I wonder how Paddock reacted to other mass shootings

Think about it Stephen was around for more shootings than a majority of mass killers/people on this fourm. He was 31 at the time of San Ysiardo, He was 46 at the time of columbine, and he was 59 at the time of Sandy Hook.

His life seems so normal compared to other shooters, his mental state would be fascinating to learn about. Like when columbine happened what did he think? Did he think they were punk kids or did he think it was funny. Was wanting to kill people always a thing in his life like Carnell Marcus Moore and the thoughts finally consumed him. he was a well educated guy, had money, and old. which goes against what everyone thought of mass shooters typically are.

I just wonder what led him down this path and how long he had thoughts of this. He left nothing behind to show a motive, other shooters leave no real motive. But Lanza, Reyes, Sharpe. were mass shooting obsessed and wanted to kill. STEPHEN HAS NOTHING THAT EVEN BEGINS TO EXPLAIN HIS MOTIVES

Maybe he was sick of that gosh darn country concert waking him up.

InsaneIntruder wrote:

Maybe he was sick of that gosh darn country concert waking him up.

I still think it very odd that he actually complained about the noise coming from another suite before the attack.

Maybe you could ask the westboro baptist church for a motive to why the shooting happend........

He didn't seem like a guy that kept track -- but I haven't researched the case yet all that much so who knows.

Stephen Paddock must be one of the most boring shooters ever, no warning signs that were obvious, and raining bullets from above just seems repetative and somewhat easy.

Ziamber II wrote:

Stephen Paddock must be one of the most boring shooters ever, no warning signs that were obvious, and raining bullets from above just seems repetative and somewhat easy.

Has a really high kill count though.

But nobody will remember him in 19 years time.

Ziamber II wrote:

But nobody will remember him in 19 years time.

its been 6 months and already he's been mostly forgotten

I wonder if anyone is going to remember the one year anniversary.

Stephen's age is honestly probably the most interesting thing about him, mainly for the questions you brought up, and also because of his likely character evolution throughout the years. I feel like most shooters weren't born thinking that murder was okay, and it seems like most of them only transition to those types of thinking patterns whenever they begin to experience some kind of despair, whether it be depression, rage, or something else entirely.

For Eric and Dylan I'd imagine that was probably sometime during the beginning of high school, which gradually led to them being able to commit murder/suicide. But with someone like Stephen? I wonder if when Columbine was the biggest news story his reaction was the same as the general public, like,

"Wow, that is so disturbing, I can't believe two kids would do that to their fellow classmates. What would drive them to do that?", and then in his later years after some kind of transformation in his way of thinking occurred which led to his point of view on the subject to change, and now instead of having the same questions everyone else did, he now was able to fully sympathize with the two.

It's just a thought, I could be entirely wrong but I think it's interesting regardless.

Ziamber II wrote:

Stephen Paddock must be one of the most boring shooters ever, no warning signs that were obvious, and raining bullets from above just seems repetative and somewhat easy.

that moment you realize the fucking columbine shooters are more recognizable then americas worst mass shooter lol

Ziamber II wrote:

Stephen Paddock must be one of the most boring shooters ever, no warning signs that were obvious, and raining bullets from above just seems repetative and somewhat easy.

I don't think someone who did a mass shooting can be boring if you really take a look at his life, especially when he started to change. But the thing is we know nothing about him. It is weird how the media completely forgot him. I am sure if they searched more there would be plenty of things to say. Also if the police released more documents it would be great, they probably found interesting stuff about Paddock.

I wonder if the Police will release anything that was found on his laptop? Probably not as the shooting has basically been forgotten.

Tommy QTR wrote:

I wonder if the Police will release anything that was found on his laptop? Probably not as the shooting has basically been forgotten.

Do they still search about him? Is there a trial linked to the shooting or something that could make them keep searching. It is annoying when the shooter is dead because it makes people less motivated to search. It's what happened when Richard Durn killed himself, there was no trial and the shooting has been forgotten.

Isn’t it interesting though nowadays it is one of the shootings with the biggest kill count and yet no one talks about it anymore.

Yet my God we will figure out if Eric and Dylan really did go to outback the night before. And how do we know it was outback there’s other steakhouses in Littleton!!!!

It’s a very interesting sign of the times I think.

Neah wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

I wonder if the Police will release anything that was found on his laptop? Probably not as the shooting has basically been forgotten.

Do they still search about him? Is there a trial linked to the shooting or something that could make them keep searching. It is annoying when the shooter is dead because it makes people less motivated to search. It's what happened when Richard Durn killed himself, there was no trial and the shooting has been forgotten.

I remember hearing the radio in February or March that the Police were looking for a woman in connection with the Shooting, but that's all I've heard in a few months so it probably has been forgotten.

Tommy QTR wrote:

I wonder if the Police will release anything that was found on his laptop? Probably not as the shooting has basically been forgotten.

I think he destroyed his hard drive so there's nothing on it anymore.

QuestionMark wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

I wonder if the Police will release anything that was found on his laptop? Probably not as the shooting has basically been forgotten.

I think he destroyed his hard drive so there's nothing on it anymore.

Classic Lanza trick, I wonder what was on there before he destroyed it?

Tommy QTR wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

I wonder if the Police will release anything that was found on his laptop? Probably not as the shooting has basically been forgotten.

I think he destroyed his hard drive so there's nothing on it anymore.

Classic Lanza trick, I wonder what was on there before he destroyed it?

Lanza was hardly the first to remove or destroy a hard drive but Paddock was only missing one hard drive and he had four laptops with him. There were three others that were analyzed and three cellphones in the room. They did release some of the search history from two of Paddock's laptops in the report from January and they also revealed that he had images of child pornography on one of them. This was on the Dell E5570 and interestingly, he had a search on his other laptop for "Where is hard drive located on e5570" from a few days before the shooting. I am assuming that he was attempting to hide evidence of the pornography but I guess that he never figured out where it was located or he needed the laptop working at the time of the shooting so he could view the outside cameras that he had placed. There was another broken Dell (I am assuming that this was the one with the missing hard drive) so maybe he had identical laptops and got confused about which one had the child pornography located on it or maybe there was something (somehow) even worse on the other Dell.

sscc wrote:

There was another broken Dell (I am assuming that this was the one with the missing hard drive) so maybe he had identical laptops and got confused about which one had the child pornography located on it or maybe there was something (somehow) even worse on the other Dell.

Something that would link his brother to the CP maybe? I know Stephen's brother was arrested for CP possession.

Tommy QTR wrote:

Neah wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

I wonder if the Police will release anything that was found on his laptop? Probably not as the shooting has basically been forgotten.

Do they still search about him? Is there a trial linked to the shooting or something that could make them keep searching. It is annoying when the shooter is dead because it makes people less motivated to search. It's what happened when Richard Durn killed himself, there was no trial and the shooting has been forgotten.

I remember hearing the radio in February or March that the Police were looking for a woman in connection with the Shooting, but that's all I've heard in a few months so it probably has been forgotten.

It's not just Paddock. The non-political mass shooting is no longer the media event it was;, the coverage is just too saturated. A pattern has emerged; suddenly, while browsing the internet or idly flipping through TV channels, there's a handful of news reports regarding a shooting in Location X, City Y. There's a burst of curiosity, an excitement almost; whats the body count? what gun did he use? was it an AR-15? was he white or a black? can we pin this on our political opponents? Details trickle out; a number of innocents gunned down, the name of a firearm model, one or two interesting tidbits to come in between the political shit throwing. As the hours tick by, the little details solidify, become concrete. A picture emerges, the horrific deaths of innocents summed up in a paragraph or two. "An [ADJECTIVE] [NOUN], [DESCRIPTION], killed [X] and wounded [X] with a [WEAPON] on [XX/XX/XXXX]." The Wikipedia page, started within an hour or so of the first news article, has a neat little description at the top and a few paragraphs below. A sterile description of men and women being blown apart, a number of dead and wounded, and the name of a rifle or shotgun or pistol is posted on the side. The coverage slows down a bit, a couple of tidbits, a family member or friend interviewed, a man stands on a pile of corpses to shout condescendingly to you. People begin to get bored, interest dwindles and dwindles until the whole matter has been forgotten about, usually within a few days. A few scant news articles pop up, telling of "new developments", discussing the investigation, but it's been forgotten about by the general public, abandoned to the dregs of Wikipedia, to be occasionally mentioned in a research paper or a powerpoint presentation.

STK wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

Neah wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

I wonder if the Police will release anything that was found on his laptop? Probably not as the shooting has basically been forgotten.

Do they still search about him? Is there a trial linked to the shooting or something that could make them keep searching. It is annoying when the shooter is dead because it makes people less motivated to search. It's what happened when Richard Durn killed himself, there was no trial and the shooting has been forgotten.

I remember hearing the radio in February or March that the Police were looking for a woman in connection with the Shooting, but that's all I've heard in a few months so it probably has been forgotten.

It's not just Paddock. The non-political mass shooting is no longer the media event it was;, the coverage is just too saturated. A pattern has emerged; suddenly, while browsing the internet or idly flipping through TV channels, there's a handful of news reports regarding a shooting in Location X, City Y. There's a burst of curiosity, an excitement almost; whats the body count? what gun did he use? was it an AR-15? was he white or a black? can we pin this on our political opponents? Details trickle out; a number of innocents gunned down, the name of a firearm model, one or two interesting tidbits to come in between the political shit throwing. As the hours tick by, the little details solidify, become concrete. A picture emerges, the horrific deaths of innocents summed up in a paragraph or two. "An [ADJECTIVE] [NOUN], [DESCRIPTION], killed [X] and wounded [X] with a [WEAPON] on [XX/XX/XXXX]." The Wikipedia page, started within an hour or so of the first news article, has a neat little description at the top and a few paragraphs below. A sterile description of men and women being blown apart, a number of dead and wounded, and the name of a rifle or shotgun or pistol is posted on the side. The coverage slows down a bit, a couple of tidbits, a family member or friend interviewed, a man stands on a pile of corpses to shout condescendingly to you. People begin to get bored, interest dwindles and dwindles until the whole matter has been forgotten about, usually within a few days. A few scant news articles pop up, telling of "new developments", discussing the investigation, but it's been forgotten about by the general public, abandoned to the dregs of Wikipedia, to be occasionally mentioned in a research paper or a powerpoint presentation.

Or a discussion forum about crime and criminals.   

Seriously though I think this goes a long way to disproving the idea that mass shooters are just after fame. The nation forgets about them too quickly; they quickly become another face in a crowd, a mere statistic, if that.

QuestionMark wrote:

Or a discussion forum about crime and criminals.   

Seriously though I think this goes a long way to disproving the idea that mass shooters are just after fame. The nation forgets about them too quickly; they quickly become another face in a crowd, a mere statistic, if that.

Yeah, maybe, but we mostly talk about shooters like James Holmes and Adam Lanza, guys who committed their shootings back when 12 dead was considered extreme. Alot of psychos haven't gotten the memo that even if you kill 50+ people the american public will probably forget about you in a week; I'm not saying that mass shooters are only after fame, or even that fame is a large part of their motivation, but fame does play a role, and I think that more recent shooters have just been in denial about their lack of longevity rather than them not caring about fame at all.

...............Maybe I'm just being cynical about all this. Maybe the next shooter's going to be as interesting as Lanza and achieve as much fame as him, and I'm just disheartened by a string of uninteresting shooters with large bodycounts, but somehow I doubt it...................

STK wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

Neah wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

I wonder if the Police will release anything that was found on his laptop? Probably not as the shooting has basically been forgotten.

Do they still search about him? Is there a trial linked to the shooting or something that could make them keep searching. It is annoying when the shooter is dead because it makes people less motivated to search. It's what happened when Richard Durn killed himself, there was no trial and the shooting has been forgotten.

I remember hearing the radio in February or March that the Police were looking for a woman in connection with the Shooting, but that's all I've heard in a few months so it probably has been forgotten.

It's not just Paddock. The non-political mass shooting is no longer the media event it was;, the coverage is just too saturated. A pattern has emerged; suddenly, while browsing the internet or idly flipping through TV channels, there's a handful of news reports regarding a shooting in Location X, City Y. There's a burst of curiosity, an excitement almost; whats the body count? what gun did he use? was it an AR-15? was he white or a black? can we pin this on our political opponents? Details trickle out; a number of innocents gunned down, the name of a firearm model, one or two interesting tidbits to come in between the political shit throwing. As the hours tick by, the little details solidify, become concrete. A picture emerges, the horrific deaths of innocents summed up in a paragraph or two. "An [ADJECTIVE] [NOUN], [DESCRIPTION], killed [X] and wounded [X] with a [WEAPON] on [XX/XX/XXXX]." The Wikipedia page, started within an hour or so of the first news article, has a neat little description at the top and a few paragraphs below. A sterile description of men and women being blown apart, a number of dead and wounded, and the name of a rifle or shotgun or pistol is posted on the side. The coverage slows down a bit, a couple of tidbits, a family member or friend interviewed, a man stands on a pile of corpses to shout condescendingly to you. People begin to get bored, interest dwindles and dwindles until the whole matter has been forgotten about, usually within a few days. A few scant news articles pop up, telling of "new developments", discussing the investigation, but it's been forgotten about by the general public, abandoned to the dregs of Wikipedia, to be occasionally mentioned in a research paper or a powerpoint presentation.

As William Atchison said...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:

I wanna take a picture of this and frame it on my wall

10/10

QuestionMark wrote:

Or a discussion forum about crime and criminals.   

You mean there are people who spend their days studying and talking about mass shootings?! What a bunch of freaks!

STK wrote:

Yeah, maybe, but we mostly talk about shooters like James Holmes and Adam Lanza, guys who committed their shootings back when 12 dead was considered extreme. Alot of psychos haven't gotten the memo that even if you kill 50+ people the american public will probably forget about you in a week; I'm not saying that mass shooters are only after fame, or even that fame is a large part of their motivation, but fame does play a role, and I think that more recent shooters have just been in denial about their lack of longevity rather than them not caring about fame at all.

...............Maybe I'm just being cynical about all this. Maybe the next shooter's going to be as interesting as Lanza and achieve as much fame as him, and I'm just disheartened by a string of uninteresting shooters with large bodycounts, but somehow I doubt it...................

I agree, mass shooters don't do it for fame, but I think it is something that adds to the motivation.

Chris Harper-Mercer wrote:

A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. ... Seems the more people you kill, the more you're in the limelight.

Ivan Lopez (2014 Fort Hood shooter) about Adam Lanza and other mass shooters wrote:

These bastards have perfected their way of attacking studying previous massacres to gain publicity and their minute of fame as a villain. But thanks to Hollywood and the sensational profiling by the media [they] give more power to those intelligent cowards.

Nikolas Cruz wrote:

When you see me on the news, you'll all know who I am.

But even without the fame that some manage to get, they would do their shooting because I think the most important is what they feel at the moment (power, people have awe towards them, feared) and what their victims feel at the moment.

Adam Lanza wrote:

The enthusiasm I had back when Virginia Tech happened feels like it’s been gone for a hundred billion years

I feel it is what we feel right now, even if I am not very proud of it.

STK wrote:

Maybe I'm just being cynical about all this. Maybe the next shooter's going to be as interesting as Lanza and achieve as much fame as him, and I'm just disheartened by a string of uninteresting shooters with large bodycounts, but somehow I doubt it...................

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

IMO Nikolas Cruz is what I would consider a new and interesting shooter with a high body count and lasting impact going forward. He's getting more mentions than Paddock, Mateen, or many other shooters with a higher or comparable kill count (though admittedly this might be due to the gun control harpies that latched on to the shooting even worse than in previous cases).

QuestionMark wrote:

IMO Nikolas Cruz is what I would consider a new and interesting shooter with a high body count and lasting impact going forward.

I would indeed say that the impact lasts too much time in my opinion. Now I feel that after each shooting people will talk about gun control again. I wonder if an impressive mass stabbing or bombing with a high death count would put an end to all that talking about guns.

QuestionMark wrote:

STK wrote:

Maybe I'm just being cynical about all this. Maybe the next shooter's going to be as interesting as Lanza and achieve as much fame as him, and I'm just disheartened by a string of uninteresting shooters with large bodycounts, but somehow I doubt it...................

IMO Nikolas Cruz is what I would consider a new and interesting shooter with a high body count and lasting impact going forward. He's getting more mentions than Paddock, Mateen, or many other shooters with a higher or comparable kill count (though admittedly this might be due to the gun control harpies that latched on to the shooting even worse than in previous cases).

I agree, I think Nik is one of the most interesting shooters there is, how relatable he is and the information there is about him, although I hate how the whole shooting is being used for more stricter Gun control.