Las Vegas Shooter: What Laws Were Broken?

On October 1, 2017, Stephen Paddock opened fire on a crowd of about 22,000 concertgoers attending a country music festival on the Las Vegas Strip, killing 60 people and injuring approximately 867. The incident is the deadliest mass shooting by a lone gunman in American history. Paddock's motive remains officially undetermined, and the possible factors are the subject of speculation. However, the question of whether he broke any laws is a straightforward one: he did.

Was the Las Vegas shooter influenced by psychotropic medication?

On October 1, 2017, Stephen Paddock, aged 64, opened fire on a crowd of about 22,000 concertgoers at the Route 91 Harvest music festival on the Las Vegas Strip, killing 60 people and injuring approximately 867. Paddock killed himself in his hotel room following the shooting.

An autopsy report from the Clark County Coroner's Office indicated that Paddock had anti-anxiety medication in his system at the time of his death. He had been prescribed 50 10-milligram tablets of diazepam, a strong sedative in a drug class called benzodiazepine, on June 21, 2017, by Dr. Steven Winkler. Paddock was instructed to take one pill per day.

Diazepam is a sedative-hypnotic drug that has been linked to aggressive behaviour. Chronic use or abuse of the drug can also trigger psychotic experiences. Dr. Mel Pohl, the chief medical officer at the Las Vegas Recovery Center, stated that diazepam can disinhibit an underlying emotional state, and that people with underlying anger issues "can become aggressive" when sedated by the drug. This finding has been confirmed by several medical studies.

Dr. Michael First, an expert on benzodiazepines and a clinical psychiatry professor at Columbia University, noted that the reason for Paddock being prescribed the drug in the first place "may have more to do with why he did what he did." However, Paddock's autopsy revealed that he was not under the influence of any psychoactive drugs or alcohol at the time of the shooting, although his urine did contain benzodiazepines.

While there is no definitive evidence that Paddock was influenced solely by psychotropic medication, the presence of diazepam in his system and its potential side effects raise questions about its possible role in his actions.

Did the shooter break any gun laws?

On October 1, 2017, Stephen Paddock opened fire on a crowd of about 22,000 concertgoers attending the Route 91 Harvest music festival on the Las Vegas Strip, killing 60 people and injuring approximately 867. This incident is the deadliest mass shooting by a lone gunman in American history.

Paddock had meticulously planned the attack. He checked into the Mandalay Bay Hotel and Casino on September 25, six days before the shooting, with 10 shooting-range bags and a computer. On September 29, he moved into an additional suite connected to the first one; both rooms overlooked the festival grounds. He stayed in both rooms in the days leading up to the shooting.

Paddock's arsenal included 14 .223-caliber AR-15 type rifles, eight .308-caliber AR-10 type rifles, one .308-caliber Ruger American bolt-action rifle, and one .38-caliber Smith & Wesson Model 342 revolver. Many of these rifles were equipped with bump stocks, which allowed him to fire shots in rapid succession, similar to an automatic firearm. In total, Paddock fired over 1,000 rounds, with some sources stating the number to be 1,058.

In the aftermath of the shooting, the focus was brought to firearms laws in the U.S., specifically regarding bump stocks. While the U.S. Justice Department banned bump stocks in December 2018, the ban was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2024 for lacking a legislative basis.

Regarding the legality of the firearms themselves, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives determined that the firearms found in Paddock's hotel room, along with more guns found in his homes, had been legally purchased in Nevada, California, Texas, and Utah. However, it is worth noting that the purchase and possession of bump stocks were legal at the time of the shooting, and it was only in March 2019 that the Trump administration banned them.

In conclusion, while Stephen Paddock did not break any gun laws in terms of the legality of the firearms he purchased and possessed, the deadly nature of the shooting and the use of bump stocks brought attention to and sparked debates about gun laws in the United States.

Was the Mandalay Bay hotel negligent?

The question of whether the Mandalay Bay hotel was negligent in the 2017 Las Vegas shooting hinges on the concept of "duty of care" in basic negligence law. The hotel had a duty of care to its guests, and this duty may have extended to guests of the music festival, as it was held on land owned by MGM, the parent company of Mandalay Bay.

The key question is whether the shooting was a "foreseeable" event. Under Nevada law, there is a two-pronged test to determine foreseeability:

> The Legislature provided a definition in NRS 651.015(3). The subsection provides that a wrongful act is not “foreseeable” unless: (a) The owner or keeper failed to exercise due care for the safety of the patron or other person on the premises; or (b) Prior incidents of similar wrongful acts occurred on the premises and the owner or keeper had notice or knowledge of those incidents.

Some commentators argue that hotels, being like mini-cities, should do more to protect their guests in today's terrorist environment. They should employ more security measures to identify potential threats, such as the stockpiling of weapons and ammunition. In this case, the hotel had an unarmed security guard and cameras, but no technology to detect gunpowder or metal.

On the other hand, hotels may argue that unless an incident like this has occurred previously, they cannot be held liable. They may claim that they did what they could and that it is unreasonable to expect them to prevent such an unusual and horrific event.

In November 2017, a lawsuit was filed on behalf of 450 victims of the shooting, claiming that the Mandalay Bay Hotel was negligent in allowing Paddock to bring a large amount of weaponry into the building. In July 2018, MGM Resorts International countersued, claiming it had "no liability of any kind" for the attack. However, in 2019, MGM agreed to pay up to $800 million to settle the lawsuits filed by victims.

Was the shooter influenced by conspiracy theories?

Several conspiracy theories emerged after the 2017 Las Vegas shooting, the deadliest mass shooting by a lone gunman in American history. While the motive of the shooter, Stephen Paddock, remains undetermined, conspiracy theorists have proposed several hypotheses surrounding the involvement of other shooters, the use of a machine gun, and Paddock's political leanings.

One of the most popular conspiracy theories suggests the involvement of multiple shooters, contradicting the official narrative that Paddock acted alone. This theory is based on eyewitness testimonies, rumours, and the complexity of the attack. Some eyewitness accounts, including one posted to social media by a survivor named Kymberley Suchomel, have claimed the existence of multiple shooters. However, these accounts have not been supported by tangible evidence, and independent researchers and fact-checking organizations have disproven the multiple shooter theory. Law enforcement, including the FBI and the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, have also confirmed that Paddock acted alone, based on considerable evidence including witness testimony, ballistic analysis, and CCTV footage.

Another theory suggests that Paddock used a machine gun during the attack, rather than the AR-15-style rifles discovered by law enforcement. This theory is based on the high rate of fire heard during the attack, which many believed sounded like a machine gun. Many witnesses, particularly those who recorded videos, have claimed that a machine gun was used. However, official investigations and evidence indicate that various firearms, including rifles, were used, and not a machine gun.

Conspiracy theories have also linked Paddock to Antifa, an anti-fascist movement. Radio host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones popularized this theory, claiming that Paddock selected a country music festival because it was likely to be attended by "pro-gun folks and Trump supporters." This theory has been heavily criticized by mainstream media and law enforcement for a lack of evidence and "spreading disinformation." There is no evidence to support any link between Paddock and Antifa, and the FBI has stated that Paddock did not have ties to any terrorist organization.

Other conspiracy theories surrounding the Las Vegas shooting include the involvement of the Islamic State or ISIS, a government cover-up, and the existence of "crisis actors." These theories have also been discredited by official investigations and a lack of credible evidence.

Did the shooter break any other laws?

Stephen Paddock, the Las Vegas shooter, broke several laws. Firstly, he committed mass murder, which is illegal in the United States. Secondly, he fired a weapon in a crowded public space, which is also illegal. Additionally, he was in possession of a large number of firearms and ammunition, which is illegal without the proper licensing and permits. Furthermore, he was found to have child pornography on his laptop, which is a serious criminal offence.

Paddock's arsenal included several assault rifles and high-capacity magazines, which are highly regulated in the United States. He also had bump stocks, which were banned by the US Justice Department in December 2018 but later legalised by the Supreme Court in 2024. These devices allowed him to fire shots in rapid succession, similar to automatic firearms.

Paddock's motive for the shooting remains officially undetermined, but investigators found no evidence of accomplices or a second shooter. They did, however, discover hidden surveillance cameras set up inside and outside his hotel room, suggesting he may have been planning the attack and wanted to monitor his surroundings.

Frequently asked questions