW many times?


Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

 

[Betty P]

-Anyone recall the post I referenced on when the PR Crisis firm issued a MANDATORY ‘no talk-no interview’ for their employees? I questioned it because
I thought how can they keep someone from Free Speech. A poster then responded that LV possibly being a ‘No work’ state, where if they talk they get fired. (not sure if No-work is the correct term)
I didn’t look into any further.

Sorry, I don't recall that. Do you have a link? TIA. As for employers telling employees not to talk, they can do that, but employees don't have to obey. There may be consequences for ignoring it, including firing or legal action. In such cases, employees should still have constitutionally guaranteed access to the courts for remedy if they were wrongly terminated or punished by the employer. Suggest you consult an attorney if it happens to you.

 

[Spice]

Yes and as we know it has changed HOW many times?


Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

As many times as it needed to in 17 days I guess. And it may change again, as the FBI and the Sheriff stated. I have milk in my refrigerator that predates this event.

 

[canadiangirl]

Because he donates the money to the victims fund means someone else is paying him? If he had accepted the cheque, then nobody else was paying them? But then the flap would be heard that he's financially benefiting from a tragedy.

Up to yesterday when it was assumed he wasn't talking and even worse had vanished, questions arose what was he hiding (or did he even exist). But now he talks and everything he says is under a microscope.

The guy just can't win.

He donated the money to the victims fund? Ellen said Shutterfly did it on his behalf,I his name IIRC

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

 

[Spice]

He donated the money to the victims fund? Ellen said Shutterfly did it on his behalf,I his name IIRC

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

He donated the money offered to him to a victims fund. Yes.

 

[al66pine]

-Anyone recall the post I referenced on when the PR Crisis firm issued a MANDATORY ‘no talk-no interview’ for their employees? I questioned it because
I thought how can they keep someone from Free Speech. A poster then responded that LV possibly being a ‘No work’ state, where if they talk they get fired. (not sure if No-work is the correct term)
I didn’t look into any further.

Generally a co/employer can require employees to refrain from speaking to media re work.

"In the United States, freedom of speech and expression is strongly protected from government restrictions by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, many state constitutions, and state and federal laws. The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized several categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment and has recognized that governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech. The First Amendment's constitutional right of free speech, which is applicable to state and local governments under the incorporation doctrine,[SUP][1][/SUP] only prevents government restrictions on speech, not restrictions imposed by private individuals or businesses unless they are acting on behalf of the government.[SUP][2][/SUP] However, laws may restrict the ability of private businesses and individuals from restricting the speech of others, such as employment laws that restrict employers' ability to prevent employees from disclosing their salary with coworkers or attempting to organize a labor union.."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States

Read more^^^.

 

[Tricia]

The next person who is snarky toward another member or tells a member how to post will be timed out or banned


The next person who is snarky toward another member or tells a member how to post will be timed out or banned


The next person who is snarky toward another member or tells another member how to post will be timed out or banned


The next person who is snarky toward another member or tells another member how to post will be timed out or banned


The next person who is snarky toward another member or tells another member how to post will be timed out or banned


The next person who is snarky toward another member or tells another member how to post will be timed out or banned


The next person who is snarky toward another member or tells another member how to post will be timed out or banned and if I had a bigger font I would write this again

Thank you!




​

 

[MistyWaters]

Maybe his faith in his own ability to shoot the tanks was grandiose and impossible but he still tried. Maybe he tried, didn't succeed, and then decided to just focus on the crowd.

I don't think his original plan was possible from the outset. He was grandiose, he was playing "God"imo. It is clear that he intended much much more damage and terror (The tanks, hence the incendiary rounds, and the explosive materials and guns in his car), he attempted (according to LE) but was not able to blow up the tanks, he also was not able to escape to his car. So he turned his attention to what was easiest about his plan. Shooting innocent people in the crowd, who were sitting ducks, and then he killed himself.

Good points. I also think he was grandiose in his planning and at the end of it all, (thankfully) wasn't as successful as he imagined.

Pure speculation, but a thought crossed my mind that he initially intended to leave his vehicle filled with explosives parked somewhere close to the fuel tanks. Either he failed to predict the streets surrounding the festival were blocked off or he wasn't allowed access to where he planned to park. JMO

 

[x_files]

-Anyone recall the post I referenced on when the PR Crisis firm issued a MANDATORY ‘no talk-no interview’ for their employees? I questioned it because
I thought how can they keep someone from Free Speech. A poster then responded that LV possibly being a ‘No work’ state, where if they talk they get fired. (not sure if No-work is the correct term)
I didn’t look into any further.

You're free to talk to the press and they are free to fire you because you did.

 

[Betty P]

Yes and as we know it has changed HOW many times?


Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

If you've ever followed criminal investigations, you would know they can change many times depending on the circumstances. That's why LE usually doesn't like to give out many details at first.

This investigation will conclude and facts will come out <modsnip>

 

[Spellbound]

The weight to let the world know his side. IMO he is/was being pressured to say something. Anything .. If I was in attendance that night, absolutely I'd be seeking answers. Hell I wasn't and I'm still passionate about answers and questioning things. So don't think a victim isn't waiting to hear what anyone who was there has to say.
So far we can't rely on LE to get it right MOO

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

Why does he owe anything to anyone? If I had been there, I might want to talk to others who had also been there, but I would not be going on any media &#8212; radio, talk show, newspaper, etc. If someone wants to judge me for that, so be it. I would expect it was very traumatic for all, and appreciate any witness accounts, but I would not put too much weight into them as witness stories will vary and may not always be accurate. How one reacts to stress and anxiety, the ability to think quickly or not, degree of mobility. &#8212; all will be a factor.

Personally, I find it appalling that JC is in any way being picked apart. he is NOT A SUSPECT in anything that LE has released (that I have seen or been directed to) and it seems to me we should not be accusatory in any discussion about him. But that&#8217;s just my own opinion. We are all entitled to believe differently .... but hopefully, logically.

 

[Spice]

Good points. I also think he was grandiose in his planning and at the end of it all, (thankfully) wasn't as successful as he imagined.

Pure speculation, but a thought crossed my mind that he initially intended to leave his vehicle filled with explosives parked somewhere close to the fuel tanks. Either he failed to predict the streets surrounding the festival were blocked off or he wasn't allowed access to where he planned to park. JMO

I agree. Those explosives and guns in his car were meant to be used for something. He abandoned the idea at that last minute or his plan was thwarted when he could not blow up the tanks and when he could not escape.

 

[vlpate]

Why does he owe anything to anyone? If I had been there, I might want to talk to others who had also been there, but I would not be going on any media — radio, talk show, newspaper, etc. If someone wants to judge me for that, so be it. I would expect it was very traumatic for all, and appreciate any witness accounts, but I would not put too much weight into them as witness stories will vary and may not always be accurate. How one reacts to stress and anxiety, the ability to think quickly or not, degree of mobility. — all will be a factor.

Personally, I find it appalling that JC is in any way being picked apart. he is NOT A SUSPECT in anything that LE has released (that I have seen or been directed to) and it seems to me we should not be accusatory in any discussion about him. But that’s just my own opinion. We are all entitled to believe differently .... but hopefully, logically.

Just yiza, I zm not picking JC apart, I am picking apart his and SS timeline and changing story that, IMO, is being dictated by MGM for liability purposes. I believe the first call JC made was dispatched internally to their security in order not to alarm guests with police presence - saying shots were fired could have been a drunk guy with a gun whooping it up in his room. There are too many changing narratives not to question the motive behind the changes.