What the Fk, Corrupt MSM ABCnews takes advantage of Vegas shooting to smear AP/High roller, using...

What the Fk, just as our country is coping with the worst shooting in history, Corrupt mainstream media the failing ABC news, published an article slamming APs and high rollers. Using a linguistical ambiguity trick known as the Oxford comma, stated that All CTR are automatically suspicious. Basically if you're an AP and you're forced to spread high to turn a profit, you're a fking mass murderer if you they give you a CTR.

The title of this article makes me furious:

"Vegas shooter had 200+ reports of suspicious activities, large financial transactions in casinos"

http://abcnews.go.com/US/vegas-shooter-200-reports-suspicious-activities-large-financial/story?id=50258986

They probably claim they meant "Shooter had 200 reports of (SAR+CTR)", but the way they incorrectly used the comma, by the rules of American English, it means "Shooter had 200 suspicious reports -- they are all CTRs"

APs and high rollers should not tolerate this abuse from ABC news. We should stand up and collectively sue the sht out of them for vicious slander.


It is already disgusting that liberals are taking advantage of a national tragedy to push anti-gun agenda. Now we have to deal with the corrupt mainstream media taking advantage of a national tragedy to push anti-cash agenda?

They want to criminalize using cash, they want to make cash transactions suspicious, so they can confiscate using civil forfeiture and call it drug money. They want to force the citizens to put all their assets in government controlled banks so when an emergency happens they can levy all our savings from the bank. That's the real reason the deep state government is trying to criminalize cash, and the mainstream media is helping them by taking advantage of this national tragedy.

If not this then, why publish a 3 page article that is basically 1 sentence, "The shooter was a high roller"?

Methinks you are overreacting.

Quote: Neutrino

What the Fk, just as our country is coping with the worst shooting in history, Corrupt mainstream media the failing ABC news, published an article slamming APs and high rollers. Using a linguistical ambiguity trick known as the Oxford comma, stated that All CTR are automatically suspicious. Basically if you're an AP and you're forced to spread high to turn a profit, you're a fking mass murderer if you they give you a CTR.

The title of this article makes me furious:

"Vegas shooter had 200+ reports of suspicious activities, large financial transactions in casinos"

http://abcnews.go.com/US/vegas-shooter-200-reports-suspicious-activities-large-financial/story?id=50258986

They probably claim they meant "Shooter had 200 reports of (SAR+CTR)", but the way they incorrectly used the comma, by the rules of American English, it means "Shooter had 200 suspicious reports -- they are all CTRs"

APs and high rollers should not tolerate this abuse from ABC news. We should stand up and collectively sue the sht out of them for vicious slander.

Sue them for what?
How will you prove damages. Exactly how much is your monetary damage
ROTFL
Did you even read the article
In no way does it slam AP's
What are you smoking, and, do you have some more :-)

"In the last three years alone, more than 200 reports about Paddock’s activities, particularly large transactions at casinos, have been filed with law enforcement authorities, ABC News was told.
While some of the reports centered around "suspicious activity," most were "currency transaction reports," which casinos are required to file with the Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network when a person withdraws or deposits more than $10,000 in cash.
The number of reports prompted by Paddock's activities reflects -- at the very least -- how routine it was for him to gamble with large sums of money. "

I stopped at "failing ABC News" because I knew it wasn't going to be reasonable and logical in any way.

I thought suing people who say meanie things was something people accuse liberal snowflakes of doing.

Quote: terapined

Did you even read the article
In no way does it slam AP's
What are you smoking, and, do you have some more :-)

No I didn't read the article the title alone got me angry enough.

It slams Anyone indirectly who receives a CTR which is obviously APs and High rollers, so no not directly but they are after criminalizing cash.

You want some tweek coffee?

Quote: gamerfreak

I thought suing people who say meanie things was something people accuse liberal snowflakes of doing.

It's more than "mean", they are accusing anyone who receives CTR of being a mass killer

I saw nothing wrong with the article.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

I saw nothing wrong with the article.

The title

Quote: Neutrino

The title of this article makes me furious:

"Vegas shooter had 200+ reports of suspicious activities, large financial transactions in casinos"

http://abcnews.go.com/US/vegas-shooter-200-reports-suspicious-activities-large-financial/story?id=50258986

They probably claim they meant "Shooter had 200 reports of (SAR+CTR)", but the way they incorrectly used the comma, by the rules of American English, it means "Shooter had 200 suspicious reports -- they are all CTRs"

Easy there, chief. Headlines have different grammar and syntax rules than the standard written word. Check out this headline writing guide published by KU in which it states:

Quote: Kansas University headline guide

The comma, in addition to its normal use, can take on the work of the word "and."

I believe it is clear that this is the case here. The headline writer meant to communicate the shooter had 200 reports of suspicious activities, and had large financial transactions.

Headlines are rarely written by the author of the article. Usually the editor reads the first paragraph or two and summarizes it with limited space (and often limited time). It may be that the headline writer did indeed have the intentions you attribute to him and wanted to smear high/rollers/AP's, but the more probable explanation is that he wrote this headline quickly, without much thought, and was oblivious to any ambiguities it might have conveyed.

Quote:

a linguistical ambiguity trick known as the Oxford comma

BTW, that comma is in no way an Oxford Comma. An Oxford comma only applies if there is a list of 3 or more items.

Quote: Neutrino

No I didn't read the article the title alone got me angry enough.

It slams Anyone indirectly who receives a CTR which is obviously APs and High rollers, so no not directly but they are after criminalizing cash.

You want some tweek coffee?

You are the one bringing AP's into the mix. Good job.

I bet most (all?) of the suspicious activity was cash structuring to avoid a CTR.

Quote: Neutrino

The title of this article makes me furious:

"Vegas shooter had 200+ reports of suspicious activities, large financial transactions in casinos"

They probably claim they meant "Shooter had 200 reports of (SAR+CTR)", but the way they incorrectly used the comma, by the rules of American English, it means "Shooter had 200 suspicious reports -- they are all CTRs"

By the "rules of American English," isn't that a sentence fragment?

I disagree with the interpretation. In fact, it could also be read as all 200 reports being "suspicious activities"

The only time "AP" was mentioned in the article was a reference to "Associated Press." NOT "Advantage Player."

That article doesn't actually say anything though, does it?

It refers to, "Suspicious activity," in the title and once or twice throughout the rest of it, but never does it say what that, "Suspicious activity," might have been. As mentioned, it could have been structuring in an effort to avoid CTR's, but I'm not sure why that would be when the article says, "Most were CTR's." It doesn't seem like the guy was afraid of drawing a CTR if, "Most," of the, "Over 200," reports were CTR's.

It's a click bait headline, with the comma basically standing for, "And." He had over 200 reports of Suspicious Activities AND CTR's, which the article then goes on to say were mostly CTR's.

The article says, "Some," of the reports were suspicious activities. That word effectively just means, "More than one." It could be two, four, nine, twenty-seven. It says, "Most," were CTR's, which means, "More than half." 98% could be CTR's, 51%, 72%, again, the article effectively doesn't say anything.

Is there anyone who deals with this kind of stuff, on either side of it, that would know what might constitute, "Suspicious activity?" Like, would you file that if a slot player loaded over 10k into a machine, but did not do it all at once and lost a total of over 10k, or would that require a CTR if you knew it happened?

What if a player took out a cash advance or marker and then immediately left the property, would that constitute, "Suspicious activity?" I would look at it as potentially, but not necessarily, suspicious. It seems that this guy had access to some pretty substantial casino credit, so maybe that was the source of one or more reports? Took out a 20k marker, then left the property immediately after. Granted, it would probably be to go to another casino, but is that something you would think a record would be kept of?

That's my point. The writer of the article doesn't know much more than I know, but the title of the article makes it sound like this guy was constantly doing, "Suspicious activity." It also links CTR's to, "Suspicious Activity," and CTR"s are the exact opposite of suspicious if one is a high-roller.

It's just an eye-catching title. All sound and fury signifying nothing.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

The only time "AP" was mentioned in the article was a reference to "Associated Press." NOT "Advantage Player."

I saw that as well, but I couldn't imagine someone who writes as well as Nutrino would make that mistake. I don't think he made that mistake, perhaps it inspired him to add in AP's to the mix.

Quote: Neutrino

No I didn't read the article...

lol... "failing media..." didn't read the article... hmmm, can't see through that agenda. <close thread>

Quote: Mission146

Is there anyone who deals with this kind of stuff, on either side of it, that would know what might constitute, "Suspicious activity?" Like, would you file that if a slot player loaded over 10k into a machine, but did not do it all at once and lost a total of over 10k, or would that require a CTR if you knew it happened?

I

I do the training for CTR's and SAR's for the company I work for so I have some experience with this.

Any cash transactions of $10k or more, excluding jackpots that give a W2G, in a 24 hour period requires a CTR. In your example if a player had bills in of over $10k throughout the day it would require a CTR. It doesn't matter if he put in $100, cashed out, and repeated. If the total in is over $10k it is to be reported. It is difficult to track if they are not using a players card.

"What if a player took out a cash advance or marker and then immediately left the property, would that constitute, "Suspicious activity?" I would look at it as potentially, but not necessarily, suspicious. "

I would tell our people to write up a SAR for that just to cover their butts if the amount is $5000 or more. A SAR is not considered accusatory and the law protects the person filing it as long as the report is accurate.

The only thing suspicious about an SAR is the first word.

Unfortunately, too many media people don't understand that.

Quote: DRich

I do the training for CTR's and SAR's for the company I work for so I have some experience with this.

Any cash transactions of $10k or more, excluding jackpots that give a W2G, in a 24 hour period requires a CTR. In your example if a player had bills in of over $10k throughout the day it would require a CTR. It doesn't matter if he put in $100, cashed out, and repeated. If the total in is over $10k it is to be reported. It is difficult to track if they are not using a players card.

I definitely appreciate your response, given that you speak from both authority and experience!

When you say, "Bills," that means in terms of actual cash money in and out, right? is it safe to assume that tickets would not count towards that? I'm just curious because even my low-rolling butt has probably transferred tickets totaling $10,000 over the course of 24 hours, and I've never been asked to fill our a CTR.

Quote:

I would tell our people to write up a SAR for that just to cover their butts if the amount is $5000 or more. A SAR is not considered accusatory and the law protects the person filing it as long as the report is accurate.

Thank you, that was precisely the answer I was looking for and expected.

In other words, an SAR does not, in and of itself, actually mean anything other than an employee found that it could be reasonably necessary to fill out such a report. It doesn't mean, or necessarily do anything to indicate, that a person has committed any sort of wrongdoing whatsoever.

Again, the article (especially the title) signifies absolutely nothing. It's a click bait fluff piece that delivers nothing, in and of itself, of any great meaning or import lacking any further specifics.

The media is going to take the term SAR and run with it, which really isn’t surprising if someone is not knowledgeable of the casino industry.

The shame is really on the casino’s for calling it a SAR when they use them so liberally to report non-criminal/AP activity.

Quote: gamerfreak

The media is going to take the term SAR and run with it, which really isn’t surprising if someone is not knowledgeable of the casino industry.

The shame is really on the casino’s for calling it a SAR when they use them so liberally to report non-criminal/AP activity.

It's not just that, but if this guy did have a gambling problem, serious aspersions are going to be cast on the casino industry as a whole.

It's going to be, "Oh, this evil and Godless casino industry fostering gambling addiction. But for this vile and unholy industry none of this would have happened!"

Should casinos make greater attempts to identify problem gamblers? Absolutely. But, problem gambling (if the case) didn't kill anybody no matter how much the media or gun enthusiasts (often Religious Right) are clamoring for a narrative.

What killed so many people are semi-automatic weapons and weapons that were modified, legally, to function in a manner closer to fully automatic with a guy able to perch himself on high ground and pick off a crowd.

But, we need a narrative so that we can take the attention off of gun laws, right? How can we accomplish that? I know, let's focus on the gambling, it did happen at a casino, after all.

Consistently cashing out large tickets without having any play recorded on your card will get you an SAR. Had a friend in the phone card business that thought he could use slot machines to transform the $10s and $20s into $100 bills. The folks at Resorts World didn't appreciate it. Seems that drug dealers do the same thing.

Quote: Mission146

What killed so many people are semi-automatic weapons and weapons that were modified, legally, to function in a manner closer to fully automatic with a guy able to perch himself on high ground and pick off a crowd.

But, we need a narrative so that we can take the attention off of gun laws, right? How can we accomplish that? I know, let's focus on the gambling, it did happen at a casino, after all.

It's difficult to defend your freedom to do things you enjoy when you care so little for the same rights of others.

What killed so many people was a crazy person, not guns. You don't get to blame an inanimate object in one sentence and then complain when others blame your inanimate object in the next.

Quote: Skeptic

It's difficult to defend your freedom to do things you enjoy when you care so little for the same rights of others.

What killed so many people was a crazy person, not guns. You don't get to blame an inanimate object in one sentence and then complain when others blame your inanimate object in the next.

How about the right to live? Is that a right I don’t care about?

Someone wants to play with automatic weapons, have a blast! Keep shooting centers open for that purpose and make those owners authorized to have such weapons provided they don’t leave the premises.

Handguns? Don’t touch them. I’m perfectly fine with low capacity and low rate of fire weapons. I don’t think that every shooting can be prevented or will be, I think this one and a few others could have been.

You know, everything that this guy did until he broke that window might have been perfectly legal. If you don’t see a problem with that, I’m not going to convince you. If, whatever power that be or not be forbid, someone close to you is ever a victim of an attack like this....that might.

IIRC this is the first time in history that a legally licensed automatic weapon has been used in a crime - going back to the 1930's. that doesn't stop them from being illegally used often. They are virtually impossible to get in the first place but that didn't stop this did it? That's the point: restrictions only hurt those who abide by the laws.

No gun control would have stopped this guy from killing a bunch of people. You're about to learn quickly how knee-jerk feel-good reactionary regulations impact the lawful when your AP life is burdened by what might come. I'll still be there fighting for your freedom even though you won't be there for mine.

Quote: Skeptic

IIRC this is the first time in history that a legally licensed automatic weapon has been used in a crime - going back to the 1930's.

Quote: Skeptic

that doesn't stop them from being illegally used often.

huh?

Fwiw, I don't think the player fills out, acknowledges, or even sees a CTR. It's for the cashier or accounting to do. Not sure how it would be used, except to build a file against future activity, or collectively at some central info point.

I won a bit over 10k on a table once, and cashed out. They filled out forms on their computer, but not only did not give me a copy to read or sign, they refused to tell me what they were or show me the screen. I'm pretty sure it was a CTR. I guess there could also have been a SAR, but it was a very ordinary situation other than the amount. They also did not ask for ID or SSN: they just used my players card info. And they did not issue a W2G, as the bets did not exceed the reporting ratio.

Quote: billryan

Consistently cashing out large tickets without having any play recorded on your card will get you an SAR. Had a friend in the phone card business that thought he could use slot machines to transform the $10s and $20s into $100 bills. The folks at Resorts World didn't appreciate it. Seems that drug dealers do the same thing.

Yes, this is very common but it isn't really about turning them into bigger bills, it is because the people will say they won the money at the casino instead of identifying the true source of the funds. That is considered laundering the money.

Mission, it is only currency that counts toward the $10k. The feds are literally interested only in the CASH. If you ask the casino for a check instead of cash you will not be issued a CTR.

Quote:

huh?

I could've phrased that better. There are very onerous restrictions on owning a full-auto firearm that makes them virtually impossible for normal people to get due to the costs. They are pretty easy for criminals to get though, cheaply.

Quote: Skeptic

I could've phrased that better. There are very onerous restrictions on owning a full-auto firearm that makes them virtually impossible for normal people to get due to the costs. They are pretty easy for criminals to get though, cheaply.

Because criminals don't care how they get them.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Quote: Skeptic

I could've phrased that better. There are very onerous restrictions on owning a full-auto firearm that makes them virtually impossible for normal people to get due to the costs. They are pretty easy for criminals to get though, cheaply.

Because criminals don't care how they get them.

How many mass shootings in Australia since the ban?
Gun laws work

Quote: Skeptic

IIRC this is the first time in history that a legally licensed automatic weapon has been used in a crime - going back to the 1930's. that doesn't stop them from being illegally used often. They are virtually impossible to get in the first place but that didn't stop this did it? That's the point: restrictions only hurt those who abide by the laws.

No gun control would have stopped this guy from killing a bunch of people. You're about to learn quickly how knee-jerk feel-good reactionary regulations impact the lawful when your AP life is burdened by what might come. I'll still be there fighting for your freedom even though you won't be there for mine.

Yeah, but what about semi-autos? Again, my rail is against high capacity automatic or semi-automatic weapons capable of firing some arbitrary number of rounds per minute or faster...which I haven't yet determined a suggestion for.

Are we really taking fundamental human rights away to suggest that someone, short of an arms dealer, should not own twenty-three firearms (actually, more) and that the fact that he was able to get twenty-three firearms into a building for the purpose of public occupancy, apparently within three days, is not something of a problem?

Nobody is suggesting that every gun owner has done or will do something along these lines, just that it is senseless that something like this could happen to begin with.

Also, would metal detectors at the entrances of Mandalay Bay have stopped this event? That's my other angle, mandatory metal detectors at public buildings and venues with an occupancy greater than x. Again, I do not currently have a suggestion for what x should be, but it should be something.

Do you even know what a "semi-auto" is? That they've been around since about 1900? That 40% of rifles sold today are semi-auto?

What new law would do you propose would have prevented Sunday night? Everything the guy did was already illegal.

It makes more sense to have airport TSA-level security screening in order to enter a casino. Why aren't you in favor of that? Lets outlaw comp'd rooms too.

Quote: Skeptic

What new law would do you propose would have prevented Sunday night? Everything the guy did was already illegal.

.

Same laws they have in Australia

Quote: Skeptic

Do you even know what a "semi-auto" is? That they've been around since about 1900? That 40% of rifles sold today are semi-auto?

I wouldn't even completely restrict ownership of those, just modifications and how many a person could legally own.

Quote:

What new law would do you propose would have prevented Sunday night? Everything the guy did was already illegal.

What did he do that was illegal prior to breaking the first window?

Quote:

It makes more sense to have airport TSA-level security screening in order to enter a casino. Why aren't you in favor of that? Lets outlaw comp'd rooms too.

Who said I wouldn't be in favor of the first thing? That's not a bad idea for buildings and venues of a certain occupancy or greater.

Quote: gamerfreak

The media is going to take the term SAR and run with it, which really isn’t surprising if someone is not knowledgeable of the casino industry.

The shame is really on the casino’s for calling it a SAR when they use them so liberally to report non-criminal/AP activity.

I fully agree with this.

and furthermore they do this to criminalize cash and encourage civil forfeiture, and government control over our money

Speaking of the shooting at Mandalay Bay, I remember someone saying on a gambling website about a year before this tragic tragedy,"One of my biggest fears is that some literal loser who lost a lot of money gambling in the casino will start to shoot innocent gamblers in his rage over losing his money." I have read that the Mandalay shooter had lost money gambling at Mandalay Bay shortly before shooting people. I thought back to the poster's fear of a loser with a gun in a casino.

Quote: Nathan

Speaking of the shooting at Mandalay Bay, I remember someone saying on a gambling website about a year before this tragic tragedy,"One of my biggest fears is that some literal loser who lost a lot of money gambling in the casino will start to shoot innocent gamblers in his rage over losing his money."

I dunno which post or what website you referred to. But, here's a June 2016 post from WoV that might interest folks: How Safe Are Our Casinos?.

Most comments focused a shooter inside a casino: How likely? How risky? Lots of discussion about checking purses, bags, backpacks, and car trunks. The last page has a great summary by DrawingDead of the 1980 bombing of Harvey's Resort Hotel in Reno. Bottom line from the thread was casinos seem "safe enough" even though most don't check for weapons (or explosives).

Quote: Nathan

Speaking of the shooting at Mandalay Bay, I remember someone saying on a gambling website about a year before this tragic tragedy,"One of my biggest fears is that some literal loser who lost a lot of money gambling in the casino will start to shoot innocent gamblers in his rage over losing his money." I have read that the Mandalay shooter had lost money gambling at Mandalay Bay shortly before shooting people. I thought back to the poster's fear of a loser with a gun in a casino.

On the radio (Wayne Allen Root) from a supposed friend of his host, said that he recently won a $100k jp. Guy even paid off his marker before his rampage. I'm not sure what they consider recently but even WAR was like "who does that?" to the idea of someone paying off their marker right before their rampage.

Quote: Mooseton

On the radio (Wayne Allen Root) from a supposed friend of his host, said that he recently won a $100k jp. Guy even paid off his marker before his rampage. I'm not sure what they consider recently but even WAR was like "who does that?" to the idea of someone paying off their marker right before their rampage.

To me, that seems a strong sign that his gripe was not with the casinos. If his grudge was about money or casinos, it seems natural he would stiff a big marker in his way out.

Maybe a target of opportunity, the music festival. He played in Vegas a lot, he probably saw a lot of big events come through, perhaps experienced some inconvenience with the crowding, traffic, maybe some rudeness from people in town for things (not just this concert). But they have a lot of evidence he was scouting other music festivals for most of a year. So I'm guessing that was the focus, not gambling.

I doubt we'll ever know for sure. But he liked the whole casino experience AFAICT. Just not the other customers.