Stephen Paddock

oneonesit wrote: There a number of reasons why Sydney Casino has the highest violence statistics of any major venue. One of these is a lot of people doing their arse in the one spot !

The volume of people passing through it may have some input into that, I am not a fan or apologist for casinos either, I think the way successive govts have approved more casinos is dead wrong.

oneonesit wrote: So all those old western movies when cowboys are shot playing cards is fallacy....unbelievable !

The context of that was usually cheating, from my observations. I have been in some bent card games, and never resorted to violence, but did avoid any further contact with the cheats !

oneonesit wrote: Max you made yourself very clear in another thread. You said punters were mugs & were fair game. .

You are verballing me, 1-1. I never said that.

Carioca wrote: Many would have went on during prohibition, your commenting on one now, and what goes on behind closed door's you read about but know little of the reasons, losses at gambleing would be holding its own there with a belly full of drink thrown in.

You are assuming this massacre is attributable to gambling losses, I wouldn't make that assumption. Of course gambling losses frequently lead to domestic discord, but so do a host of other money-munching vices, particularly drugs. But we are talking about a mass shooting here.

That is saying punters are mugs, and fair game ? It is saying that there is no compulsion to bet, other than a self-generated one.

Seems to me, 1-1, that you are taking your antipathy towards gambling operators, out on me ! Better that than buy a machine gun, I guess.

oneonesit wrote: max manewer wrote: Seems to me, 1-1, that you are taking your antipathy towards gambling operators, out on me ! Better that than buy a machine gun, I guess. Maybe Max. I just don't have the same faith in Corporate Bookies you seem to have Max. Without some legislative guidelines they would be signing kids up outside pre-schools !

& I certainly do not have the pre-occupation in worrying that the poor old Corporate Bookie is not making enough profit !

max manewer wrote: oneonesit wrote: max manewer wrote: That is saying punters are mugs, and fair game ? It is saying that there is no compulsion to bet, other than a self-generated one. Your kidding Max...revisit that thread. Your whole argument was that it was fair & reasonable for Corporate Bookies to fleece mug punters....that no legislation was required to keep them in check. Fair dinkum ! Nope, you are gilding the lily. "mug" is a pejorative I have not applied to anyone. The biggest advertiser at the moment appears to be Crownbet, and I seriously doubt it is money they will easily recoup. But again, it is a matter of personal choice to bet, drink, take drugs etc, and a life that is marred by wasting money you can't afford to spend, is in the end down to the spender, no one else.

Exactly....so why make out you care when you obviously don't ! Keep it a free for all

max manewer wrote: You might as well pass laws preventing shopaholics from racking up huge credit card debt, 1-1, as crack down on gambling outlets. You infringe on the liberty of others. There is absolutely no substitute for self-control in this life, and those without it will **** up big-time, one way or another.

Why....financial institutions set credit limits ! Why have road rules Max....surely self-control should cover that !

I know a bloke, who I had not seen for decades, that got himself into severe financial distress from various addictions, He spun me a few sob stories and I helped him out financially. I had real doubts that he wasn't wasting what I gave him on some kind of addiction(s), (not gambling), but since I found out the real situation, he won't be getting any more from me. That is what addicts of any kind do, lie, cheat, steal, cadge, anything but accept they are not in control, and need to be.

It is all supposition, at this stage. I can accept the casino industry wants to distance his gambling habits fromn what happened, and even that the wider authorities would be complicit in wanting to do that, but what the real situation was, we may never know.

I see the FBI has set itself the goal of issuing a report on Steve's rampage, and the motives behind it.....by next October !

The motives will never be unravelled, imo, when you start trying to rationalize the irrational, it never ends with a satisfactory result. I can't imagine why the "how" of his deeds will take till next October to figure out, that should already be a mature investigation, the "why" can't realistically be expected to ever crystallize, if it hasn't already, either. In my opinion, of course.

Passing Through wrote: These investigations are designed to fail. Too many powerful lobbies dont want answers

you sound like a conspiracy theorist which you were quick to label everyone else in here as one, who were suspect on the whole thing and the way it was being handled.


but youve come around. better late than never.

Passing Through wrote: The Centre for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) is the body who researches and collects data on gun crime in the US ''Strangely'' congress keeps cutting their budgets to the point where they dont have the resources to do that properly. Statistics required for legislative assessment comes down to the FBI and local and state law enforcement data.

Passing Through wrote: cabosanlucas wrote: Passing Through wrote: They dont, the NSA/FBI does that so what was your point about security cameras in vegas casinos?   That surveillance does a fantastic job of catching crooks. They will have every detail of this monster's life that can be electronically gathered and it is a great thing they do

but powerful lobby groups corrupt the investigation and wont let the truth out.

backflip.