IF you’ve paid attention to the news back in 2017, you may have heard of the tragedy that occurred late last year in Las Vegas. To give the general summery, a deranged real estate investor opened fire onto a crowd attending a music festival. He killed dozens of individuals and injured hundreds. He later took his own life. The hotel in the center of the story, Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino, has something up their sleeves. It has recently been announced that MGM, the owner of the resort, is filing a lawsuit; this lawsuit being directed at the victims.Now, MGM aren’t seeking compensation, but are rather trying to prove it was not the resort’s fault. This comes after they had received a large sum of complaints by victims, some of which written their intention to sue. MGM cited the 2002 Safety Act that protects companies from liability when the claims are related to terrorism. Supposedly, MGM had employed a Homeland Security certified security contractor specializing in “protecting against and responding to acts of mass injury and destruction”. This would fall into line of the requirements within the Safety Act to protect them.The shooting, however, has been up for debate whether it was an act of terrorism. No motive was found as the shooter had taken his own life before he was taken into custody. This means, MGM’s main protection does not apply to them. There are many people who did not feel MGM or any of its affiliates were to blame for the shooting, though. Eric Cronk, a retired Alaskan teacher was a survivor of the shooting. He witnessed his friend get shot and almost die. He said he did not believe the hotel was to blame, but rather the shooter.Cronk did say he could see that the legal action could be seen as a “blow to the survivors that sued”.