What do you think Paddock's motive was?

Often times in the aftermath of a shooting, it is said that the motive is not known. Usually when this happens, looking back at the shooter's history will provide a clear picture of, if not the motive itself, circumstances that provide insight.
Paddock however, seems to be one of the few cases in which the words "motive unknown" are perfectly fitting;
A well to do 64 year old man with no known history of violence or mental illness, plans out the most methodical shooting spree in years, killing 58 people and wounding nearly 500.  As I said, this may just be because we haven't gotten the full picture yet, but it's still a puzzle nonetheless.  So, I was interested in what you might believe his motivation to be.

As of now, my money's on "fame seeker". The attack was extremely well planned, taking into account minute details such as wind speeds. The large amount of firearms he had, as well as the high capacity magazines and bump-stocks indicated that he wanted to kill a lot of people. The fact that he booked hotel rooms at other music festivals, suggest that he didn't have any particular grudge against Las Vegas or Country music , but chose the site because it offered him a large crowd and an unobstructed. Lastly, the filming of his attack suggests that he wanted to create some sort of legacy for himself.

Since we still don't have any clue as what his motive would be, and nothing in his personal life suggests anything that would put him on the path of violence, I have absolutely no clue. At this point, the theory that Paddock was possessed by a demon or controlled by space aliens seems as likely as anything else.

QuestionMark wrote:

Since we still don't have any clue as what his motive would be, and nothing in his personal life suggests anything that would put him on the path of violence, I have absolutely no clue. At this point, the theory that Paddock was possessed by a demon or controlled by space aliens seems as likely as anything else.

Funny how this got posted just as I edited in my two cents.

STK wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

Since we still don't have any clue as what his motive would be, and nothing in his personal life suggests anything that would put him on the path of violence, I have absolutely no clue. At this point, the theory that Paddock was possessed by a demon or controlled by space aliens seems as likely as anything else.

Funny how this got posted just as I edited in my two cents.

Kek.

Well while I think the "attention whore theory" is a decent one, I don't see any clear evidence towards it, just circumstantial stuff. Which leads us right back to square 1.

QuestionMark wrote:

Kek.

Well while I think the "attention whore theory" is a decent one, I don't see any clear evidence towards it, just circumstantial stuff. Which leads us right back to square 1.

Well circumstantial evidence is better than no evidence.

I to am just stumped at what Paddock's motive might had been. Unfortunately there seems to be very little to go on to even try to pinpoint a motive. On the surface he appeared to be a normal, wealthy, older man who liked to gamble.  Then dig a wee bit and he apparently had been collecting guns for some time, but exactly what lead him to go from gun collector to evil mastermind who planned such an attack is still up in the air.

The media outlets are only fueling the confusion with their typical contradicting reports. The police investigation has started to look like a joke, considering how many times they have set a timeline of the events and then had to go backtrack when something new came up.

Also the fact that one of the homes owned by the suspect was broken into that may or may not have contained evidence pertaining to the case. At this point we still know nothing about what drove him to do it.

Investigation was always going to be suspect because events like these cause mass confusion. Look at the victims, it took them a while to take in what was happening, imagine law enforcement figuring out what was happening then and now.. At night, Mandalay Bay isn’t small.

Still have no pin point motive as to why he did this. They keep bringing up family history but he made it 64 years without any hiccups. Mental health? I don’t know. Do we really want to just call him mentally ill? Especially with the type of planning he had. Gamblers are unstable and he was definitely a numbers guy but it’s no reason to do what he did.

Not sure about fame because He was known to be a private person and this day in age of social media it’s rare to not have anything online.
Not sure if we’ll ever find out why and I’m sure he wanted it that way. He probably didn’t choose the other locations because he didn’t want to drag all those guns and firepower too far.

Just so so strange. This guy called hotel security the night before not once but twice to complain about loud music from the room below him. He really goes down as one of the more confusing mass shooters in history.

Sane One wrote:

Just so so strange. This guy called hotel security the night before not once but twice to complain about loud music from the room below him. He really goes down as one of the more confusing mass shooters in history.

I also thought that was very weird. You would think that he wouldn't have wanted to draw any unnecessary attention to himself.

The more you try to find out why the more you go crazy yourself. You can try to make the case he was a numbers guy, everything and everybody was just a number to him but he still showed compassion and love to his family and girlfriend or whoever she was to him. It’s just so messed up. I’m going to make sure my mother is all right from a deadly hurricane and make sure my woman is okay but not have a care in the world for people just having fun at a concert. It really is mind boggling.

Due to his age and activities, I suspect that there will be a decent amount of people who want to step forward with "information" about him and his life, but who knows if information from random people is reliable.

On another note, when I was watching the videos that have come out of people at the concert I kept thinking how unique it is to see videos of the scene of something like this in progress, from so many different pov's. There is a lot to learn about this.

abstractsmigs wrote:

Due to his age and activities, I suspect that there will be a decent amount of people who want to step forward with "information" about him and his life, but who knows if information from random people is reliable.

There was an article or two quoting an escort who claimed to have had sex with Paddock on multiple occasions. I never posted it because it only appeared in a couple of British tabloidy papers when I first read it but I wondered how reliable the information was. I'm not sure if it was verified or covered by any other publications since then but the information would be interesting if it's true.

Sane One wrote:

Just so so strange. This guy called hotel security the night before not once but twice to complain about loud music from the room below him. He really goes down as one of the more confusing mass shooters in history.

I have to admit, I laughed when I first read about this. It's ridiculous.

sscc wrote:

Sane One wrote:

Just so so strange. This guy called hotel security the night before not once but twice to complain about loud music from the room below him. He really goes down as one of the more confusing mass shooters in history.

I have to admit, I laughed when I first read about this. It's ridiculous.

Maybe he needed his beauty sleep.

He wanted to be infamous and/or wanted revenge on people for whatever reason and/or decided to kill himself and take others with him!

He doesn't fit into any categories based on the information given about him.
-No political or religious affiliations.
-He was 64 and well off so him wanting to do this for the notoriety doesn't make much sense.
-Based on the planning and preparation this is allot more than someone going insane and snapping.

W.A.R. wrote:

He doesn't fit into any categories based on the information given about him.
-No political or religious affiliations.
-He was 64 and well off so him wanting to do this for the notoriety doesn't make much sense.
-Based on the planning and preparation this is allot more than someone going insane and snapping.

Nothing about this case is making sense. The more we learn about Paddock, the less he seems the type that would do something like this.

STK wrote:

Often times in the aftermath of a shooting, it is said that the motive is not known. Usually when this happens, looking back at the shooter's history will provide a clear picture of, if not the motive itself, circumstances that provide insight.
Paddock however, seems to be one of the few cases in which the words "motive unknown" are perfectly fitting;
A well to do 64 year old man with no known history of violence or mental illness, plans out the most methodical shooting spree in years, killing 58 people and wounding nearly 500.  As I said, this may just be because we haven't gotten the full picture yet, but it's still a puzzle nonetheless.  So, I was interested in what you might believe his motivation to be.

As of now, my money's on "fame seeker". The attack was extremely well planned, taking into account minute details such as wind speeds. The large amount of firearms he had, as well as the high capacity magazines and bump-stocks indicated that he wanted to kill a lot of people. The fact that he booked hotel rooms at other music festivals, suggest that he didn't have any particular grudge against Las Vegas or Country music , but chose the site because it offered him a large crowd and an unobstructed. Lastly, the filming of his attack suggests that he wanted to create some sort of legacy for himself.

The lack of any other possible motivation has led to me to think that the attack was all about his father. Justifying himself to him? Surpassing him? A final bout of anger over being abandoned? Revenge against the authorities who arrested his dad?

The shooter's father's was first convicted and served jail time in Chicago. The reports say he demanded to speak to a manager until able to reserve a room overlooking Lollapalooza and he did even though he never checked in.

The shooter's father was arrested by the FBI for bank robbery in Las Vegas. He reserved a room overlooking another music festival there before finally carrying out the attack.

I haven't found a Boston connection that fits into this, but that seems to be the location he was least interested in. All I've read is that he researched hotels and places in Boston.

Hearing that the shooter's father was on the FBI top 10 list and that the shooter had worked to ensure the rest of the family was well off got me started on this path. It's like he stepped into the role his father abandoned.

Maybe he wanted to be like his bank robber father? Maybe he wanted attention? Or he was possessed by evil pedophile space devils, which is as likely as pretty much any other theory about his motive like [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] pointed out.

Curious might be on to something. I was hearing rumblings from people out there that sometimes people which included law enforcement sometimes chastised him about who his father was.

You can start getting somewhat of a clearer picture of his mindset. Once you go up against the powers that be in regards to the slip and fall and him trying to sue a hotel out there,, even for being a private person, you automatically put yourself on the radar that goes way past just gambling out there. Losing the case makes matters even worse. Family history of the father just compounds matters even more. And If he was as good as his brother claimed to be at gambling, people with any power or connections had to of known him.

Obviously nobody is ever going to admit about chastising him but it’s just another interesting theory that really makes sense.

I don't believe for a second he was the only shooter, if he was at all.  Too many eyewitnesses in the crowd stated there were multiple shooters on the ground.  My initial reaction was that he was a gun ruuner.  Who would have so many weapons in a hotel room?  Someone who was selling them or supplying them to someone.  I am not a conspiracy theorist at all, but from the beginning, I knew something wasn't right.  My gut instinct is usually right.  He was a patsy.  The real murderers are still at large as far as I am concerned.  Most likely terrorists.

starrwilliams wrote:

I don't believe for a second he was the only shooter, if he was at all.  Too many eyewitnesses in the crowd stated there were multiple shooters on the ground.  My initial reaction was that he was a gun ruuner.  Who would have so many weapons in a hotel room?  Someone who was selling them or supplying them to someone.  I am not a conspiracy theorist at all, but from the beginning, I knew something wasn't right.  My gut instinct is usually right.  He was a patsy.  The real murderers are still at large as far as I am concerned.  Most likely terrorists.

Eyewitness testimony isn't reliable, especially if you're cherry picking. That's generally not because the witnesses have any ill will, it's because human memory is flawed, especially in traumatic situations. That's the basis of most conspiracy theories. Most people accurately remember what happened, but some are convinced they saw or heard things they actually didn't.

I read about a study where the subjects were shown a traumatic video with parts removed. A day later, most accurately described what they saw but 1/3 of them were convinced they "remembered" parts of the video they hadn't actually seen. Their brains had tried to fill in the gaps to explain what happened, creating false memories.

curious2017 wrote:

Eyewitness testimony isn't reliable, especially if you're cherry picking. That's generally not because the witnesses have any ill will, it's because human memory is flawed, especially in traumatic situations. That's the basis of most conspiracy theories. Most people accurately remember what happened, but some are convinced they saw or heard things they actually didn't.

I read about a study where the subjects were shown a traumatic video with parts removed. A day later, most accurately described what they saw but 1/3 of them were convinced they "remembered" parts of the video they hadn't actually seen. Their brains had tried to fill in the gaps to explain what happened, creating false memories.

Completely agree with this! This is why most witness statements are usually all over the place in terms of accuracy. You could have two people in the exact same place, seeing the exact same thing. Yet they would have completely different stories, down to different perpetrators, different directions of gunfire, etc.

curious2017 wrote:

Eyewitness testimony isn't reliable...

I'll go a step further for this particular event: intoxicated, terrified people who have never been shot at before and were still trying to process what happened...are not reliable witnesses.

I can't blame them, I would probably recount the same kinds of things: it was chaos, there was gunfire coming from this direction and this direction, I'm still in shock, etc.

Someone would have to explain to me that the initial crack of the bullet breaking the sound barrier sounds like one thing from one direction, then a thump sounds very different and comes from the actual direction of the shooter (the hotel windows), ricochet sounds like a third thing from yet another direction (ground-level), then you have an echo effect from everything that comes from several different directions...even trained people who can normally immediately point to where the shooter is were going to have difficulties.

starrwilliams wrote:

I don't believe for a second he was the only shooter, if he was at all.  Too many eyewitnesses in the crowd stated there were multiple shooters on the ground.  My initial reaction was that he was a gun ruuner.  Who would have so many weapons in a hotel room?  Someone who was selling them or supplying them to someone.  I am not a conspiracy theorist at all, but from the beginning, I knew something wasn't right.  My gut instinct is usually right.  He was a patsy.  The real murderers are still at large as far as I am concerned.  Most likely terrorists.

Agree with this! Paddock was dead before the shooting even began.

silentprocess wrote:

starrwilliams wrote:

I don't believe for a second he was the only shooter, if he was at all.  Too many eyewitnesses in the crowd stated there were multiple shooters on the ground.  My initial reaction was that he was a gun ruuner.  Who would have so many weapons in a hotel room?  Someone who was selling them or supplying them to someone.  I am not a conspiracy theorist at all, but from the beginning, I knew something wasn't right.  My gut instinct is usually right.  He was a patsy.  The real murderers are still at large as far as I am concerned.  Most likely terrorists.

Agree with this!  Paddock was dead before the shooting even began.

I don't think so, and I would say that this conspiracy theory stuff is not going to be helpful in the slightest.

Why is it a conspiracy theory when there's no evidence saying otherwise?

starrwilliams wrote:

 Too many eyewitnesses in the crowd stated there were multiple shooters on the ground.

Would you happen to have any links to the witness reports that say there was other shooters?

I'm not specifically saying there were other shooters, even though there's video of muzzle flashes from way lower in the building than the 32nd floor and there's not enough brass in "Paddocks" room.  Some amateurs acoustic research points to more than one shooter as well, but I haven't even looked into that.

I just think that this isn't what it seems is all and the inept FBI/Police investigation isn't helping.  

I think Paddock was killed before the shooting started and someone else did the shooting.  But it's just what I think.  

Sorry I don't believe media reports and our FBI.  lol

Edit: in regards to the witness accounts of multiple shooters, there's quite a few on youtube from people at the concert ect. Most of the ones I'm finding are not on major media sites (lmao...) but on fringe media sites. Still the videos are there from the concert and otherwise.

silentprocess wrote:

Sorry I don't believe media reports and our FBI.  lol

Not like they haven't earned the reputation for being deceitful.

I for one do not count myself among the sheeple who just blindly believe anything they see or hear about. I like to dig, and look at things from every possible angle and then see what makes the most logical sense.

Say no to sheeple!!! I found that this is even something that both sides of the political spectrum even agree on. I rarely agree with anyone at work about anything, but we all agree that this is not at it seems. Believe it or not my proclamations are way more conservative than theirs.

The people here seem to believe the government has a direct hand in it. Which is completely understandable since some are military wives and we are contracted to the government. It's interesting the closer you get to the government the less you trust it.

notoriety, gambling loss or mental health problems for now but there is more to come out

The United States government has previously instigated coups in democratic countries , has attempted to assassinate foreign leaders
, and has attempted to blackmail people, and if that isn't enough to get you concerned :
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Operation Northwoods was a proposed false flag operation against the Cuban government, that originated within the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) of the United States government in 1962. The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or other U.S. government operatives to commit acts of terrorism against American civilians and military targets, blaming it on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba. The plans detailed in the document included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.[2] The proposals were rejected by the Kennedy administration.[3]

I'm not saying this shooting was a false flag operation, but the government has repeatedly shown that it is willing take actions ranging from fucking up democratic countries for their own benefit, to straight up murdering people to get it's way.

silentprocess wrote:

Why is it a conspiracy theory when there's no evidence saying otherwise?

If you're going to delude yourself and believe that there's some sort of conspiracy or strange happenings afoot here, then by all means, go right ahead. After all, it's not my job to convince you otherwise and all things considered I probably wouldn't be able to change your mind anyway.

On the plus side, if indeed you're right you have full permission to tell me "I told you so, [insult of your choice]".

Mass murder motives are all the same: Revenge, injustice, grudge, power, envy, notoriety/fame. Pick one or several.

Or he was just a psychopath all of this life.

My real thought on this particular guy is that, maybe he spent his entire life containing his demons. He was able to stave them off for years through vices like gambling and drinking. Maybe nothing really "snapped"... maybe he just wasn't strong enough to fight anymore.

When I first heard it, I though it had to be gambling debt. But now I have my doubts about it.

Cobra6 wrote:

When I first heard it, I though it had to be gambling debt. But now I have my doubts about it.

yeah same i thought it was some guy getting revenge against institutions at vegas for losing a large amount of money whilst gambling or some other business linking to Vegas and the Casinos but now it is entirely different

QuestionMark wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

Why is it a conspiracy theory when there's no evidence saying otherwise?

If you're going to delude yourself and believe that there's some sort of conspiracy or strange happenings afoot here, then by all means, go right ahead. After all, it's not my job to convince you otherwise and all things considered I probably wouldn't be able to change your mind anyway.

On the plus side, if indeed you're right you have full permission to tell me "I told you so, [insult of your choice]".  

Alot of these conspiracies are far out but in these cases with limited info and no motives law enforcement does act strange and hesitant and there are strange anomalies among the evidence but i do believe Vegas is an event in which no outside source was involved and that the conspiracy is the cryptic motives of stephen paddock and his why he did this to such a complex and planned scale

TucosTeeth wrote:

My real thought on this particular guy is that, maybe he spent his entire life containing his demons. He was able to stave them off for years through vices like gambling and drinking. Maybe nothing really "snapped"... maybe he just wasn't strong enough to fight anymore.

I think that makes some amount of sense. This is just a theory, but perhaps Stephen Paddock was a high functioning psychopath, akin to a Wall Street stockbroker, who kept his dark side hidden from everyone by gambling and other, mundane activities, then one day decided that it wasn't good enough anymore and chose to indulge his inner demons.

His father was said to be a career criminal with a psychopathic personality, it's not much of a stretch to assume Stephen inherited those tendencies.

silentprocess wrote:

I'm not specifically saying there were other shooters, even though there's video of muzzle flashes from way lower in the building than the 32nd floor and there's not enough brass in "Paddocks" room.  Some amateurs acoustic research points to more than one shooter as well, but I haven't even looked into that.

I just think that this isn't what it seems is all and the inept FBI/Police investigation isn't helping.  

I think Paddock was killed before the shooting started and someone else did the shooting.  But it's just what I think.  

Sorry I don't believe media reports and our FBI.  lol

Edit: in regards to the witness accounts of multiple shooters, there's quite a few on youtube from people at the concert ect.  Most of the ones I'm finding are not on major media sites (lmao...) but on fringe media sites.  Still the videos are there from the concert and otherwise.

Exactly. The independent media sites are willing to hear the truth from the eyewitnesses who were there.

QuestionMark wrote:

TucosTeeth wrote:

My real thought on this particular guy is that, maybe he spent his entire life containing his demons. He was able to stave them off for years through vices like gambling and drinking. Maybe nothing really "snapped"... maybe he just wasn't strong enough to fight anymore.

I think that makes some amount of sense. This is just a theory, but perhaps Stephen Paddock was a high functioning psychopath, akin to a Wall Street stockbroker, who kept his dark side hidden from everyone by gambling and other, mundane activities, then one day decided that it wasn't good enough anymore and chose to indulge his inner demons.

His father was said to be a career criminal with a psychopathic personality, it's not much of a stretch to assume Stephen inherited those tendencies.

I feel like you may be on to something here, Paddock's dad was on the FBI's most wanted list from when he was 15 until he was nearly 25, I have a hard time believing this had no effect on him psychologically.

Jollyhelpful wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

TucosTeeth wrote:

My real thought on this particular guy is that, maybe he spent his entire life containing his demons. He was able to stave them off for years through vices like gambling and drinking. Maybe nothing really "snapped"... maybe he just wasn't strong enough to fight anymore.

I think that makes some amount of sense. This is just a theory, but perhaps Stephen Paddock was a high functioning psychopath, akin to a Wall Street stockbroker, who kept his dark side hidden from everyone by gambling and other, mundane activities, then one day decided that it wasn't good enough anymore and chose to indulge his inner demons.

His father was said to be a career criminal with a psychopathic personality, it's not much of a stretch to assume Stephen inherited those tendencies.

I feel like you may be on to something here, Paddock's dad was on the FBI's most wanted list from when he was 15 until he was nearly 25, I have a hard time believing this had no effect on him psychologically.

I read in a couple of places that the mother tried to hide this from her sons (or at least from Stephen Paddock). I think she told them that he was dead but if the neighbors knew about it, what are the chances that Stephen really didn't know about it?

Here are the articles that I mentioned in another post.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I still don't know if it's legitimate but she claims that he bragged about his criminal father and said that he was "born bad."

Personally, my only theory is that Paddock was driven to insanity by watching the show The Blacklist about Raymond Reddington, who was a master criminal and an FBI top ten fugitive. James Spader bears some resemblance to Big Daddy Paddock these days.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

And he can see no reasons
'Cause there are no reasons
What reason do you need to be shown?

QuestionMark wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

Why is it a conspiracy theory when there's no evidence saying otherwise?

If you're going to delude yourself and believe that there's some sort of conspiracy or strange happenings afoot here, then by all means, go right ahead. After all, it's not my job to convince you otherwise and all things considered I probably wouldn't be able to change your mind anyway.

On the plus side, if indeed you're right you have full permission to tell me "I told you so, [insult of your choice]".  

I would consider it enlightening myself.  Your implying that I'm trying to deceive myself.  Which you have also done while stating:

"I think that makes some amount of sense. This is just a theory, but perhaps Stephen Paddock was a high functioning psychopath, akin to a Wall Street stockbroker, who kept his dark side hidden from everyone by gambling and other, mundane activities, then one day decided that it wasn't good enough anymore and chose to indulge his inner demons.

His father was said to be a career criminal with a psychopathic personality, it's not much of a stretch to assume Stephen inherited those tendencies. "

A huge assumption on one piece of evidence.  My thoughts are just as legitimate as yours.

This is why I like to look at everything involving a case. Even down to the wildest, most nut job inspired conspiracy theories.

Some people just think outside the box and will catch or notice some totally random bit of info that others who take things at face value will miss. A lot of conspiracy theorists ideas come from legitimate facts, they just go about researching or thinking about things in a different manner.

Don't get me wrong some of these people are truly just out of their minds and will make crazy claims, but sometimes some will make connections and then you are like "DAMN how did I miss that?"

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

This is why I like to look at everything involving a case. Even down to the wildest, most nut job inspired conspiracy theories.

Some people just think outside the box and will catch or notice some totally random bit of info that others who take things at face value will miss. A lot of conspiracy theorists ideas come from legitimate facts, they just go about researching or thinking about things in a different manner.

Don't get me wrong some of these people are truly just out of their minds and will make crazy claims, but sometimes some will make connections and then you are like "DAMN how did I miss that?"

I appreciate you being open minded. I am looking into every aspect until there's legitimate facts disproving something one way or another. Right now the only facts we have are there are 59 people dead including Paddock, an injured security guard who won't answer hard questions, police withholding information/ineptness, and many pieces of evidence that do not support what little the police have shared (timeline, not near enough brass in the room to support 10 minute continuous shooting, and more).

silentprocess wrote:

Right now the only facts we have are there are 59 people dead including Paddock, an injured security guard who won't answer hard questions, police withholding information/ineptness, and many pieces of evidence that do not support what little the police have shared (timeline, not near enough brass in the room to support 10 minute continuous shooting, and more).

To be honest, I count only two real facts in this statement: 59 dead people. Injured security guard.

The rest is subjective, wouldn't you agree?

silentprocess wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

This is why I like to look at everything involving a case. Even down to the wildest, most nut job inspired conspiracy theories.

Some people just think outside the box and will catch or notice some totally random bit of info that others who take things at face value will miss. A lot of conspiracy theorists ideas come from legitimate facts, they just go about researching or thinking about things in a different manner.

Don't get me wrong some of these people are truly just out of their minds and will make crazy claims, but sometimes some will make connections and then you are like "DAMN how did I miss that?"

I appreciate you being open minded.  I am looking into every aspect until there's legitimate facts disproving something one way or another.  Right now the only facts we have are there are 59 people dead including Paddock, an injured security guard who won't answer hard questions, police withholding information/ineptness, and many pieces of evidence that do not support what little the police have shared (timeline, not near enough brass in the room to support 10 minute continuous shooting, and more).

You may be open to alternative truths but you have also discounted relevant facts. You have said that Paddock was inexperienced with weaponry even though there's no reason to believe that. You are saying that although he was found dead in the room where the shooting happened, surrounded by an entire arsenal that he purchased with his own money, that these facts do not support the conclusion that he was the shooter. I think that these are good reasons to believe that he was the shooter. Maybe there are other possibilities but it's not close minded to accept those facts as reasonable proof that he was the perpetrator (or at least one of them). It's true that some questions still need to be answered but so far, the evidence that he perpetrated this crime outweighs the evidence that he did not. Of course, if you want to say that you don't trust the information that has been released by official sources, then there's not going to be enough common ground to discuss evidence anyway because then you could say that these pictures did not come from the hotel room where the shooting happened or that this was not even the hotel room where the shooting happened to begin with.

silentprocess wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

Why is it a conspiracy theory when there's no evidence saying otherwise?

If you're going to delude yourself and believe that there's some sort of conspiracy or strange happenings afoot here, then by all means, go right ahead. After all, it's not my job to convince you otherwise and all things considered I probably wouldn't be able to change your mind anyway.

On the plus side, if indeed you're right you have full permission to tell me "I told you so, [insult of your choice]".  

I would consider it enlightening myself.  Your implying that I'm trying to deceive myself.  Which you have also done while stating:

"I think that makes some amount of sense. This is just a theory, but perhaps Stephen Paddock was a high functioning psychopath, akin to a Wall Street stockbroker, who kept his dark side hidden from everyone by gambling and other, mundane activities, then one day decided that it wasn't good enough anymore and chose to indulge his inner demons.

His father was said to be a career criminal with a psychopathic personality, it's not much of a stretch to assume Stephen inherited those tendencies. "

A huge assumption on one piece of evidence.  My thoughts are just as legitimate as yours.

Dude, believe what you want, I don't care.