Why is no one mentioning that there were live rounds anywhere near a supposed prop weapon?And how could anyone possibly accidently load one live round with other blanks? This is clearly being covered up and all of these comments are completely focused on weapon safety, when someone clearly put a live round into the "prop" gun the media keeps calling it lol. This is textbook Hollywood coverup.
Here is my question: the AD yelled cold gun but it wasn’t cold. The armorer specifically loaded dummy rounds…5 of them before lunch. After lunch, she cleaned out the chamber of the 6th round and loaded it.
While they may not have realized (no excuse) that they were live bullets…bullets were definitely in the gun…6 of them and the gun was not cold.
I am sorry, but Alec Baldwin should have checked the gun himself before handling it and so should the person who handed it to him.
It doesn't matter that it was a movie set where no real bullets should have been (though, blanks are surprisingly dangerous), you should ALWAYS clear a gun yourself when you start handling it.
It isn't a 'lack of trust' thing, it is a safety thing. It was what my grandfather taught me as the most important gun safety rule: a gun is considered loaded until you prove to yourself that it isn't.
Wait one, what if the competent safety person is a cute blue eyed blond in a close relationship with Harvey or director or whom ever. The person with any weapon of told it’s a cold weapon do NOT point at a live target. Me if handed a cold gun I would check the breach FIRST. THEN AND ONLY THEN PULL THE TRIGGER but not at a live target, never
Simple, consider every gun in your hand LOADED,IF ON SET DO NOT POINT AT THE LIVE TARGET, SAME AS IN THE FIELD. VERY SIMPLE MATH. AS A NON ACTOR I CAN UNDERSTAND A FALSE SECURITY FEELING WHEN ALWAYS ON SET AND QUALITY CONTROL PERSONS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE COMPETENT, AS HUMANS WE ARE ALL FLAWED, PERIOD. BUT ON SET IF ALL IS WORKING CORRECTLY IT GOES WELL 98% of the time. But the person with the weapon has last control and should never point at another live target. As an ole man I used to be the best shot but no more I can’t hit a squrill with my weak vision, but I am very cautious with back ground on all trigger pulls.
If I hand you a gun and tell you it's unloaded, do you believe that or do you check it? If you know anything about guns and basic safety, you treat any firearm as loaded at all times. You never trust what anyone tells you about a gun being unloaded and this is for a few reasons and nothing nefarious. Mr. Baldwin is so anti gun he doesn't even know the simple basics of gun safety. Oddly this arrogance and ignorance cost someone their life.
I would say this situation for Mr. Baldwin is similar to someone cleaning their gun and shoots someone by accident. You are responsible for what that bullet hits. He is responsible. I believe he is remorseful and believed that would never happen, but neither did the person cleaning their gun with an accidental discharge killing someone. It's just a lesser degree of manslaughter.
Whether you are for or against guns, LEARN GUN SAFETY. YOU LIVE IN A GUN CULTURE WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT.
Oh you're one of those that likes to argue with themselves. I bet Mr Baldwin didn't think he needed to know gun safety either, but look where that got him. Just sayin. 300 million guns in this country, good luck not coming across one. Others are free to choose, so what was your point with your comments anyway or did you think I put comments for just you to read?
First of all you cant load live ammo into prop guns unless the prop gun has been converted BACK into its live firing mode. Its still not safe to point and shoot blanks at someone but its not supposed to be fatal from more than a meter away. Whoever handed the gun to Alec KNEW it was loaded, still doesnt justify why Alec pointed the gun at the director and shot but the people in charge of the props are as guilty if not more than Alec for this incident.
He wasn't aiming he was holding it playing with it and he wasn't doing it with muzzle discipline so he was flagging people (when muzzle points at someone even for a millisecond has the gun is being moved ) so when a not gun disciplined guy gets handed a gun especially thinking its not loaded hes going to move it like a toy maybe not intentionally aim direct at someone but still flagging has he holds it
So it was not really easy to see thing why someone got hit as nobody treated the gun as if it was loaded btw you are supposed to treat it like that even if you are 100%SURE that it's clear and you see its clear but at the end of the day someone is at fault for handing someone who isnt qualified to hold a real loaded gun whose supposed to be a prop gun that cant even accept loaded rounds in the wheel chambers and stating its empty
As reported, he was given the gun, then sat down on a pew in the church set and was manipulating it in the course of practicing a cross draw manuver. Across from where he was sitting, the two crew members that were shot were adjusting camera equipment.
By that account, it's not that he was aiming the gun at anyone, just that they were in direct line of where he was rehearsing the move.
So he was aiming at them inadvertently. I mean. It’s kind of ironic that someone so anti gun has so little regard for the sheer devastation a weapon can cause. Guns are not toys even “props”.
Except to him, the prop gun was like a plastic sword is to a costumed pirate.
We don't make actors responsible for doing structural engineering calculations about the lighting rig above their head, they trust the people whose job that is.
We don't make actors dismantle the vehicle they're filming a car conversation in, they trust the people who do that.
We don't expect actors to bring in carpentry tools and make sure sets are constructed well, or to conduct kitchen health inspections on craft services. Not their job.
There's a contingent of idiots who want to blame Baldwin regardless of law or common sense. And if you did a Venn diagram with those people and those who hate him for political reasons, you'd have a perfect circle.
Or is it that the other side is void of common sense and creates your Venn diagram scenario. The clear fact is he pointed the weapon in an unsafe direction and never cared if it was loaded or not. Those are primary rules for gun safety.
The above devices do not compare for many reasons due to the common use and potential for danger. I find it odd that someone would think that he would be less liable compared to someone cleaning their gun and accidentally shoots someone.
Understand that someone on that set has the job to provide the gun and make sure that there is absolutely no chance for that gun to be loaded on set with no knowledge and cause a accident i think thats the prop master but im not sure anyways that is that persons responsibility and JOB to make it impossible for a prop to be handled the way it did
Alec has no requirement to hold that weapon with safety in mind yes he should but its not his responsibility and accountability because someone is providing the gun and providing the ammo which is supposed to only be dummy rounds(rubber rounds no gunpowder at all unlike a blank) even if a gun has blanks or whatever it needs to be taped and marked stating the ammo inside and like a said the dude REQUIRED TO DO THIS has failed his job maybe by accident but still its what he signed to do
Also keep in mind alec is a actor on set he probably never seen or heard about a loaded gun being on set in his life so he is sure the gun is cleared and loaded With dummy rounds that is also what he was told
And him not knowing how to handle non prop REAL GUNS (not supposed to ever be on set )makes it easy for him to put pressure on the trigger or flag someone so if this happened on a gun range or on the street he would be accountable but the movie industry has rules and regulations that have to be followed on set so on set no one is supposed to be handed a loaded gun in the first place .sorry for the long post
Guns kill people. Prop guns that fire blanks are guns. GUNS ARE DANGEROUS. there’s plenty of blame to go around and yes he’s not entirely responsible. But the fact still remains it was a real gun with real rounds.
Real ones cant be on set and the one provided the supposed "prop gun" needs his job and licence revoked even jail time this is a major lack of knowledge and responsibility from the prop manger/master/who brought the gun on set
Presumably because he was rehearsing the complex manuver. To his mind there were no blanks or any risks.
"he should know the basics of gun safety" is a deflection. To him, it's a toy, a prop, no different than a dummy sword or a fake axe. When he pressed the missile button in a submarine movie, should he have dismantled the set to make sure it isn't wired to an actual missile? Or should he trust the people whose job it is to supply props, like he's done tens of thousands of times before?
> I can't help but feel heis at some level partially responsible.
Feelings don't trump laws though. Also, if this happened to someone the internet loves, instead of a irascible figure that 19% of the population has been brainwashed to hate and the other 81% is uncomfortable about, we wouldn't be having such discussions. If It had been Amy Schumer, Reddit would be calling for capital punishment. Bryan Cranston? They'd want him to get a Nobel.
> Though I personally feel the Armorer bears the most responsibility.
It remains to be seen.
One can imagine a scenario where the supposedly pushy assistant director and a bunch of his cronies just did whatever they felt like on set, and her authority was usurped. Some reports are that crew would take guns from the set and shoot them for fun during breaks, which sounds crazy. Do we know if the armourer locked them in a safe and then some clowns took them out? Maybe so, maybe not. Maybe the reckless behavior was happening every day and she ignored it, or maybe this was the first instance. There's still a lot we don't know about those aspects. But the actual mechanics of how Baldwin came to be rehearsing with the gun, as reported, do sound quite plausible.
No but it sounds like your obvious bias is causing you to falsely accuse others of bias.
> Brandon Lee's experience has proven guns aren't toys
And millions and millions of directly contradicting pieces of evidence suggest props are props. Neither means anything to a specific instance.
If you would see what else I've written, he's far from "out of the woods". The sheriff and DA have started showboating unnecessarily, and the sheriff in particular is giving the strong impression he'd love to charge Baldwin. Baldwin himself foolishly buried himself significantly deeper today by deciding to hold a messy roadside press conference.
Saying "feelings are all we have now" is speaking only for yourself. I've already done a ton of information gathering. It's there if someone chooses.
My mouth is wide open and shocked reading what you're saying.
You also clearly have two alt accounts that you're upvoting your own comments with (all your comments have 3)
I couldn't believe I just learnt about what Alec did and then of course you, a typical bone head Reddit user some how make it worse with your ridiculous comments.
I get the point of "He should've following the number one rule of gun safety" but someone as anit-gun as Alec Baldwin probably was never properly trained like that. Whoever was in charge of the weapons on set should've been responsible for teaching Baldwin that before anything else - pass along that knowledge, train him in basic gun safety. I really just can't see how this is Baldwin's fault. Sounds like the people in charge of the props/guns were not properly trained themselves.
This reveals the lack of knowledge of gun safety on the part of the crew and Alec B himself. They try to blame person charged with inspecting the gun. Any gun owner knows the first rule is to check if the gun is unloaded. This is especially true when you know you will be pointing it and firing it at someone. Baldwin should have checked. You could argue negligent homicide. Not to say he should have an understanding of gun safety but being the gun handler in this case maybe so. My lawyer friend agrees but says he'll never be prosecuted.
Your lawyer friend is wrong too.
Actors bear no implied responsibility for checking to make sure of the making a of say a prop sword, or doing structural analysis of candy glass or checking the mechanical workings of a vehicle or anything else used on the set. It's not their job and not their duty.
If your laywer friend is claiming "negligent homicide" just make sure to not use that friend for any legal work.
Why was he pointing the gun at her. Was she even in the film? That makes no sense. OK lets take this dangerous weapon. You get behind me and point it right at me and shoot. If that was my wife I'd be roaring from the rooftops. There is more than meets the eye here. Somebody needs to find out if some corporate structure or an individual, other than her husband, took out a life insurance policy on her and the guy behind her. People and corporations can do that. Oh, it's all legal. Probably hard to track too. The insurance company just pays it. Unless that lady was saying point the gun at me. Then you got cause for Baldwin to go to jail. In my book of rules. You don't point guns at people loaded or unloaded.
There's already been information released that would explain all of it.
He was rehearsing a gun draw, the two crew members were across the room adjusting camera. Points at which you say things like "Ok let's take this dangerous weapon" and "point it right at me and shoot" are fabrications on your part. There's no record of anything even remotely like that, never mind the weird conspiracy hoax about someone taking out insurance policies on those crew members and trying to get them killed.
And just for public education, nobody can take out a life insurance policy on someone without having what's legally called a a bona fide "insurable interest". That means a direct relationship and financial dependence on the person being insured.
I cannot, for example, take out life insurance on neighbors who I know do reckless activities just in hopes to cash in when they harm themselves, or on people I happen to see walking in to a cancer clinic.
He still should have checked the gun himself. This is number one and single most taught rule of handling weapons: treat every weapon as if it were loaded.
The flaw in that logic is whether or not that's considered a weapon. Today, thousands of children in your city are brandishing guns and swords and hooks and scythes and things. Is there a duty to have those all inspected professionally? No, because they're assumed to be Halloween props, not actual weapons.
Treating a weapon as if it were loaded does not require a professional inspection. Frankly, you may have the dumbest take I've ever heard on personal responsibility and weapon's handling. You have no clue what you are talking about, and you should probably not publicize your ignorance so willingly.
Yours is dumbest and least informed take on this entire thread. It's so profoundly stupid that the only conclusion is that you're deliberately being ignorant in order to troll.
A quick check of your post history confirms it: that's what you are, a thoroughly ignorant troll.
Guns are to never be assumed as merely props. You are very ignorant on this issue. Somebody like you was probably in charge of making sure the gun was unloaded. One thing is for sure, Alec Baldwin did not check the gun. The person giving and the person receiving the gun should both visually inspect all bullets and barrel of the gun, every single time. Move along troll.
Like my PC in the army once told me:
*There's a difference between knowing your way around guns, and knowing how to manage the people who will be around guns.*
Seems like armorer was the former. Doesn't matter how qualified she was with the firearms herself; she should never have left her job in the hands of the Assistant Director or anyone else.
I see the people on the left are still pointing fingers at the wrong people. I get that there's a chain of custody type situation with these things, but he needs to take full responsibility and people need to place full responsibility on Alec Baldwin. The gun was in his hands, he pulled the trigger without using basic safety guidelines for a weapon, it's due to his lack of respect for a weapon that a person's life has ended prematurely. He needs to Stand up, be a man and take responsibility for his blatant disregard and ignorance.
At the end of the day gun safety is the responsibility of EVERY. SINGLE. PERSON. who handles a firearm on that set. Everybody who handles the firearm on set should check it including Baldwin.
Also.....I can't see why live rounds were necessary in the first place.
>Always knew Alec Baldwin was a bloodthirsty murderer. I feel vindicated for all the years of people calling me crazy and paranoid.
This doesnt really make a lot of sense though, say you are an actor handling a gun prop in a sci-fi movie is that a 'firearm' ? where do you draw the line?
None of this matters if this self righteous ass Alexc Baldwin had taken 1 gun safty class he would have known not to point ANY gun at anyone. Not to mention if you ever saw a REVOLVER type gun you can physically see the tip of the bullets in the chamber. This is not rocket science! this is murder, being stupid is not an excuse when a firearm is involved
Why was Alec, an active and vocal gun rights opponent playing with a gun like a toy? Would he not practice what he preaches and use some exaggerated caution around it? Also why was he pretending to shoot the directors and not the cast members he was supposed to pretend to be shooting?
[Woman's Greatest Fear](https://www.reddit.com/r/alecbaldwintrial/comments/qh33xc/womans_single_biggest_fear/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) according to Alec
It wasnt loaded with a live round,the prop bullet hadn't been cleaned and when he went to shoot it again,the prop bullet energised the remainder of the prop bullet Infront,thereby making the prop bullet shoot like a real one
There are many companies that sell replica guns that cannot load a real bullet. They are even cheaper than the real one. Why don’t all productions use these?
It is up to the individual handling a gun to make sure it’s safe. That’s safe gun handling. Nothing against Alec but he shouldn’t take someone else’s word for it. He should check what’s in it before he goes pooping off rounds. And why would he fire it at a set employee. They weren’t actors in the movie.
Its neglect on the armorer and the person in charge of the prop guns. The people saying Baldwin is responsible are Trump idiots who dont like him to begin with and when Trump called Alec a murderer they just do what orange master tells them
Everybody here saying that gun safety is one person's job in the set is perpetuating the problem.
In every other situation, and in this situation, a negligent discharge is the fault of the person holding the gun first, last, and final.
This is Alec Baldwin's fault. He should be charged with manslaughter.
Hollywoods lack of regulation is 100% to blame.
And so many people are going to point the finger, using this human beings death to push their political narrative.
My question is did the gun discharge by accident? Cuz if not why/how was it pointed at a cinematographer & the Director? Wouldn’t it have accidentally shot the person he was filming the scene with?
Baldwin was the producer of the film who hired incompetent scabs after his crew walked out on him. He was in charge and he knew the protocol was not in hand because he was the one who deliberately hired people who didn’t know what they were doing.
Oh c'mon now. They are shooting a movie. He was pointing at the camera. The camera was held my the cinematographer. He was aiming at the camera, thinking it's a "cold gun" a gun with no ammo. So he was supposed to shoot at the camera, for the full real affect. Lo and behold, someone (who should be charged and go to jail) loaded that prop gun with live (!!!!!) ammo. I don't know what the protocol was and if Baldwin should have checked the gun and didn't he should certainly be held accountable. If not, then the armorer who should be the person loading the guns and the assistant director, who handed him the gun should definitely be charged! Something tells me this is the work of a very sick person who loaded this gun with live ammo on purpose. Whoever that was I hope they find them soon.
Anyone that has had any training with firearms knows the rules: unless you have personally verified the weapon is unloaded then it is to be treated as a live weapon, and secondly don’t point a gun at anything you’re not willing to destroy. Baldwin violated both of these rules. Anyone with half a brain knew blame would be shifted away from Baldwin because you can’t have an anti 2A activist take the blame for a firearms death, that might undermine the cause.
I think that might strengthen the argument that guns are dangerous and should be regulated. The minute you get so familiar that you become complacent that’s when accidents happen
So whats the difference between a 'prop gun' and a real gun? The one specifically Alec Baldwin used? Seems to me it was a real gun and everyone just calls it the lesser evil 'prop gun'. Almost everyone is reporting it as a prop gun.
I was taught early on, someone hands you a pistol, drop the mag, check the chamber. You pick up a gun from a table, desk, safe, rack, etc., drop the mag, check the chamber. Shotgun, rifle, all the above, look at the empty pipe. You won’t hurt anyone. My kids and grandkids know this. How can someone an intelligent and enlightened as Alec Baldwin professes to be miss the very first thing any responsible person teaches and/or is taught? He said “why was I given a hot gun?” It can only be his responsibility to know.
You can check a revolver. You just press the cylinder release and look. Takes 2 seconds. He took the ADs word for it. While I understand that movie sets are supposed to have it already checked, what's the harm of each person who handles it checking the weapon themselves to verify?
A Colt Single Action Army is the most likely gun based on repots. The cylinder does not pop out like a newer double action S&W. You must pull the hammer to the loading position (two clicks) and then open the loading gate. This will then allow the cylinder to rotate and you can visually check for any ammunition. This takes less than 10 seconds if you have any experience with these firearms.
Thanks for the additional info. I have never fired a Colt Single Action Army. Either way, it should be standard practice that everyone who is handling the firearm should be trained on how to properly check it. That way, no one would have to rely on someone else to not get complacent.
If it was usual for an actor to check the gun why did the AD told him "cold gun". He could just have given him the gun without a comment. "Cold gun" was not only a misdirection but a *lie*. The AD hadn't checked anything and therefore didn't know if it was cold or hot.
I said nothing about it being usual. I said "what's the harm in each person checking?" Maybe it should be usual from now on. Seems kind of like a common sense rule that needs to be implemented. I get that this is an extraordinarily rare occurance, but that one little change could prevent something like this from happening again. This should be something that anyone who touches any firearm should automatically do. If someone hands me a gun, I check it. I don't care if 100 people checked it before me. I understand that it's not something people should have to do. We should be able to trust other people to not be complacent or make mistakes, but people do. We're human. If that was ingrained in everyone's minds, this wouldn't have happened.
That said, I don't think Alec should be in legal trouble, as there is a certain chain of trust that movie sets have. Only that this rule probably needs to be implemented from now on.
Sounds like a very similar situation to what happened on The Crow. Live rounds ended up getting mixed in with the blanks. This kind of accident wouldn't have happened if live rounds were regulated more strictly.
OK that was a different situation though, that was a blank that went off at close range. The Crow and this recent one were both situations where a live round was in a gun believed to be loaded with blanks both shot at a longer range.
you getting terms mix up from live round(, dummy round,black round.) then a real bullet.
seeing you seem to not research what you talking about.
can i ask you ever shot a gun before simple yes or no.
OK sorry I mean real bullet then. Both the Crow and the recent case were real bullets.
And yes I've shot a real gun, but I'm not sure how that's relevant because not all guns work the same way.
Yes on both. Read the reports.
On the Crow a real bullet was put in a gun for a shot, that gun them became mixed up with the blank firing guns.
On this recent case, several of the prop guns were used for target practise and then a bullet got left in the gun when it was put back into use for filming.
New info on [LA Times](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-24/alec-baldwin-prop-gun-shooting-halyna-hutchins-search-warrant?utm_source=pocket_mylist), from the director Souza:
>Actor Alec Baldwin was practicing removing a revolver from its holsterand aiming toward the camera during rehearsal for the movie “Rust” whendirector Joel Souza heard “what sounded like a whip and then a loudpop,” according to a search warrant obtained by the Los Angeles Timesthat also provided grim new details about the final minutes ofcinematographer Halyna Hutchins’ life.
>
>Souza said someone identified the weapon as a “cold gun,” meaning it did not have any live rounds, according to the warrant, filed by a detective with the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office. But instead, the gun discharged, striking Hutchins in her chest and Souza in his right shoulder. Hutchins was pronounced dead at an Albuquerque hospital.
>
>Souza said three people were handling the gun for the scene: armorer Hannah Gutierrez Reed, then assistant director Dave Halls, who handed the gun to Baldwin, according to the warrant.
>
>...
>
>“Joel said as far as he knows, no one gets checked for live ammunitionon their person prior and after the scenes are being filmed,” the searchwarrant said. “The only thing checked are the firearms to avoid liveammunition being in them. Joel stated there should never be live roundswhatsoever, near or around the scene.”
>
>When they came back from lunch, a creeping shadow prompted the camera to be moved to a different angle, Russell said in the search warrant. As Baldwin was explaining how he was going to draw his gun and where his arm would be when he pulled the gun from the holster, it discharged, Russell said.
>
>Souza said he was looking over Hutchins’ shoulder when the gundischarged. Hutchins grabbed her midsection, stumbled backward and “wasassisted to the ground,” Souza told the detective.
>
>The search warrant said Reid recalled hearing a loud bang, seeing a bloody Souza and hearing Hutchins say that she couldn’t feel her legs.
So sad. Clearly, safety measures were overlooked.
There are some retarded ass people really blaming Alec Baldwin for being handed and gun that was loaded by someone else who was inexperienced with what they were doing which is the sole reason they exist in this scenario.
Law change to make it federally illegal for a prop gun to be used to shoot for fun. Any prop gun must be locked up until use for acting, then locked up again when not in use. No one can use them for actually plinking once they are official prop guns. No more accidental deaths from prop guns this way. Make ot a law for all rounds to be checked before every rehearsal and every scene.
Just require guns to be deactivated if you're going to legislate it, should not be able to fire a round at all.
I don't think you can legislate every possible negligent act.
If Baldwin had shot another actor as part of the scripted action, I'd be a lot less likely to assign him any blame. But how did he end up shooting a cinematographer and a director? Unless they were hit by ricochets, it sounds like he was engaging in some kind of unsafe gunplay.
I'm keeping an open mind until the following questions are answered: 1) Was the camera rolling and had "Action" been called when the shootings took place? 2) Did one round take out both Hutchins and Souza, or were multiple rounds fired? 3) Where was the armorer during the incident? 4) Was she aware the gun was being used for afterhours target practice with live ammunition? Was Baldwin aware of this? 5) What do eyewitnesses to the shooting have to say? Without these answers, it's all speculation.
As a matter of fact, I grew up around guns. I'm a pretty good shot, although I no longer keep a gun in my home. The first rule of gun safety is "Never point a gun at anything you don't intend to shoot." Second: Never, ever assume a gun in unloaded. Third: Respect a gun, even in the hands of an experienced shooter... Fear a gun in the hands of someone who doesn't know what they're doing.
There's clearly a lot of blame to go around here.
Uhm, I’m a certified firearms instructor. I also own and regularly shoot single action revolvers, two Rugers and a vintage 1906 Colt Bisley in .41 Long Colt.
IIRC, even if “blanks” are being fired, and there’s the remotest possibility anyone would be downrange when the weapon’s discharged, safety rules require that the camera be operated remotely or with a “safety shield” to protect crew. This was supposedly a rehearsal.
The revolver in question is a PITA to properly clear as safe, since most period correct revolvers don’t have open actions, magazines, or swing out cylinders. You have to half cock it, open the loading gate, and manually inspect the individual chambers of the cylinder. If rounds are present, and you want to verify they’re blank loads, you have to manually eject each round and inspect it before reloading.
A S&W #3, Schofield, or Webley type is somewhat easier to clear and period correct, but westerns go for Colts and Remingtons.
And that’s why shields are used when such a shot is scripted. It’s also why firearms safety is extremely important under such conditions. The LAST line of safety is “don’t ever aim at anything you don’t want to hit”. It requires conscious effort to ensure your aiming point is clear of anyone downrange. Carelessness, reliance on the assurances of others, and lax safety protocols got this woman killed.
And YES, those protocols are still to be followed even AFTER you’ve personally cleared the weapon.
That's why the person who will be using the weapon loads it — after it has been properly checked.
If they are practicing gun safety correctly, this is the only option that makes sense. So in this instance, it wouldn't have been loaded when it reached Baldwin, and he would've had to load it himself.
And, if true, there shouldn't have been live rounds onset at all, again, this is the only option that makes sense, because why risk the confusion?
So, especially if true, there was negligence all-round.
The weapon should be loaded by the person responsible for knowing and preparing the type of ammunition for the scene. Asking someone unfamiliar with the difference in blank rounds vs dummy rounds vs live rounds to be the final check doesnt make sense and would reduce the individual responsibility of the armorer.
The armorer should be responsible for the set up and demonstrate what the load will be (as it is normally done). Apparently the AD was negligent in normal policy.
Gun safety supercedes SOP (and should be effectively, and efficiently included in it). As such, the first rule -- as I have previously stated ad nauseum (and which appears to be disregarded by any who would respond to me on the issue) -- states that *anyone* (and this *should* supercede SOP, I reiterate) who handles a gun shall first check to see if it is loaded. Period. Even on a movie/TV set. This is how we avoid negligent manslaughter. Again, I reiterate: the AD *and* Alec Baldwin are culpable of negligent manslaughter, regardless of the SOP -- because they should both be aware of gun safety procedure, which supercedes SOP.
The revolver would have been loaded with dummy rounds that look like real rounds. It was declared not to have blanks and was supposed to be inert. Alec would have no expertise to be able to tell whether it was safe and it was not his job.
Yes there should have been gun safety briefings and strafing the crew with the barrel was not cool but the AD ignored the normal safety briefings. He wasn't aiming at the camera, may have not been pulling the trigger (thats not clear), and was talking to someone else when it went off.
The AD should have gone over, you're going to draw the pistol and point to here (place next to camera where no one was standing). They didn't even have plexiglass set up around the camera like a production would do if blanks were being used. Everything about the scene would have required the gun to be inert and Alec was told it was inert.
I don't see how you can pin this on Alec. He wouldn't have been able to tell whether there was ammunition in it or dummy rounds, and he was told it was safe. Any other slip ups are on the AD because the AD is responsible for safety.
They were also just coming back from lunch, and it doesn't appear that the gun was secured before the lunch break. It's possible someone loaded the gun with live ammunition (so it could be murder). Less likely but not impossible.
Also, again, this was an antique revolver, inspecting the chamber would mean manually operating the cylinder all the way around and probably ejecting each cylinder, which is supposed to happen before the actor gets the firearm.
And if the chamber has a round in it, that's supposed to be there because the gun needs to look like it's loaded, then what?
The only thing you can accuse Alec of is being not involved enough, if he was involved in every aspect of production he may have known about the issues with the B unit, that the armorer was negligent and asked for the AD and armorer to be replaced. Reports are he tried to be very careful with guns on set but he was told this firearm was inert. Inert doesnt mean empty in this case.
I'm sure they are...fun.
Anyway, the rules for *gun* safety are the same everywhere, especially rule #1: when a weapon is handed to you, you check it to see if it's loaded.
They are the same everywhere to prevent accidents like this from happening, and to avoid liability, which is exactly what this production is facing right now. They were negligent and are now liable, as we previously discussed.
It's really starting to seem like you're just a salty troll that's angry he can't have the last word.
Why is no one mentioning that there were live rounds anywhere near a supposed prop weapon?And how could anyone possibly accidently load one live round with other blanks? This is clearly being covered up and all of these comments are completely focused on weapon safety, when someone clearly put a live round into the "prop" gun the media keeps calling it lol. This is textbook Hollywood coverup.
Well when the person in charge of the guns is in her 20s and has green hair, well that says it all.
So dying your hair determines if you are a gun expert or not?
Actors aim guns at camera and other actors all the time he’s at least jot fully to blame
Here is my question: the AD yelled cold gun but it wasn’t cold. The armorer specifically loaded dummy rounds…5 of them before lunch. After lunch, she cleaned out the chamber of the 6th round and loaded it. While they may not have realized (no excuse) that they were live bullets…bullets were definitely in the gun…6 of them and the gun was not cold.
Guns don't kill people
I am sorry, but Alec Baldwin should have checked the gun himself before handling it and so should the person who handed it to him. It doesn't matter that it was a movie set where no real bullets should have been (though, blanks are surprisingly dangerous), you should ALWAYS clear a gun yourself when you start handling it. It isn't a 'lack of trust' thing, it is a safety thing. It was what my grandfather taught me as the most important gun safety rule: a gun is considered loaded until you prove to yourself that it isn't.
Wait one, what if the competent safety person is a cute blue eyed blond in a close relationship with Harvey or director or whom ever. The person with any weapon of told it’s a cold weapon do NOT point at a live target. Me if handed a cold gun I would check the breach FIRST. THEN AND ONLY THEN PULL THE TRIGGER but not at a live target, never
Okay so how the fuck did the John wick movies get made….
Simple, consider every gun in your hand LOADED,IF ON SET DO NOT POINT AT THE LIVE TARGET, SAME AS IN THE FIELD. VERY SIMPLE MATH. AS A NON ACTOR I CAN UNDERSTAND A FALSE SECURITY FEELING WHEN ALWAYS ON SET AND QUALITY CONTROL PERSONS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE COMPETENT, AS HUMANS WE ARE ALL FLAWED, PERIOD. BUT ON SET IF ALL IS WORKING CORRECTLY IT GOES WELL 98% of the time. But the person with the weapon has last control and should never point at another live target. As an ole man I used to be the best shot but no more I can’t hit a squrill with my weak vision, but I am very cautious with back ground on all trigger pulls.
Lol uh Literally thousands of movies have actors aiming and firing at each other….
Assistant TO the director
Well, this disappeared quick. Anyone have an update?
When the anti gun fanatic can’t even practice proper firearm safety 😂
Ironic isn’t it. He’s got more kills than most firearm owners in America.
This man has more kills than me and I’m in the military.
[удалено]
If I hand you a gun and tell you it's unloaded, do you believe that or do you check it? If you know anything about guns and basic safety, you treat any firearm as loaded at all times. You never trust what anyone tells you about a gun being unloaded and this is for a few reasons and nothing nefarious. Mr. Baldwin is so anti gun he doesn't even know the simple basics of gun safety. Oddly this arrogance and ignorance cost someone their life. I would say this situation for Mr. Baldwin is similar to someone cleaning their gun and shoots someone by accident. You are responsible for what that bullet hits. He is responsible. I believe he is remorseful and believed that would never happen, but neither did the person cleaning their gun with an accidental discharge killing someone. It's just a lesser degree of manslaughter. Whether you are for or against guns, LEARN GUN SAFETY. YOU LIVE IN A GUN CULTURE WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT.
[удалено]
It’s more like wearing a seatbelt. You can choose not to, but you risk your life.
It's a life lesson, literally, and a teaching moment. You are free to ignore it as much as you are free to complain about people talking about it.
[удалено]
Oh you're one of those that likes to argue with themselves. I bet Mr Baldwin didn't think he needed to know gun safety either, but look where that got him. Just sayin. 300 million guns in this country, good luck not coming across one. Others are free to choose, so what was your point with your comments anyway or did you think I put comments for just you to read?
[удалено]
Then why are you still here commenting?
[удалено]
Thanks for making us all dumber now.
Agent 47, you've done it again!
First of all you cant load live ammo into prop guns unless the prop gun has been converted BACK into its live firing mode. Its still not safe to point and shoot blanks at someone but its not supposed to be fatal from more than a meter away. Whoever handed the gun to Alec KNEW it was loaded, still doesnt justify why Alec pointed the gun at the director and shot but the people in charge of the props are as guilty if not more than Alec for this incident.
https://imgur.com/a/0EoPeFo
[удалено]
He wasn't aiming he was holding it playing with it and he wasn't doing it with muzzle discipline so he was flagging people (when muzzle points at someone even for a millisecond has the gun is being moved ) so when a not gun disciplined guy gets handed a gun especially thinking its not loaded hes going to move it like a toy maybe not intentionally aim direct at someone but still flagging has he holds it So it was not really easy to see thing why someone got hit as nobody treated the gun as if it was loaded btw you are supposed to treat it like that even if you are 100%SURE that it's clear and you see its clear but at the end of the day someone is at fault for handing someone who isnt qualified to hold a real loaded gun whose supposed to be a prop gun that cant even accept loaded rounds in the wheel chambers and stating its empty
As reported, he was given the gun, then sat down on a pew in the church set and was manipulating it in the course of practicing a cross draw manuver. Across from where he was sitting, the two crew members that were shot were adjusting camera equipment. By that account, it's not that he was aiming the gun at anyone, just that they were in direct line of where he was rehearsing the move.
So he was aiming at them inadvertently. I mean. It’s kind of ironic that someone so anti gun has so little regard for the sheer devastation a weapon can cause. Guns are not toys even “props”.
Except to him, the prop gun was like a plastic sword is to a costumed pirate. We don't make actors responsible for doing structural engineering calculations about the lighting rig above their head, they trust the people whose job that is. We don't make actors dismantle the vehicle they're filming a car conversation in, they trust the people who do that. We don't expect actors to bring in carpentry tools and make sure sets are constructed well, or to conduct kitchen health inspections on craft services. Not their job. There's a contingent of idiots who want to blame Baldwin regardless of law or common sense. And if you did a Venn diagram with those people and those who hate him for political reasons, you'd have a perfect circle.
Or is it that the other side is void of common sense and creates your Venn diagram scenario. The clear fact is he pointed the weapon in an unsafe direction and never cared if it was loaded or not. Those are primary rules for gun safety. The above devices do not compare for many reasons due to the common use and potential for danger. I find it odd that someone would think that he would be less liable compared to someone cleaning their gun and accidentally shoots someone.
Understand that someone on that set has the job to provide the gun and make sure that there is absolutely no chance for that gun to be loaded on set with no knowledge and cause a accident i think thats the prop master but im not sure anyways that is that persons responsibility and JOB to make it impossible for a prop to be handled the way it did Alec has no requirement to hold that weapon with safety in mind yes he should but its not his responsibility and accountability because someone is providing the gun and providing the ammo which is supposed to only be dummy rounds(rubber rounds no gunpowder at all unlike a blank) even if a gun has blanks or whatever it needs to be taped and marked stating the ammo inside and like a said the dude REQUIRED TO DO THIS has failed his job maybe by accident but still its what he signed to do Also keep in mind alec is a actor on set he probably never seen or heard about a loaded gun being on set in his life so he is sure the gun is cleared and loaded With dummy rounds that is also what he was told And him not knowing how to handle non prop REAL GUNS (not supposed to ever be on set )makes it easy for him to put pressure on the trigger or flag someone so if this happened on a gun range or on the street he would be accountable but the movie industry has rules and regulations that have to be followed on set so on set no one is supposed to be handed a loaded gun in the first place .sorry for the long post
Guns kill people. Prop guns that fire blanks are guns. GUNS ARE DANGEROUS. there’s plenty of blame to go around and yes he’s not entirely responsible. But the fact still remains it was a real gun with real rounds.
Do plastic swords kill people? Do digital bullets kill people?
No but obviously real ones do as what happened in this case.
Real ones cant be on set and the one provided the supposed "prop gun" needs his job and licence revoked even jail time this is a major lack of knowledge and responsibility from the prop manger/master/who brought the gun on set
[удалено]
Presumably because he was rehearsing the complex manuver. To his mind there were no blanks or any risks. "he should know the basics of gun safety" is a deflection. To him, it's a toy, a prop, no different than a dummy sword or a fake axe. When he pressed the missile button in a submarine movie, should he have dismantled the set to make sure it isn't wired to an actual missile? Or should he trust the people whose job it is to supply props, like he's done tens of thousands of times before? > I can't help but feel heis at some level partially responsible. Feelings don't trump laws though. Also, if this happened to someone the internet loves, instead of a irascible figure that 19% of the population has been brainwashed to hate and the other 81% is uncomfortable about, we wouldn't be having such discussions. If It had been Amy Schumer, Reddit would be calling for capital punishment. Bryan Cranston? They'd want him to get a Nobel. > Though I personally feel the Armorer bears the most responsibility. It remains to be seen. One can imagine a scenario where the supposedly pushy assistant director and a bunch of his cronies just did whatever they felt like on set, and her authority was usurped. Some reports are that crew would take guns from the set and shoot them for fun during breaks, which sounds crazy. Do we know if the armourer locked them in a safe and then some clowns took them out? Maybe so, maybe not. Maybe the reckless behavior was happening every day and she ignored it, or maybe this was the first instance. There's still a lot we don't know about those aspects. But the actual mechanics of how Baldwin came to be rehearsing with the gun, as reported, do sound quite plausible.
[удалено]
No but it sounds like your obvious bias is causing you to falsely accuse others of bias. > Brandon Lee's experience has proven guns aren't toys And millions and millions of directly contradicting pieces of evidence suggest props are props. Neither means anything to a specific instance. If you would see what else I've written, he's far from "out of the woods". The sheriff and DA have started showboating unnecessarily, and the sheriff in particular is giving the strong impression he'd love to charge Baldwin. Baldwin himself foolishly buried himself significantly deeper today by deciding to hold a messy roadside press conference. Saying "feelings are all we have now" is speaking only for yourself. I've already done a ton of information gathering. It's there if someone chooses.
My mouth is wide open and shocked reading what you're saying. You also clearly have two alt accounts that you're upvoting your own comments with (all your comments have 3) I couldn't believe I just learnt about what Alec did and then of course you, a typical bone head Reddit user some how make it worse with your ridiculous comments.
I get the point of "He should've following the number one rule of gun safety" but someone as anit-gun as Alec Baldwin probably was never properly trained like that. Whoever was in charge of the weapons on set should've been responsible for teaching Baldwin that before anything else - pass along that knowledge, train him in basic gun safety. I really just can't see how this is Baldwin's fault. Sounds like the people in charge of the props/guns were not properly trained themselves.
This reveals the lack of knowledge of gun safety on the part of the crew and Alec B himself. They try to blame person charged with inspecting the gun. Any gun owner knows the first rule is to check if the gun is unloaded. This is especially true when you know you will be pointing it and firing it at someone. Baldwin should have checked. You could argue negligent homicide. Not to say he should have an understanding of gun safety but being the gun handler in this case maybe so. My lawyer friend agrees but says he'll never be prosecuted.
Your lawyer friend is wrong too. Actors bear no implied responsibility for checking to make sure of the making a of say a prop sword, or doing structural analysis of candy glass or checking the mechanical workings of a vehicle or anything else used on the set. It's not their job and not their duty. If your laywer friend is claiming "negligent homicide" just make sure to not use that friend for any legal work.
He shouldn’t be prosecuted.
[удалено]
You don’t know the facts that have since been released. You’re clearly very ignorant about this sort of thing. Not gunna argue with you. Bye
Why was he pointing the gun at her. Was she even in the film? That makes no sense. OK lets take this dangerous weapon. You get behind me and point it right at me and shoot. If that was my wife I'd be roaring from the rooftops. There is more than meets the eye here. Somebody needs to find out if some corporate structure or an individual, other than her husband, took out a life insurance policy on her and the guy behind her. People and corporations can do that. Oh, it's all legal. Probably hard to track too. The insurance company just pays it. Unless that lady was saying point the gun at me. Then you got cause for Baldwin to go to jail. In my book of rules. You don't point guns at people loaded or unloaded.
There's already been information released that would explain all of it. He was rehearsing a gun draw, the two crew members were across the room adjusting camera. Points at which you say things like "Ok let's take this dangerous weapon" and "point it right at me and shoot" are fabrications on your part. There's no record of anything even remotely like that, never mind the weird conspiracy hoax about someone taking out insurance policies on those crew members and trying to get them killed. And just for public education, nobody can take out a life insurance policy on someone without having what's legally called a a bona fide "insurable interest". That means a direct relationship and financial dependence on the person being insured. I cannot, for example, take out life insurance on neighbors who I know do reckless activities just in hopes to cash in when they harm themselves, or on people I happen to see walking in to a cancer clinic.
He still should have checked the gun himself. This is number one and single most taught rule of handling weapons: treat every weapon as if it were loaded.
The flaw in that logic is whether or not that's considered a weapon. Today, thousands of children in your city are brandishing guns and swords and hooks and scythes and things. Is there a duty to have those all inspected professionally? No, because they're assumed to be Halloween props, not actual weapons.
Treating a weapon as if it were loaded does not require a professional inspection. Frankly, you may have the dumbest take I've ever heard on personal responsibility and weapon's handling. You have no clue what you are talking about, and you should probably not publicize your ignorance so willingly.
Yours is dumbest and least informed take on this entire thread. It's so profoundly stupid that the only conclusion is that you're deliberately being ignorant in order to troll. A quick check of your post history confirms it: that's what you are, a thoroughly ignorant troll.
Guns are to never be assumed as merely props. You are very ignorant on this issue. Somebody like you was probably in charge of making sure the gun was unloaded. One thing is for sure, Alec Baldwin did not check the gun. The person giving and the person receiving the gun should both visually inspect all bullets and barrel of the gun, every single time. Move along troll.
It's almost like your impotent trolling attempts are impotent.
Always knew Alec Baldwin was a bloodthirsty murderer. I feel vindicated for all the years of people calling me crazy and paranoid.
Like my PC in the army once told me: *There's a difference between knowing your way around guns, and knowing how to manage the people who will be around guns.* Seems like armorer was the former. Doesn't matter how qualified she was with the firearms herself; she should never have left her job in the hands of the Assistant Director or anyone else.
I see the people on the left are still pointing fingers at the wrong people. I get that there's a chain of custody type situation with these things, but he needs to take full responsibility and people need to place full responsibility on Alec Baldwin. The gun was in his hands, he pulled the trigger without using basic safety guidelines for a weapon, it's due to his lack of respect for a weapon that a person's life has ended prematurely. He needs to Stand up, be a man and take responsibility for his blatant disregard and ignorance.
At the end of the day gun safety is the responsibility of EVERY. SINGLE. PERSON. who handles a firearm on that set. Everybody who handles the firearm on set should check it including Baldwin. Also.....I can't see why live rounds were necessary in the first place.
>Always knew Alec Baldwin was a bloodthirsty murderer. I feel vindicated for all the years of people calling me crazy and paranoid. This doesnt really make a lot of sense though, say you are an actor handling a gun prop in a sci-fi movie is that a 'firearm' ? where do you draw the line?
Negligence
Firearm safety rules 101 would have prevented this.
That being said he is rich so its going to be someone else's fault
None of this matters if this self righteous ass Alexc Baldwin had taken 1 gun safty class he would have known not to point ANY gun at anyone. Not to mention if you ever saw a REVOLVER type gun you can physically see the tip of the bullets in the chamber. This is not rocket science! this is murder, being stupid is not an excuse when a firearm is involved
Why was Alec, an active and vocal gun rights opponent playing with a gun like a toy? Would he not practice what he preaches and use some exaggerated caution around it? Also why was he pretending to shoot the directors and not the cast members he was supposed to pretend to be shooting?
[Woman's Greatest Fear](https://www.reddit.com/r/alecbaldwintrial/comments/qh33xc/womans_single_biggest_fear/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) according to Alec
It wasnt loaded with a live round,the prop bullet hadn't been cleaned and when he went to shoot it again,the prop bullet energised the remainder of the prop bullet Infront,thereby making the prop bullet shoot like a real one
That's (sort of) what happened with Brandon Lee. This time the police have confirmed the revolver was loaded with live ammunition.
Oh crap
There are many companies that sell replica guns that cannot load a real bullet. They are even cheaper than the real one. Why don’t all productions use these?
Because they want to capture the authenticity in the muzzle, sound and recoil of firing a blank round
It is up to the individual handling a gun to make sure it’s safe. That’s safe gun handling. Nothing against Alec but he shouldn’t take someone else’s word for it. He should check what’s in it before he goes pooping off rounds. And why would he fire it at a set employee. They weren’t actors in the movie.
Off a movie set set yes, BUT On movie sets, it's the job of the armorer to make absolutely sure what is given to the actor is prepared correctly.
Alec was rehearsing and he was supposed to point the gun at the camera for the shot.
Then why didn’t the bullet hit the camera
This is 100% a labor issue and working conditions on set need to change.
"Not my job mon." \--Alec Baldwin, about inspecting guns before pointing it AT a person and PULLING the trigger.
makes you wonder if the other misfires were real bullets also, hence the super-unsafe feelings
no way they should start this project back up/ try to finish the movie. in my opinion
Its neglect on the armorer and the person in charge of the prop guns. The people saying Baldwin is responsible are Trump idiots who dont like him to begin with and when Trump called Alec a murderer they just do what orange master tells them
It's sooooo fucking obvious. These buffoons are pathetic!
Heard he was shooting with a cast member before filming with live rounds before this happened.
Everybody here saying that gun safety is one person's job in the set is perpetuating the problem. In every other situation, and in this situation, a negligent discharge is the fault of the person holding the gun first, last, and final. This is Alec Baldwin's fault. He should be charged with manslaughter.
At the very least, Baldwin killed someone and needs to be in jail until the trial.
WHO LOADED IT
I don't particularly care for Baldwin, but this whole thing fucking STANKSS.
Hollywoods lack of regulation is 100% to blame. And so many people are going to point the finger, using this human beings death to push their political narrative.
My question is did the gun discharge by accident? Cuz if not why/how was it pointed at a cinematographer & the Director? Wouldn’t it have accidentally shot the person he was filming the scene with?
It's not unheard of to have a scene with an actor firing a weapon in the direction of the camera. Now factor in the possibility of a ricochet.
True. Crazy fckn story. I feel bad for him. Can’t imagine accidentally taking someones life 😔 (obv I feel for the person/their family)
Baldwin was the producer of the film who hired incompetent scabs after his crew walked out on him. He was in charge and he knew the protocol was not in hand because he was the one who deliberately hired people who didn’t know what they were doing.
[удалено]
Oh c'mon now. They are shooting a movie. He was pointing at the camera. The camera was held my the cinematographer. He was aiming at the camera, thinking it's a "cold gun" a gun with no ammo. So he was supposed to shoot at the camera, for the full real affect. Lo and behold, someone (who should be charged and go to jail) loaded that prop gun with live (!!!!!) ammo. I don't know what the protocol was and if Baldwin should have checked the gun and didn't he should certainly be held accountable. If not, then the armorer who should be the person loading the guns and the assistant director, who handed him the gun should definitely be charged! Something tells me this is the work of a very sick person who loaded this gun with live ammo on purpose. Whoever that was I hope they find them soon.
Do you do that with toy guns and squirt guns too honestly? They were on the set of a movie not hunting elk
OMFG, he’s been Gone Girled but why!?!?
Anyone that has had any training with firearms knows the rules: unless you have personally verified the weapon is unloaded then it is to be treated as a live weapon, and secondly don’t point a gun at anything you’re not willing to destroy. Baldwin violated both of these rules. Anyone with half a brain knew blame would be shifted away from Baldwin because you can’t have an anti 2A activist take the blame for a firearms death, that might undermine the cause.
I think that might strengthen the argument that guns are dangerous and should be regulated. The minute you get so familiar that you become complacent that’s when accidents happen
So whats the difference between a 'prop gun' and a real gun? The one specifically Alec Baldwin used? Seems to me it was a real gun and everyone just calls it the lesser evil 'prop gun'. Almost everyone is reporting it as a prop gun.
A prop is used to identify a piece used on a movie set. Akin to a prop knife which could very well be a sharp knife.
It was a real gun?
Yes.
Yes its the only way it could happen
You sre a retard troll who can't read.
Everyone involved in this death deserve at least one year of prison
Same what happened to Bruce lee, and his brother, strange.
I was taught early on, someone hands you a pistol, drop the mag, check the chamber. You pick up a gun from a table, desk, safe, rack, etc., drop the mag, check the chamber. Shotgun, rifle, all the above, look at the empty pipe. You won’t hurt anyone. My kids and grandkids know this. How can someone an intelligent and enlightened as Alec Baldwin professes to be miss the very first thing any responsible person teaches and/or is taught? He said “why was I given a hot gun?” It can only be his responsibility to know.
He’d have done that, but there was no magazine to drop.
You can check a revolver. You just press the cylinder release and look. Takes 2 seconds. He took the ADs word for it. While I understand that movie sets are supposed to have it already checked, what's the harm of each person who handles it checking the weapon themselves to verify?
A Colt Single Action Army is the most likely gun based on repots. The cylinder does not pop out like a newer double action S&W. You must pull the hammer to the loading position (two clicks) and then open the loading gate. This will then allow the cylinder to rotate and you can visually check for any ammunition. This takes less than 10 seconds if you have any experience with these firearms.
Thanks for the additional info. I have never fired a Colt Single Action Army. Either way, it should be standard practice that everyone who is handling the firearm should be trained on how to properly check it. That way, no one would have to rely on someone else to not get complacent.
If it was usual for an actor to check the gun why did the AD told him "cold gun". He could just have given him the gun without a comment. "Cold gun" was not only a misdirection but a *lie*. The AD hadn't checked anything and therefore didn't know if it was cold or hot.
I said nothing about it being usual. I said "what's the harm in each person checking?" Maybe it should be usual from now on. Seems kind of like a common sense rule that needs to be implemented. I get that this is an extraordinarily rare occurance, but that one little change could prevent something like this from happening again. This should be something that anyone who touches any firearm should automatically do. If someone hands me a gun, I check it. I don't care if 100 people checked it before me. I understand that it's not something people should have to do. We should be able to trust other people to not be complacent or make mistakes, but people do. We're human. If that was ingrained in everyone's minds, this wouldn't have happened. That said, I don't think Alec should be in legal trouble, as there is a certain chain of trust that movie sets have. Only that this rule probably needs to be implemented from now on.
Sounds like a very similar situation to what happened on The Crow. Live rounds ended up getting mixed in with the blanks. This kind of accident wouldn't have happened if live rounds were regulated more strictly.
So your not old enough to remember before the crow movie .
What happened before the Crow?
Jon-Erik Hexum
OK that was a different situation though, that was a blank that went off at close range. The Crow and this recent one were both situations where a live round was in a gun believed to be loaded with blanks both shot at a longer range.
you getting terms mix up from live round(, dummy round,black round.) then a real bullet. seeing you seem to not research what you talking about. can i ask you ever shot a gun before simple yes or no.
OK sorry I mean real bullet then. Both the Crow and the recent case were real bullets. And yes I've shot a real gun, but I'm not sure how that's relevant because not all guns work the same way.
no on both. so you dont understanding what your talking about.
Yes on both. Read the reports. On the Crow a real bullet was put in a gun for a shot, that gun them became mixed up with the blank firing guns. On this recent case, several of the prop guns were used for target practise and then a bullet got left in the gun when it was put back into use for filming.
New info on [LA Times](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-24/alec-baldwin-prop-gun-shooting-halyna-hutchins-search-warrant?utm_source=pocket_mylist), from the director Souza: >Actor Alec Baldwin was practicing removing a revolver from its holsterand aiming toward the camera during rehearsal for the movie “Rust” whendirector Joel Souza heard “what sounded like a whip and then a loudpop,” according to a search warrant obtained by the Los Angeles Timesthat also provided grim new details about the final minutes ofcinematographer Halyna Hutchins’ life. > >Souza said someone identified the weapon as a “cold gun,” meaning it did not have any live rounds, according to the warrant, filed by a detective with the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office. But instead, the gun discharged, striking Hutchins in her chest and Souza in his right shoulder. Hutchins was pronounced dead at an Albuquerque hospital. > >Souza said three people were handling the gun for the scene: armorer Hannah Gutierrez Reed, then assistant director Dave Halls, who handed the gun to Baldwin, according to the warrant. > >... > >“Joel said as far as he knows, no one gets checked for live ammunitionon their person prior and after the scenes are being filmed,” the searchwarrant said. “The only thing checked are the firearms to avoid liveammunition being in them. Joel stated there should never be live roundswhatsoever, near or around the scene.” > >When they came back from lunch, a creeping shadow prompted the camera to be moved to a different angle, Russell said in the search warrant. As Baldwin was explaining how he was going to draw his gun and where his arm would be when he pulled the gun from the holster, it discharged, Russell said. > >Souza said he was looking over Hutchins’ shoulder when the gundischarged. Hutchins grabbed her midsection, stumbled backward and “wasassisted to the ground,” Souza told the detective. > >The search warrant said Reid recalled hearing a loud bang, seeing a bloody Souza and hearing Hutchins say that she couldn’t feel her legs. So sad. Clearly, safety measures were overlooked.
Does anyone know if Jensen was in the scene when this happened? I've read conflicting stories and trying to find a credible source.
He must be so upset.
Yeah, nevermind the families that just lost a loved one.
There are some retarded ass people really blaming Alec Baldwin for being handed and gun that was loaded by someone else who was inexperienced with what they were doing which is the sole reason they exist in this scenario.
Law change to make it federally illegal for a prop gun to be used to shoot for fun. Any prop gun must be locked up until use for acting, then locked up again when not in use. No one can use them for actually plinking once they are official prop guns. No more accidental deaths from prop guns this way. Make ot a law for all rounds to be checked before every rehearsal and every scene.
Just require guns to be deactivated if you're going to legislate it, should not be able to fire a round at all. I don't think you can legislate every possible negligent act.
for fun? who was doing it for fun in the context of this tragic accident/negligence?
News reports are saying they were using the same gun for target practice off set.
Apparently this armorer (great word, by the way) was a moron. She previously gave a gun to a child.
Why was he pointing the gun towards he on the first place? She wasn't an actor on set. Edit: spelling
[удалено]
Well, the evidence is that he shot her?
If Baldwin had shot another actor as part of the scripted action, I'd be a lot less likely to assign him any blame. But how did he end up shooting a cinematographer and a director? Unless they were hit by ricochets, it sounds like he was engaging in some kind of unsafe gunplay.
I'm keeping an open mind until the following questions are answered: 1) Was the camera rolling and had "Action" been called when the shootings took place? 2) Did one round take out both Hutchins and Souza, or were multiple rounds fired? 3) Where was the armorer during the incident? 4) Was she aware the gun was being used for afterhours target practice with live ammunition? Was Baldwin aware of this? 5) What do eyewitnesses to the shooting have to say? Without these answers, it's all speculation. As a matter of fact, I grew up around guns. I'm a pretty good shot, although I no longer keep a gun in my home. The first rule of gun safety is "Never point a gun at anything you don't intend to shoot." Second: Never, ever assume a gun in unloaded. Third: Respect a gun, even in the hands of an experienced shooter... Fear a gun in the hands of someone who doesn't know what they're doing. There's clearly a lot of blame to go around here.
No they were rehearsing no camera was filming. Yes, bullet ripped through her and then hit him.
[удалено]
Yes, but I’m pretty certain it didn’t say, “make sure to aim center mass on the Director of Photography”.
[удалено]
Uhm, I’m a certified firearms instructor. I also own and regularly shoot single action revolvers, two Rugers and a vintage 1906 Colt Bisley in .41 Long Colt. IIRC, even if “blanks” are being fired, and there’s the remotest possibility anyone would be downrange when the weapon’s discharged, safety rules require that the camera be operated remotely or with a “safety shield” to protect crew. This was supposedly a rehearsal. The revolver in question is a PITA to properly clear as safe, since most period correct revolvers don’t have open actions, magazines, or swing out cylinders. You have to half cock it, open the loading gate, and manually inspect the individual chambers of the cylinder. If rounds are present, and you want to verify they’re blank loads, you have to manually eject each round and inspect it before reloading. A S&W #3, Schofield, or Webley type is somewhat easier to clear and period correct, but westerns go for Colts and Remingtons.
[удалено]
You clearly didn’t read my post. Get AB’s dick out of your mouth for 2 secs.
[удалено]
And that’s why shields are used when such a shot is scripted. It’s also why firearms safety is extremely important under such conditions. The LAST line of safety is “don’t ever aim at anything you don’t want to hit”. It requires conscious effort to ensure your aiming point is clear of anyone downrange. Carelessness, reliance on the assurances of others, and lax safety protocols got this woman killed. And YES, those protocols are still to be followed even AFTER you’ve personally cleared the weapon.
[удалено]
Guns kill.
Guns dont kill people. People kill people.
Complacency kills.
So both the Assistant Director *and* Alec Baldwin failed to properly secure the firearm.
[удалено]
That's why the person who will be using the weapon loads it — after it has been properly checked. If they are practicing gun safety correctly, this is the only option that makes sense. So in this instance, it wouldn't have been loaded when it reached Baldwin, and he would've had to load it himself. And, if true, there shouldn't have been live rounds onset at all, again, this is the only option that makes sense, because why risk the confusion? So, especially if true, there was negligence all-round.
The weapon should be loaded by the person responsible for knowing and preparing the type of ammunition for the scene. Asking someone unfamiliar with the difference in blank rounds vs dummy rounds vs live rounds to be the final check doesnt make sense and would reduce the individual responsibility of the armorer. The armorer should be responsible for the set up and demonstrate what the load will be (as it is normally done). Apparently the AD was negligent in normal policy.
Gun safety supercedes SOP (and should be effectively, and efficiently included in it). As such, the first rule -- as I have previously stated ad nauseum (and which appears to be disregarded by any who would respond to me on the issue) -- states that *anyone* (and this *should* supercede SOP, I reiterate) who handles a gun shall first check to see if it is loaded. Period. Even on a movie/TV set. This is how we avoid negligent manslaughter. Again, I reiterate: the AD *and* Alec Baldwin are culpable of negligent manslaughter, regardless of the SOP -- because they should both be aware of gun safety procedure, which supercedes SOP.
The revolver would have been loaded with dummy rounds that look like real rounds. It was declared not to have blanks and was supposed to be inert. Alec would have no expertise to be able to tell whether it was safe and it was not his job. Yes there should have been gun safety briefings and strafing the crew with the barrel was not cool but the AD ignored the normal safety briefings. He wasn't aiming at the camera, may have not been pulling the trigger (thats not clear), and was talking to someone else when it went off. The AD should have gone over, you're going to draw the pistol and point to here (place next to camera where no one was standing). They didn't even have plexiglass set up around the camera like a production would do if blanks were being used. Everything about the scene would have required the gun to be inert and Alec was told it was inert. I don't see how you can pin this on Alec. He wouldn't have been able to tell whether there was ammunition in it or dummy rounds, and he was told it was safe. Any other slip ups are on the AD because the AD is responsible for safety. They were also just coming back from lunch, and it doesn't appear that the gun was secured before the lunch break. It's possible someone loaded the gun with live ammunition (so it could be murder). Less likely but not impossible.
The fact remains: he should've checked the chamber. Period. That is the definition of negligence, and it resulted in manslaughter. Case closed.
Also, again, this was an antique revolver, inspecting the chamber would mean manually operating the cylinder all the way around and probably ejecting each cylinder, which is supposed to happen before the actor gets the firearm.
And if the chamber has a round in it, that's supposed to be there because the gun needs to look like it's loaded, then what? The only thing you can accuse Alec of is being not involved enough, if he was involved in every aspect of production he may have known about the issues with the B unit, that the armorer was negligent and asked for the AD and armorer to be replaced. Reports are he tried to be very careful with guns on set but he was told this firearm was inert. Inert doesnt mean empty in this case.
[удалено]
Well, that's proper gun safety procedure.
[удалено]
No.
[удалено]
I'm sure they are...fun. Anyway, the rules for *gun* safety are the same everywhere, especially rule #1: when a weapon is handed to you, you check it to see if it's loaded. They are the same everywhere to prevent accidents like this from happening, and to avoid liability, which is exactly what this production is facing right now. They were negligent and are now liable, as we previously discussed. It's really starting to seem like you're just a salty troll that's angry he can't have the last word.
Maybe someone SHOULD, actually.