"Bumpstocks"

He had 580 shots meet target against 1200 bullets.

Almost a 1:2 hit ratio with bump stocks.

Many reports of multiple shooters?

Some survivor witnesses dead after the attack.

Complete media shutdown case closed "Lone Gunman".

Occam's razor says's Paddock was a magician.

580 hits from 1200 bullets is not unusual. He was basically shooting at fish in a barrell. Most of the hits would have happened in the first volley of fire when everyone was still packed like sardines.

You're out of your mind if you think getting close to 50% accuracy from 475 yards (almost 5 football fields) away with that rate of fire, using a bump stock isn't unusual... Especially for an out of shape 60 year old with little to no training. Maybe if he used a mounted/bi-pod gun or even shot in bursts, but the official narrative hasn't indicated that or have they shown the "shooters nests" they've referred too initially.

Well he's actually mistaken. There were 580 people injured, but not all of them were bullet injuries. So it wasn't really a 50% hit rate.

It was probably around 400 people shot with either 1100 or 900 bullets shot (I haven't seen whether they include the 200 bullets down the hallway as part of the 1100 or not). I came to the 400 shot victim number base off of the numbers reported by 2 hospitals that took in 300 injuries and 200 of them were gun shot vitims:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-las-vegas-shooting-20171003-story.html

Many of the most critically wounded patients arrived at the 541-bed University Medical Center of Southern Nevada, the state's only Level One trauma center. Over about four hours, it received 104 patients. More than 80 percent were gunshot victims.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/10/04/555584905/sheer-number-of-casualties-makes-las-vegas-count-difficult

On Wednesday, Sunrise Hospital revised the total number of patients it had treated down — from 214 to 200, of whom 16 died and 29 were still in critical condition. Of those, the hospital estimates about 120 had gunshot wounds, but did not release an exact figure.

Lets say the 1,100 bullets fired were all on the crowd, that still a 36% accuracy rate at 475 yards with a bump stock. To give you an idea of how hard it would have been for a 60 year old out of shape gambler with little gun training, here is a bump stock from 30 yards .

Where are you getting 580 rounds hitting targets? Not everyone that got hurt was hit by a bullet.

well consider the angle he was shooting from

if you're shooting from a higher angle into a crowded area, there's more surface area on the head/upper torso (dependent on specific angle) that would lead to this result.

hitting someone in the feet or legs would be, essentially, threading the needle.

not here to debunk this conspiracy or anything but just to give a reasonable alternative possibility.

I’ll be the first to say there is something off and even covered up when it comes to the Vegas shooting, but getting shot in the head or chest often leads to death. I don’t know why this has to be spelled out but there ya go

And shooting into a crowd from a high angle results in a lot of hits to the upper body... Whod have thunk.

He was shooting a crowd from above, of course he was going to get a lot of headshots.

Yeah, like where was op expecting the bullets would go?

This post is stupid.

anyone who has played a first person shooter will know the total area of everything not a head is much larger than the total area of all heads

It was a concert crowd packed together.

Think left4dead not CoD.

Not when you have 50,000 heads packed into a small area. Likely 50% head surface area at that point.

Probably closer to 35%

As if the victims stood perfectly still once they realized that they were being shot at. That many headshots on moving targets in that amount of time at 400 yds is significant.

Thank you. I believe something is fishy with this whole thing, but when shooting into a crowd from above, a lot of head shots are to be expected.

Especially when you're only counting the people that died.

You mean that people who are fatally shot, were shot at vital locations? Who would have though!

In a more serious note, what you describe is a well known statistical fallacy, studded extensively in WW2. You can read up on it if you like.

What's it called? I agree the results aren't suspicious. I simulated the shooting in Arma 3 which has the most accurate ballistic simulation model available to the public and the engine is used by various military to simulate combat. I was easily able to achieve the amount of kills (for lack of better term) that Paddock did using both 5.56 and 6.5mm rounds and following the same full-auto fire patterns as he did from the same height and firing to the same distance.

I'm actually surprised more people didn't die.. it seems it should be twice as many. Lucky the shooting ended when it did.

Hm, I don't know if it has a specific name as other fallacies. I mean, I am sure statisticians call it something, but I am not aware of a distinctive name.

It is based on the work of Abraham Wald and the Statistical Research Group in the United States. They were trying to figure out how to better protect bombers by adding armour on the damage-ridden areas. Wald was the first to "understand" that they were bias as they examined damage patterns only on aircraft that safely returned. He hypothesised that, since those damaged aircraft managed to return home, they were sufficiently protected in the damaged areas, and the armour should be applied to the undamaged areas of the frames: Planes who were hit there didn't make back home to examine the pattern.

It is basically the reverse of what OP is doing.

Regarding Arma3, while excellent game (I grew up with Operation Flashpoint and the like), keep in mind that its still a game and that we don't know alot of things about the Las Vegas incident. I would take any simulations with a grain of salt.

Thanks for the summary, sounds interesting. And yeah, I definitely wouldn't be presenting anything done on Arma 3 in court! Haha.

I'm still real curious why the shooting stopped when he reportedly had so many rounds left in his room as well as extra guns skills they jam/overheat etc. Plus the Las Vegas metro pd said they thought he intended to leave alive but a security guard scared him so bad he decided to kill himself? I don't buy it.

1. It takes stamina to fire that many rounds, especially in pseudo-automatic. It's like getting hit in the chest over and over and over. Paddock wasn't exactly young.

2. Response time was quicker than they want you to think. If they say it took 20 minutes to respond and it only took 7, future criminals will plan to have 20 minutes to commit their crime (casino heist/mass shooting) and will get surprised by a drastically quicker response.

3. If his ultimate goal was suicide and he didn't want to be captured alive under any circumstance, he was ensuring he was dead and had chance to bleed out before police arrived.

I don't know if any of those reasons are correct, but I think they're all reasonable answers as to why he'd stop.

I agree with 1 and 3. But you're wrong with 2. You can clearly tell how long it takes from listening to the scanners that night OR from watching the taxi driver video.

Can you hear it over gunfire?

E. I'm assuming you're saying he was listening to the scanners.

Thank you for the reply.

It gets very repetitive and tiresome firing all those rounds, especially once the adrenaline has worn off and you possibly come to terms with the fact you've just massacred a bunch of people.

Fair enough.

I know that game engine well and the reason more real people survived is because the simulation only simulates so much.

Game characters are slow to react and don't have the dynamic range of movent humans do. In game they just slowly drop to the ground. Then they get up and start running. In real life people were able to get under and next to cover

Of course it doesn't properly simulate crowd dynamics but it's close enough. If you watch the videos you will see after the first volley most (although not all) of the people just dropped straight to prone/crouch position and stayed there until the end of the 2nd volley, so in that sense it's not too different from how the AI acts in Arma. I should mention I tried it with multiple AI behavior settings ie calm, alert, combat, even going as far as to split the crowd into different groups all having different behavior patterns, until I got the result that most matched how the crowd reacted in the video. The spray from his fire would have been contained entirely within the concert grounds, therefore almost every bullet is hitting somebody in the first couple of minutes, even the ones that miss and hit the concrete since they will ricochet. Also most of the hits would have been during these first two volleys.

Another fallacy is lying:

• Dishonestly implying that the complete absence of death from complications is normal.

• Dishonestly claiming that the complete absence of death from wounds to non-vital locations is normal.

This is just great! Now some other dumb fucks are gonna hollar " SINENCE ! ! !" and prove this shit like Bill Nye.

mediocrity is evident

You mean a guy shooting from anelevated position had most of his victims die by gunshots to the chest and head? Were you expecting them to say they were dying of arm and leg wounds? What kind of shit post is this?

Considering angle of the attack down on a tightly packed crowd this just makes sense.

If you think about a large group of people standing in a field, this is not that crazy.

Where were the injured hit? There was a ratio of killed to injured at about 10 to 1 roughly. The kill ratio for Canadians was higher at 5 to 2 in the crowd.

I can even shoot that well in Counter Strike.

With a gimic like a bump stock, no less.

Why has every comment section on this sub been reduced to braindead chatter?

Who are these people that don’t believe, or have any interest in conspiracies...that hang around commenting on conspiracy forums?

This is the real conspiracy.