The Las Vegas Shooting- another example of White privilege in the US?

The recent Las Vegas shooting is another in a succession of recent violent outbursts in the USA. However, this one was different to the others. The Las Vegas shooting is the deadliest in modern US history, with the current death count being 59 people and 527 injuries. It has been confirmed that Stephen Paddock was the shooter. Paddock killed himself before police were able to apprehend him. Current reports are saying that he had at least 23 weapons in his hotel room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel.

It was a devastating event in a recent flood of unrest in America. The ripples of this tragedy were felt globally. It was just another example of pure human brutality. The images and videos from that night show the carnage and havoc it wreaked in Las Vegas, a city so full of vitality.

But, how does this show us white privilege?

Reports came through from the police the very next day claiming that Paddock was acting alone. We were immediately assured that he was not affiliated with any terrorist groups. This was despite ISIS claiming that it was another terrorist attack from them- although it should be noted that ISIS are wont to do this in any situation of this nature. This declaration from the police does not come from an exhaustive background search, it was assumed because of his race. Police are unconcerned with his religion. Their opinion is set in stone. He is a “lone wolf” acting alone and without an agenda.

This is just not the way it would’ve have been handle had he been a Muslim or even just of Arabic descent.

Had he been Muslim, the blame would have been attributed to ISIS and a far-reaching agenda would have been attributed to his actions. Other people of Muslim heritage would have been attacked for their beliefs and the issue would have been the religion not the man. Whereas with Paddock, we understand that ultimately the blame for this tragedy lived and died with him in that hotel room.

As the Washington Post said ‘If the shooter had been Middle Eastern or Muslim, the rhetoric would pretty much write itself at this point. I doubt he’d be granted a descriptor with a positive connotation like “lone wolf,” as if he were the protagonist in a classic Western.’ According to state law, he can be classified a terrorist. His victims feel terrorised by his actions and ask us why we don't call him a terrorist.

However, it is not that Stephen Paddock should be called a terrorist. Evidence has come to the surface that substantiates the police’s claim that he was operating alone. The oxford dictionary definition of terrorist is a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. It would not help the police investigation to label him something he is not. There is nothing to suggest that Paddock had any political aims in his massacre. The point is that the police and the media need to stop rushing to conclusions based purely upon someone’s race.

This racist rhetoric is what causes such social unrest.