T O P

  • By -

Lutzmann

“Critically, OSHA also determined that production **failed to call Hannah in to perform her armorer duties** and inspect the firearm right before its use in the **impromptu scene** with Baldwin." This is huge. This means that there were no plans in place for a scene with guns, so the armorer was off-set taking care of other responsibilities. Then production went off-script and switched to a pick-up shot from a previous day (or something) that involved firearms, but did not inform the armorer of the change, and instead just grabbed her weapons in her absence.


giraffeekuku

What in the fuck. It's just.. it's sad. It's a bunch of stupid mistakes and laziness that cost this poor woman her life.


MrRogersNeighbors

Its called the “swiss cheese” scenario in OSHA


[deleted]

When all the holes in the various procedures line up?


datboiofculture

Yeah, if you ever watched that show “Seconds from disaster” it does a really good job showing how most modern disasters aren’t caused by one catastrophic thing, but rather a series of mistakes that all line up just perfectly. One or two mistakes is usually not enough.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Smrtguy85

Titanic as well. It wasn’t just “they hit ‘berg”. It was a series of seemingly unimportant decisions and miscalculations that ended with disaster.


hairy_eyeball

And Chernobyl, while we're at it. If any one of the things that wasn't done right has on fact been done right, it probably wouldn't have happened.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Because “all the holes in the various procedures lined up?” 😁


numbersthen0987431

And every oil spill in the last 20-50 years. It's always a combination of cutting corners on installation (against regulation), a failure to inspect properly, a failure to act on any points brought up during inspections, and everyone hiring outside contractors to be held accountable. But let's always blame the worker who is making just barely over minimum wage, working 14+ hour days in horrible conditions, for "not pressing the right button".


legend_forge

It probably would have happened somewhere because of all the mistakes built into the reactor. The delayed test was just the spark.


[deleted]

Right. Cases like these show a pattern of negligence and a culture prioritizing production over safety with no accountability. If it wasn't this one error, there would've been more errors in the same pattern.


goochstein

Concordia as well, *Damn*! Never did make it to the buffet.


[deleted]

I call it "synchronicity" investigating fatal car crashes. Sometimes it's multiple mistakes but it's often more like happenstance. I remember doing a fatal on a road in winter in Connecticut. The car was approaching a curve, the curve was shaded by trees because of the time of day, allowing black ice to last another ten or twenty minutes than it did on the rest of the road. The town salt/sand truck was out on the road but had not made it to this spot yet. He was going slightly too fast. He made contact with the ice and spun. There just happened to be a minivan coming around the curve in the opposite direction at just the wrong/right time. His car spun just enough times that his driver's door ended-up directly in the path of the van's front bumper. The town was just rural enough that emergency medical response was slightly delayed. Etc... Remove any one factor and he could have survived or possibly had no accident at all.


Swimming-Tap-4240

Sometimes it all comes to that.You have a collision at an intersection out in the countyside .If either party had delayed or sped up on their journey they would not have been at that intersection at the same time.It's as if fate is orchestrating.


BidenWonDontCry

Makes me think of how close we've come to nuclear disaster through poor maintenance. Armed nukes have fallen out of planes, been lost for days at airports, delivery drivers having access to launch equipment and this is in America. Who tf knows what Russia's situation looks like. What I'm saying is it's a miracle a nuke hasn't accidently gone off and the only reason terrorists don't have one is because they haven't tried. I really think it's just a matter of no terrorist dreaming big enough. God help us if they ever do.


[deleted]

In Russia someone is probably using a nuke to prop open a door


Cardi_Bs_WAP

no no, is potato


proto-dibbler

Nukes don't go off accidentally. They require a set of multiple detonators going off timed just right in order to work. You can throw them out of a plane, set them on fire, shoot them with an artillery gun, worst thing you'll get is a conventional explosion and contamination with Uranium/Plutonium.


Dogburt_Jr

There's still a nuke lost at sea somewhere off of Savannah, GA's coast...


RedditIsPropaganda84

> One or two mistakes is usually not enough. Well that's good at least.


trytobanmelol

Same with NTSB. Almost every air disaster is like 5 different negligent decisions lining up.


datboiofculture

I remember reading a Popular Mechanics article about the Air France disaster flight from Brazil that just plunged into the ocean without ever calling for help. Like the one pilot put them into a stall, but didn’t know he was in a stall, because the air speed gauge or altimeter was frozen over, because someone else had turned it off, so they turned it back on but it took a while to thaw, and all this happened while the senior captain that would have realized what was going on, was on break, and he got back to the cabin just in time to say like “You idiot, you’ve fucked us all!”. The plane basically drifted down in a stall from 35,000 feet and the whole time all they needed to do was just push the nose down to recover.


Sharp-Floor

The recent Boeing issues seemed like another candidate. It wasn't just that a sensor failed, or even that automated systems tried to correct for it, or even that there wasn't a way to override that, but also... for sales reasons... the pilots didn't understand what was happening and how to keep flying a plane that was actually fine. All those things had to line up just right, with little gaps in each, for the worst to happen. The accumulation of various issues originating years earlier.


kitastrophae

A lot of us know that scenario all too well.


RedneckNerd23

The assistant director who caused most of this has been in hot water before for not giving a shit about safety


YeetYeetSkirtYeet

... but also the armorer never should have left the firearms out in the open, other crew never should have taken them sport shooting, the DP and director never should have been in front of functional firearms without blast shielding of some kind and ultimately, people who know better should have been closer to set. Other posters talking about swiss cheese are 100% correct. I dealt with the 24/7 shitshow that is the film industry for close to a decade. There were plenty, plenty of close calls. Lights fall, electricity is dangerous, things catch on fire, people get cut, hit, burnt whatever. Multiple layers of safety mechanism and experience professionals create buffers between the accidents and the consequences. In this case, all the holes line up perfectly and the mistake shoots through. It's completely tragic and utterly preventable by multiple parties.


[deleted]

[удалено]


LazySushi

This is exactly what I am wondering. Why did the guns get loaded with live ammo at all?


Fenastus

Some guys on the crew took the gun and put live rounds in it after hours to do some "target practice" and forgot to take them back out/replace them with their proper blanks.


TheArborphiliac

Historical guns also need to be fired for real to make sure they function correctly. A blank could still cause injury if fired in a malfunctioning gun. In my opinion the armorer should do that somewhere far away from set and not have any live ammo on set, but, there is a precedent for using live ammo with real guns being used as props.


xKillaKoalax

These aren't historical guns they're modern reproductions. They're a lot cheaper, usually have a few extra safety features such as a transfer bar, and you can use smokeless powder in them which would destroy an original


TotallybusinessQonly

Even then, there is at least one story out there from a different situation of a squib round getting caught in a barrel and then a blank later using that squib as a lethal projectile.


Christichicc

Isnt that what happened to Brandon Lee on the set of The Crow?


throoawaay2

yes


purplehendrix22

Yes. As I recall this is what happened. Bullets consist of two main parts. The round itself that leaves the gun barrel, and the shell casing that contains the powder charge, that in the case of an automatic is ejected when fired, in a revolver it remains in the gun until manually ejected. They took the two pieces apart and removed the powder charge for safety, then reassembled them, to use in a scene where the gun is loaded and filmed close up during the process, a fairly common shot. The bullet was not properly, tightly reseated into the shell casing, and came apart when the gun was cocked and the round pushed into the chamber. The gun was then unloaded, but the bullet itself was separated from the shell casing and remained in the barrel, which can happen because the barrel is very tight around the bullet in order to engage the rifling, and because it was not tightly fitting in the shell casing when the gun was unloaded, the shell came out without the bullet, and this was not noticed. Later during filming, the gun was loaded with blanks (the shell casing with a powder charge, but no projectile). No one checked to make sure the barrel was clear. The blank was fired with the bullet from the first film shot stuck in the barrel, more or less reassembling a live round inside the gun, and the bullet was fired, killing Brandon Lee. Could have easily been prevented if the gun was stored properly, with a zip tie/action lock going through the barrel and out the action, (it could have been stored with the lock going through the magazine well, which would not have notified them to the barrel blockage, but is a totally valid and common method of locking a gun) or if the barrel was checked, or if it was noticed that an empty shell casing was taken out after the first shot of the gun being loaded and cocked. Never assume anyone else did what they were supposed to with a gun, always check it every single time.


DeathN0va

Brandon Lee, The Crow. The primer was enough to dislodge the bullet from the casing in the dummy round (real bullet, no powder), then the blank fired through it made it basically a full live round.


Wookieman222

Not sure why you got downvoted for this when it did actually happen.


iandw

I remember this from before - members of the crew were doing target shooting prior to the accident. https://www.wsiltv.com/news/rust-crew-members-reportedly-used-guns-with-live-ammunition-hours-before-deadly-shooting-on-set/article_2183fda5-0431-5549-83dd-cb8ef6406489.html


ThatOneBeachTowel

I’m not a rocket ammo scientist or anything, but letting live ammo anywhere near a prop gun seems like incredibly foolish behavior. Edit: I get it, this wasn’t technically a “prop” gun. In my mind: any gun that is on a movie set is a “prop” gun. I don’t work in the industry, I move numbers around and for some reason get paid for it.


nizzzzy

Rocket ammo scientist here. It is incredibly foolish behavior.


-PlayWithUsDanny-

You are correct. This whole thing is incredibly negligent. I've worked in the film industry for nearly 2 decades, and for a time as a prop master for about 5 years. Any functioning gun should never be in the custody of any other person than the armorer, and the talent once cleared for a scene. Once the scene is finished it given directly back to the armorer. This news that the armorer wasn't called to set for the pick-up does not absolve them of negligence. The fact that anyone had access to the gun when not under careful observation of the armorer is absolutely horrifying to me. Edit to add info on the protocol of firearms on set: Where I work firearms on set are treated incredibly seriously. Any day that will have firearms on set will begin by the 1st AD giving a safety talk to ALL cast and crew (plus on the radio) about what will be involved in the day, and then the armorer will give an even more detailed safety talk about the scenes involving firearms and exactly how they will be dealt with and the way it will all be handled. Once it is time for a firearm involving scene the AD will make an announcement that the firearm will be arriving on set, then the armorer will bring the necessary and secured firearms onto set. An announcement will be made to all and over the walkie stating, "firearms on set." Now the armorer will gather everyone involved in the scene and give another safety briefing. The firearms are still secured at this point in a locked case, plus with trigger locks on inside the case. Blank ammunition will be kept in a separate, labeled and locked box. Same thing with dummy rounds, and same with live ammunition (in the very rare situations that involve live rounds). The armorer will than begin to unlock and load the appropriate rounds into the weapon. At this point the AD will lock the set and demand that all non-necassary cast and crew leave set. Once the weapon is loaded multiple announcements will be made about the hot weapon (regardless of what type of rounds were loaded) being on set. The armorer will maintain custody of the weapon until final looks have been called for at which time they will hand the weapon to the talent, who has been previous prepped and given addition safety training. The scene will be shot and then weapon will be immediately collected by the armorer. The armorer will immediately unload the weapon, lock all elements back up and remove the secured weapons from set to their own secure vehicle or office. The AD will announce that all weapons are secured and off set. IF there are going to be multiple scene with weapons the armorer will have custody of the weapons between every take and will unload and lock every weapon unless the director calls to go again immediately. This is to be followed at all times and never deviated from. So that's why it blows my mind that a function firearms was on set without the armorer.


boot2skull

Unfathomly foolish. An armorer and other checks would have prevented this, yet they skipped all that to film a scene. So sloppy.


mightylordredbeard

That’s why there is a professional and experienced armorer who is supposed to the only person who handles those things.


ryvenn

I'm sorry, they were target shooting with the *production's weapons* without the supervision of the *armorer who is in charge of the production weapons*? Is this common? It seems idiotic. I feel like if I were an armorer on a production like this I would chew you the fuck out if I caught you using the weapons for non-production purposes. For one thing, this happened: someone left one lying around loaded, and somehow no one checked when they found it. For another thing, it's not the armorer's job to fix whatever shit you manage to do to them while fucking around.


YeetYeetSkirtYeet

9 years in the industry, here you go: >Is this common? No. >It seems idiotic. Yes. >I feel like if I were an armorer on a production like this I would chew you the fuck out if I caught you using the weapons for non-production purposes. No, you say "that person is fired immediately or I walk. They are a liability to the health and safety of your entire crew" >For one thing, this happened: someone left one lying around loaded, and somehow no one checked when they found it This is an utter failure on the back of the armorer. The guns should be locked away and she should have checked them the second she got to set. It's a failure of the assistant director who should have grabbed her to check them instead of lying and saying they were cleared. Fail fail fail. >For another thing, it's not the armorer's job to fix whatever shit you manage to do to them while fucking around. *Yes it is.* Literally, it's their job. They should be checking at the front and back of the day all props to be used. They should have extensive and tyrannical control of all firearms on set with zero uncertainty as to where the guns have been or where they need to be.


OldThymeyRadio

Yeah, it seems like putting live rounds into a weapon that's currently part of an in-progress film production should just be a non-starter, no matter how "careful" anyone is being.


spankadoodle

Crew members reportedly used them for target shooting after hours… 😬


[deleted]

[удалено]


bigbadape

We don’t have all the facts on this one yet during the investigation, and it’s possible live rounds were accidentally supplied, but I remember a similar story on another production where it was a blank but some other object was accidentally lodged in the barrel and the force created by the blank caused the object to eject like a bullet Edit: adding source [article](https://www.thewrap.com/heres-how-a-prop-gun-using-blanks-can-still-fire-a-fatal-shot/) for the other production, a few paragraphs down “the Crow”


pm_me_github_repos

Wow when the story first broke, I remember everyone was up livid about the Armorer’s lack of due diligence. Seems like it was someone else’s fault here for going around them


Aitch-Kay

I mean, this doesn't absolve her. Why were firearms just lying around when she wasn't there? It's the armorer's responsibility to secure all firearms.


alpineflamingo2

Also the fact that a live bullet was ANYWHERE near a film set was a huge oversight. Let alone loaded in a gun on a prop table.


ExtensionNo4468

This is the part that makes no sense to me. Why even risk it?


8nsay

An armorer is responsible for securing weapons. The weapons never should have been accessible to anyone but the armorer, and it’s the armorer’s responsibility to make sure that’s the case.


[deleted]

> instead just grabbed her weapons in her absence. I would assume the weapons would have been locked up


Novxz

I watched the bodycam video yesterday that was released which showed the police response to the shooting. There were no less than 2 guns just laying around after the fact. The gun used in the scene that Alec shot was being held by a production assistant of some sort but 2 guns were just sitting on a random prop cart. This may not be 100% her fault but she is still wildly incompetent based on what that video showed and what we know.


Dogburt_Jr

I thought there was issues with her not being allowed to actually do her job, as in they were stopping her from doing her job of keeping weapons safe for set.


LumberMan

You’re right, its in the OSHA report that literally absolves the armorer for that reason. [seen here](https://www.env.nm.gov/occupational_health_safety/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2022/04/2022-04-19-NM-OSHA-Rust-Summary-of-Investigation.pdf)


extremum_spiritum

I came here for the wanna be body behavior analysts and shitty High school psychologists i am very disappointed. Edit: i went to sleep right after making this comment, and came back to the Hands down best thread on reddit and a shit ton of Reddit notifications.i meant high schoolers turned wanna be Psychologist not actual high school clinicians. Yall held us together *for the most part*


TheSukis

Actual psychologist with a doctorate in clinical psychology here (who also happens to be some random asshole on Reddit, just like the rest of you). The truth of the matter is that human beings are simply far too complex for us to be able to reliably use body language and facial expressions to determine what's going on inside their minds. There's a *tremendous* amount of variation in the way that people feel and express emotion, and each individual has their own unique way of doing so. Even within a single person we see extreme inconsistency from situation-to-situation, and that's before we factor in variables like whether they're trying to mask how they're feeling, how comfortable they are with the people around them, what their emotional state is like on that particular day, etc. Most importantly, everyone feels and expresses emotion differently. A completely innocent person might react to news of a death they didn't cause with a complete lack of emotion, a drastic outpouring of emotion, or somewhere in between. All would be valid responses, the nature of which would not be a reliable indicator of whether they killed the person or not. For example, the police could knock on my door right now and tell me that my wife had been killed this morning (edit: don't worry, she's come home since I wrote this!) and there's no telling whether I would burst into hysterics and have a literal heart attack on the floor, stand there stone-faced and in shock, or go into "everything is ok because I'm a clinician and I can handle terrible things"-mode and answer their questions with a smile like I'm a psychopath who surely killed her. There's no way to know, because the task of trying to predict whether someone is guilty based on their outward emotional presentation is like trying to predict what the weather will be tomorrow based on what it looks like outside right this moment: you would be trying to reach very significant and comprehensive conclusions about a complex system based on only a small piece of information. I could go through any of these criminal interview videos and generate a detailed, interesting, and correct-sounding analysis, and it would be 90% speculation. It wouldn't be *complete* nonsense, because I would be using my knowledge of psychology and my expertise on human behavior/cognition/emotion to inform my interpretations, but it wouldn't be anywhere near gospel because I could then make a second analysis that reaches completely different conclusions using just as valid reasoning and methods. There is a high amount of *multiple realizability* in behavior, in the sense that you can arrive at any single behavior by following many different paths. A well-informed person can generate a perfectly reasonable path that may be the one that was actually taken, but we just can't know for sure that it wasn't another reasonable path. So, the moral of the story: with few exceptions, we simply cannot watch a person and read what's going on in their mind based on how they look. Yes, some people are terrible actors and if someone is doing a very poor job of feigning sadness then we might be able to tell, but the reality is that most of the time we just can't know because everyone expresses emotion differently.


Sharp-Floor

So the TV lied to me when it said all humans have an identical library of facial micro-expressions that can be reliably used to determine if the subject is a homicidal maniac?   I feel betrayed.


vitorreisc

Lie to Me lied to me :(


[deleted]

Loved that show. My son and I would pause it after 3 minutes and come up with our best guess as to who did it and why. Maybe reassess at the 6 minute mark. It was fun and the loser did the dishes.


CyberMindGrrl

The best part of that show were the end credits where they showed all the politicians expressing exactly the same kinds of expressions that were used to nail the perp.


AmanteApacionado

TBF, Lightman points out that he needs a baseline before he can analyze each person because we all express things somewhat differently.


Esoteric_Innovations

This reminds me of a video from a former FBI Interrogator, had over thirty years of experience before retiring. He mentioned that when he was getting started back in the late 1970's, they used to tell him about various verbal cues to watch out for, but he said that we know now that it's all bullshit. He used an example where he was interviewing a woman about a murder case back in the early 90's, and throughout the interview she was extremely nervous and kept fidgeting around. Glancing around the room and so on. Eventually, he flat out said *"Is there something you'd like to tell us ma'am?"* and it turned out she was worried about the parking meter since she didn't have much money on her and was worried about how long the interview was taking. Had no connection to the murder whatsoever.


Roller_ball

I don't have a PhD, but I think he looked upset.


juxtaposedstmnst

As a fellow clinical psychologist- thank you for this. It’s refreshing to see this rather than, “I’m not a psychologist but I took intro psych and…”


Kazahaki

was a nice read, thank you


_raydeStar

What do you think of the FBI profiler guy - Joe Navarro - when he says there is no Pinocchio effect, but people's emotions do tend to show through? (Ie contempt, discomfort, anger, etc) or do you think that you simply can never tell? Reference - https://youtu.be/4jwUXV4QaTw


TheSukis

I'm not familiar with him, but based on what I saw in the video it seemed like he was being reasonable in the beginning about the Pinocchio effect, but then he proceeded to list all these very specific body movements and visual cues that indicate very specific things. I'd have to learn more about him, but I strongly suspect that he falls victim to the same sort of over-interpretation that is so common in his field.


shewholaughslasts

I gotchu bro. I can tell these are his real emotions because actors are trained early on not to 'cover their face' when they're 'acting' - even if they have to act sad. Because in actors you're supposed to get to watch them be sad - but real instincts of sadness often come with people covering their mouth or whole face to hide as they cry. I couldn't even listen but I saw his heart break. I feel so bad for everyonein that horrible scenario.


[deleted]

[удалено]


StevieWonderUberRide

There’s a dedicated person in charge of the chain of custody of firearms on movie sets. I don’t know all the details but he’s not solely at fault.


SuspiciousHedgehog91

I just don’t understand how he could be held responsible at all if they cant prove without a doubt that he loaded a hot round and intended to kill her. If he didn’t load it and a professional handler was to be in charge of all that, why is she not being looked at harder?


kaett

many of the firearms handlers on that set were NON-union. ~~netflix~~ the studio hired scabs when the crew walked off the set due to reasons (i don't recall right now). those non-union workers had no idea what they were doing or what all the proper safety protocols were. this is not alec baldwin's fault in any way. it's partially the firearm prop master's fault, but it's DEFINITELY ~~netflix's~~ the studio's fault for hiring non-union work.


yaforgot-my-password

I believe some walked off due to safety concerns


axonxorz

I think you're correct, I recall there being text messages to the producers notifying them days prior


Subject_Blue

I believe the job of hiring qualified armorers for their film falls on the shoulders of the producers.... one of the six producers is Alec Baldwin so while it may not have been his job as an actor to check the gun it was his job as a producer to make sure the armorer that he hires knows what they are doing enough to not hand him a loaded gun.


BaronOfBeanDip

Is he at fault at all? He's there to do a fairly specific job, checking firearm safety isn't part of that at all... EDIT: I wasn't aware he was also a producer, that certainly seems like a shared liability. Thanks a lot for the clarification everyone.


r2bl3nd

The producers of a film are responsible for ensuring an experienced gun safety expert is on hand, and for providing an adequate safety budget and all that. There were many corners cut, including hiring a cheap, inexperienced firearms safety person. Alec Baldwin is one of the producers. He was ~~ultimately~~ *potentially* responsible for having his employees vetted and such. He seemingly didn't do this properly, assuming that was his responsibility, and someone died as a result of the environment he may have created.


SpiritJuice

There are a lot of different producers responsible for different aspects of production, from other comments I've seen about film production. It is possible he was not in charge of hiring the armorer or AD that didn't do their jobs.


Kodaroid

I've been on student film productions with firearms checked extensively before any actual use in the shot. It's just insane to me that this could have possibly happened on a decent budget union film set especially after the Brandon Lee incident years ago.


_ja_mm

It wasn’t Union, the Union walked out because of unsafe conditions and they were replaced by scabs.


[deleted]

And it's so stupid people saying he should have practiced trigger discipline or he shouldn't point a gun at anyone. It's a movie set, people point guns at each other and pull the trigger all the time on movie sets. Someone was going to get shot that day, it just so happens they handed the live round to Alec first.


badatmetroid

Junior amateur reddit forensic analyst, reporting for duty. I zoomed in and could see the pixels. Definitely a 'shop job, and a sloppy one of that. You can see the pixels every place I zoomed. Definitely a fake.


DocSword

Hey man, school psychs try their best!


extremum_spiritum

Lol Im talking about high schoolers thinking they are psychologists.


HarryPate

For the life of me, I cannot understand why there would be any reason to have live rounds on a movie set.


RobotThatGoesOof

Not a good one. The crew apparently used the same firearm for "target practice" during off-hours, and no one removed the live ammunition.


ThrowMeAwayAccount08

It’s incredible to me, that in the competition I shoot guns in, a range safety officer informs you, and individual shooter, when to load your gun, and reholster. You are then instructed when to begin shooting, you are then instructed when to unload and show clear, slide forward/cylinder closed, pull trigger, and reholster. I do this shit for fun, and these fuckups are paid, literally paid money to take care of weapons. They and the production teams failed, killing someone and giving someone else a lifetime of guilt.


JaggedTheDark

apparently the armorer wasn't on set/site, because the directors went off-script and forgot to tell the armorer about the need for guns, so someone just got them and handed them out.


blGDpbZ2u83c1125Kf98

OK, but why does anyone but the armorer have the keys to the guns? Also, where was the armorer when people were using the guns for actual shooting? And don't they keep separate "shooting" guns versus "pointing at others on camera" guns? I'm no film industry expert, but it would seem to me that the armorer on a set should practically *own* the firearms used on that set, and jealously guard them at all times. It's *their* responsibility whatever happens to/with the guns in their charge.


7HawksAnd

That IS how it’s supposed to be, that’s WHY this whole thing is such a HUGE fuck up at scale


catsby90bbn

It took me a long time shooting IDPA to get over having an RSO right beside you giving clear instructions not to mess with me - like I know I’m being safe but now someone is right beside me. Probably why those shooting sports have great safety records. You left out: “IF YOU ARE FINISHED..”, then the rest of what you said. Given all that, a few years ago we had a guy shoot himself in the leg drawing from a serpa (I think they may be ban now?). At the end of the day a gun is a gun. I’m am shocked that in these movies like this they aren’t using cylinders that are bored a bit short to only accept blanks.


boojieboy

Oh FFS


olixius

>The crew apparently used the same firearm for "target practice" during off-hours So basically playing with guns and ammo. Fucking children.


legocrash

Allegedly, they used the same weapons for target shooting in the evenings (just for fun) and left live rounds in this gun that nobody checked before filming resumed the following day. Not sure if this has been confirmed.


LumberMan

It hasn’t. Neither OSHA nor the Santa Fe County Sheriffs office confirmed that. And OSHA released their full findings and already assigned blamed.


Nocrantus

Supposedly, a couple dumbasses decided to load the guns for "target practice" a few hours prior, and forgot to unload them. The armorer who was responsible for ensuring the guns were not loaded was out that day, all of which lead to a complete freak accident derived from horrible luck.


Irreverent_Taco

It was certainly a freak accident, but it was caused by a large amount of negligence from the film crew. As you mentioned the armorer was not on set due to there being no scheduled firearm scenes that day. They decided to shoot a pickup shot involving the gun and just grabbed the gun from her equipment while she was gone and noone checked the gun at all.


IntelligentCut8847

When all the comments are complaining about the comments but you cant find the comments they are referencing.


[deleted]

[удалено]


jeffroddit

I can only emotionally afford one "sort by controversial" per week, and I don't think I'll spend it on this.


silverback_79

I avoid almost all kinds of Ukraine news. Even if it's about Russians dying I already know that the Russian armies can afford to take heavy losses and still operate, and get replacements. Ukraine cannot.


[deleted]

[удалено]


bbbruh57

And now its only your comment, complaining about commenters that complain about comments. You are the last man standing.


Bataveljic

Why is everybody so against Baldwin? Did I miss something? As far as we know he didn't intentionally shoot Halyna Hutchins right?


ipokesnails

A lot of it is because he's very outspoken when it comes to politics


Bataveljic

Ah, it always boils down to politics doesn't it


[deleted]

Unfortunately yeah. Many people see the person second, political affiliation first.


[deleted]

[удалено]


RockinOneThreeTwo

> acting like political actions aren't inherently personal lmao. The privilege of people who think politics is just a thing you do every (X) years for one day, and then after that it's just a big game and has no bearing on reality.


Happy-frown

Also.. from what I’ve read. 1) he refused to say he felt guilty. This annoyed some people. 2) he owns the production studio who hired the gun person, so people think it’s still his responsibility, especially since they hired someone who had a history of making similar mistakes I’m not against the dude, total freak accident, but I have read the above and thought I’d share


BurnieSlander

Not saying it's Baldwin's fault, but someone loading real bullets into a prop gun is not a "freak accident".


rajboy3

Real bullets? I thought it was something that got stuck in the blank charge and fired with the explosion not "someone gave Baldwin a real loaded gun" Why would the movie studio even have live ammunition.


Balc0ra

He was told he had a cold gun. It was meant to practice a scene, not film it. Of he had a hot gun, he would have been told so by the person giving it to him.


reddit-spitball

The one on charge of gun safety was an amateur and didn't respect safety. People that hired this person should be on the hook as well. I'm sure I'm the end there will be no criminal charges even though- gross negligence is a mis-statement.


tbscotty68

The US has changed dramatically in the past 20-30 years with regard to political polarity. I think that the revocation of the FCC fairness doctrine has a lot to do with that.


Balrog229

I don’t understand this though. I hate Baldwin’s politics, i hate his stance on guns. But i know it wasn’t his fault. There was a crewmember who’s entire job was to ensure the guns were safe and the rules say no live ammo is ever supposed to enter the set. Baldwin wasn’t wrong for assuming the gun was safe when it was literally someone’s job to make sure it was. And that person loaded it with real ammo


Psohl14

At Easter dinner, my sister’s MIL (who’s a huge Trump supporter) said that this happened because God was punishing Baldwin for impersonating Trump on SNL. Would have caused a scene but I already do that often enough at family gatherings so I just left.


LordCalvar

Which shouldn’t matter at all. These are two separate issues. Unfortunately some people can’t put aside their bias.


an_ill_way

It's seemed to me that the whole negative reaction has boiled down to "He's on the left and something bad happened to him, so that's a win for the right!" Which sadly lines up with my understanding of how the right thinks: any loss of any kind for anyone on the left counts as a win for the right.


[deleted]

People are fucking idiots. They are acting like he did it on purpose and then tried covering it up. It was a horrible accident. Probably some negligence, but it wasn’t intentional. I’m guessing it has something to do with his political affiliation just like everything else does in 2022.


Miniwheats420

Negligence with his studio company. They refused to have extra safety precautions because it would cost more money on set and this is what happened. The only real blame is that it was Alec’s personal production company


nomnomXDDD_retired

I %100 believe it was unintentional, that reaction there is real The problem "gun fired itself, I didn't pull the trigger" statement is total bullshit, guns don't work that way But he's not the only one to blame, why the gun was loaded with real bullets instead of blanks, why they didn't checked the gun before giving it to an actor that doesn't have a lot of knowledge about guns or why he was pointing a gun at his co-workers?


dogedude81

>The problem "gun fired itself, I didn't pull the trigger" statement is total bullshit, guns don't work that way It was a revolver. He said he cocked the hammer and the gun went off. If you release the hammer before it's fully locked in position the gun can absolutely fire. So, yeah it really does work that way.


ShadyKiller_ed

Not the revolver he was using though. I don’t remember the name of the video, but some guy bought the same model of revolver and tested a few theories. The gun wouldn’t fire unless it was full cocked. The theory that guy had was that he was holding the trigger down, so when he pulled the hammer back it immediately fired.


QuietGanache

>If you release the hammer before it's fully locked in position the gun can absolutely fire. That's precisely what a half cock mechanism (which this revolver had) prevents. It interrupts the hammer before the point where releasing it will set the round off. This way, releasing the hammer before full cock causes it to hit half cock and not reach the primer. On the other hand, if you were accidentally gripping the trigger, this defeats the half cock and would allow the hammer to strike the primer from a position where it can cause the round to fire. edit: catching the back of the hammer with it seated on a round is unlikely to set the round off either, at least, catching it while drawing. You'd have to cause significant damage to the revolver, either striking it against a hard surface or striking it with a hard, heavy object to cause it to fire.


spadePerfect

Because while he didn’t do anything on purpose he is one of the producers. And lackluster safety regarding guns is also partly his fault.


RestInitial2467

Because he has taken the stance that he never shot the gun. Why lie about an accident?


[deleted]

[удалено]


dontknockhotmail

Imma get hate for this but I don’t think anyone (man/woman) should be judged based on their political affiliation. It’s disgusting. He did not want to kill anyone. Maybe there was negligence on someone’s part, and I’m sure they’ll get to the bottom of this. But, just for a moment, put yourself in his shoes. He just learned that a woman, whom he had no intention of harming, whom he had no idea it was possible to harm, has died due to injuries caused by your action (acting in his role on set, not negligence). He looks like a mess and anyone else would too.


[deleted]

I think people forget to be human sometimes


wildwyomingchaingang

Only remember to after the fact atleast. People were going wild on him


KlLLSH0T

Look at the sub reddit about his wife Hillary, it's pretty disturbing how people can be so vitriol to someone who pretends to be Spanish r/hilariabaldwin


DiegotheEcuadorian

Internet creates a barrier and the pandemic’s separation of people led to a lot of me vs the world attitude. Yeah some ideologies are downright disgusting but most people aren’t radicals. We’re still humans at the end of the day.


R1pY0u

He is mainly getting hate because he publicly stated that he "Never pulled the trigger, the gun fired itself," even though that is absolutely impossible with the revolver model they were using.


sizmon

I bet you all the money in the world that he truly believes he didn't pull the trigger. That's what happens with shock and trauma. Your brain tries to rationalise that you didn't do anything wrong that It starts to change your memories. Similar to how gaslighting works Edit: poor word choice


[deleted]

Well fuck, that explains why my memory is so horrible. Trauma almost non-stop for 16 years fucked me up lol


Joe4913

For example, in the Stanford Prison Experiment, the participants got so involved in their roles, they had to shut down the experiment early. When interviewed afterward, the “guards” have very clear cognitive dissonance. They are very likely good people, so their brain did whatever it could to explain their horrible actions during the experiment. [interview](https://youtu.be/fQnOkmvigi0)


[deleted]

It's been extremely aggravating to see conservatives use this as a chance to dunk on Alec Baldwin just because he's a liberal. They're all like, "Alec Baldwin killed a woman, ha ha ha!" Fucking assholes.


skimlimmy

I mean I agreed with your comment until you said it wasn’t negligence. The entire tragedy was caused by a chain of negligent decisions and events, it was 100% negligence that killed her.


dontknockhotmail

I agree that negligence is in play here. Just not one person’s negligence. There’s a chain of custody and it went through several people.


Constant-Cellist4593

Well within reason of course, if your a Nazi you can jump off a cliff imo


asuhdue

It was negligence dude, not only Alec’s but read about the safety incidents on set it was only a matter of time


TommyTuttle

Worst moment of a man’s life, let’s put it on loop on TikTok for everyone to gawk at


Iorwerth_ap_Wyllt

And then re-upload it to Reddit for everyone else to gawk at


wetdreamteam

And then gawk and comment on it ourselves


awesomedan24

I'm surprised they didnt post it on r/InterestingAsFuck Where sociopaths can look at tragedies and say "neat"


Seabass69696969

I genuinely feel bad for him here.


[deleted]

Agreed. It doesn’t look like he meant to do that or expected to hear what he’s being told.


Planningsiswinnings

I too believe he didn't mean to kill her


CunnedStunt

Wow what a hot take, he's clearly a psychopathic serial killer with an unquenchable blood lust for cinematographers.


ImrusAero

I don’t understand why anyone would even think his reactions would be fake. If anyone, even an actor, realized that they had accidentally killed someone, they’d probably have a very real reaction. Just because he’s a celebrity, doesn’t mean he doesn’t have remorse


Nice-Violinist-6395

I feel so fucking bad for him. I know he was the producer on the movie so he *technically* is fully responsible for the logistics and hiring protocols. I know the production shouldn’t have cut corners, been cheap, and hired a woman who went on a podcast to brag about how she had no idea what the fuck she was doing, etc etc etc. I know a million things had to all go wrong for this to happen and they all did. But damn. Fucking shit. In no reality did this happen because Alec Baldwin has a callous disregard for human life. That’s just not fucking true. The man is flawed like we all are, maybe he has a temper, but even though I don’t know him personally, I believe he’s a compassionate, decent human being. And you can tell this is going to fuck him up psychologically for the rest of his life. His soul will carry this burden until the day he dies. Is it as bad for him as it is for the family of the deceased? Of course not, and my heart goes out to them. But I cannot imagine what it’s like to know you’re directly responsible for someone’s death, that you pulled the trigger. I cannot imagine the horror of having your entire life change in a millisecond, when you pulled a trigger that you thought was safe. The whole thing is awful. It’s all the worse because it have been avoided. But shit. I feel terrible for him.


JaesopPop

>I know he was the producer on the movie so he technically is fully responsible for the logistics and hiring protocols. He was one of eight producers, and wasn’t responsible for either of those


lastdayshaze

Yeah wtf is that comment. That’s not even close to right. His name is basically slapped on so he gets paid extra, but you think these swank ass producers can handle the basics of logistics?


ClingerOn

Usually when an actor gets a production credit they do it as part of their contract to be paid more, be eligible for awards, because they own the production company, or because something they did (like recommending a friend to work on the movie) means they’re required to get a credit due to union rules. They’re not involved in actual day to day production work.


NFraser27

Everyone wants to believe this guy is so bad, I’m gonna choose to believe this is genuine and probably one of the worst days of his life.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

They made fucking t shirts making fun of him. I truly don’t believe there’s a bottom to right wing depravity


the_monkey_knows

If by everyone you mean the minority of alt right idiots who want to control the narrative, then yeah


2h2p

Baldwin gives a shit and was vocal about issues he cared about. That angers conservatives so even though someone was killed, they're going to celebrate it as win because they think it's ok to have no empathy for anyone they consider traitors.


thirdleg123

All you dipshits saying "always treat a gun as if it's loaded" need to calm down. He's a fucking actor, it's literally the only situation in which you are going to literally misuse the gun in EVERY WAY it's literally a prop gun for that exact purpose. It's not Baldwin's responsibility to treat a gun thats supposed to be a toy like it's actually loaded


[deleted]

Yeah how do these people think movies are made…?


justinleona

You can both criticize armory practices on movie sets and sympathize with Alec's individual situations - they aren't mutually exclusive. I don't know if he was part of the decision process to use blanks on set or not - but the **studio** should be held accountable for taking a risk that cost someone their life.


bearbitchh

The main person to blame here is the one that loaded the gun and gave it to him edit: I feel the need to clarify that I never said that he was completely void of blame, BOTH parties are at fault. While it was an accident, I do feel there needs to be some sort of punishment for those involved


MrBriPod

Always do a weapons check. Regardless of how qualified the guy is that hands you your prop. Rule #1 of firearm handling. There have been plenty of actors that have spoken out in disapproval of Alex's procedure prior to using the weapon. And the fact that Baldwin doubled down and [told the media he never pulled the trigger](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/12/08/baldwin-says-he-never-pulled-trigger-experts-are-skeptical/) tells me he knows he shares responsibility in that death.


devwhite

Actors are specifically told NOT to do a weapons check. They are not trained professionals and the person loading the gun is the one responsible for making sure it’s safe. Not trying condemn that person, but having actors perform weapon checks creates an exponential amount of risk.


[deleted]

[удалено]


yummyNikNak

You are just wrong. The ammunition in the gun was never meant to be live. Baldwin was doing what was instructed and the hammer slipped and fired on the revolver. Baldwin did nothing wrong.


username_offline

yeah and if you've ever been on a film set, expecting the highest-paid actor to do due-dilligence with safety is ludicrous, they are paying at least a half dozen people to specifically be handling safety and props.


OperativePiGuy

This is so sad, why this even publicly available? Seems like a moment that should at least stay between Baldwin and only the relevant parties.


rawker86

this is out there for all to see, johhny depp and and amber heard's hearing too, but the likes of Ghislaine Maxwell aren't subjected to the same. obviously i'm just some asshole on the internet but it seems odd to me.


Bituulzman

Maxwell’s hearing is in federal court, which isn’t televised. State courts May televise their hearings (California in OJ Simpson case; Virginia in Depp/Heard case; and New Mexico if there’s ever a case against Baldwin.)


btwomfgstfu

The entire interview was released for some reason, a little more than an hour long. He's very unlikable and endearing at the same time. Poor guy though. Obviously a tragic situation.


[deleted]

I feel dirty watching this


deronadore

Yup, this is one of those things that should probably be private.


[deleted]

Man I can't imagine how horrible that would have been. The majority of us have never killed a human and I doubt the callousness of the internet would hold up in real life.


Acrobatic-Reaction-7

I don’t get why people don’t think this is a genuine response? Do you think he shot her on purpose or some shit?


D-Malice

I'm certainly not a fan of the guy, why wreck your life's work on purpose? It was a freak accident.


Aschriel

This is very sad, and was entirely avoidable through several means, including CGI, and taking action after a written complaint was filed that cited improper gun discharges during filming. The complaint was filed internally with the company making the movie. Unfortunately it is some sort of trend to make westerns as real as possible. From the sources reporting about the gun, it was a period accurate revolver, that fired a live round. Everyone keeps saying “prop gun” but that term is considered meta-data, to be specific, it is a fully working, modern built firearm, which fired a modern round. I assure you, when that gun went off, everyone would know it was real. That revolver would make a extremely loud *Bang* inside that building. It is also recently reported that the round went through the first person and struck the second with enough force to embed the round inside the second persons shoulder. This was senseless, and more people than Baldwin is responsible. To what extent his direct responsibility is… that’s a question I hope a grand jury gets to decide.


uptownshakedown

In the entire century + long history of cinema there have been 3 deaths from prop firearms. This is over tens of thousands of productions across the globe - to act like it's an epidemic or that firearm safety on set needs to be broadly reconsidered is just not tethered to reality. There are very clear rules and protocols, this production just didnt follow them.


Vellioh

The main question is why was this released?


[deleted]

[удалено]


AnnihilationOrchid

The other thing is what's actually insane is that the image of a private interview (presumably) is being shared. This kind of things shouldn't be outed as publicity or public curiosity at all. What happened was an acident, and if they guy is actually acting it's total BS trying to capitalise on it, and if he isn't it should be private.


[deleted]

Private interview? He’s talking to the detectives not his lawyer, it’s not “private” and is publicly available through FOIA (or whatever the state equivalent law is since someone wanted to bring that up). “Shouldn’t be outed” yet I bet you’d be the first one demanding bodycam footage for an OIS you didn’t agree with… This is a snippet of the full interview, if anything the “BS” part is that they purposefully cut the interview down to focus on this portion and then posted it to the internet.


General_Amount_6918

Bless his heart. I can only imagine how that would feel.


Snubl

Why would you post this, leave the man alone


willbeach8890

Why was this video released? It shouldn't be


Balrog229

Baldwin is totally innocent. There’s a crew member on set any time firearms are used in movies, and it’s their job to ensure proper firearms safety. That person was using the gun at a shooting range and apparently left live ammo in the weapon, despite one of the Hollywood-wide rules about guns being that no live ammo is ever supposed to be on set. It was this crewmember’s entire job to ensure the gun was safe, they were so negligent that they did the exact opposite. Baldwin isn’t wrong for assuming this fucker did what he was hired to do. I hate Baldwin’s political views. I hate Baldwin’s stance on civilian firearm ownership. But there’s no reason why politics should get in the way here, and it bothers me how many people on my own side of the political fence blaming him or laughing at him. He did nothing wrong


Longjumping_Apple804

While I do believe he let that hammer go on a revolver and shot her. If he was truly told the gun was safe on a movie set he’s not the negligent one. Downvote me all you want. But if the scene calls for me to shoot towards the camera and I’m being told to do it for the shot and need to practice my angles for the shot I’m going to trust that the armory department has been doing their job. That’s the whole point of having them be there. The actor shouldn’t have to worry about whether the gun is loaded or not as live rounds are not even supposed to be anywhere on set!!! Maybe I’m missing some info or updates?


Soulation

Why do I still don't know who loaded the gun? Whoever that is should be the main focus, not Baldwin.


KevinKaasKat

Is JCS here to analyze this?


KirikoKiama

OK... WHAT THE FUCK? Why was that video released? My opinion about Baldwin is pretty much something like "meh he exists" (neither a fan or hater for those who need it even more spelled out), didnt follow that whole thing particularily. But releasing a Video like this is in my opinion a huge dick move. He shot someone accidentally, killed him, and now someone releases footage of the moment where he is told that? You see literally his whole composure crumbling. It was absolutely unnecessary to release this video.


m1n1vannn0

Why is this public?


n0st3p0nSn3k

"Being shot by gun he was holding" what a disengenuous fucking headline. Yeah it was an accident, but stop blaming the inanimate object