My take is that Alec Baldwin the Actor isn’t to blame. Alec Baldwin the Producer caused all of the Armourer problems by running a low budget production.
As an actor he wasn’t supposed to check the gun, however as a producer he failed by not hiring the correct licensed armourer due to cutting corners.
Especially aiming directly at her and pulling the trigger. I don’t believe it was malicious but damn; I would never consider that without triple clearing the weapon. I still would feel comfortable.
Even if he took the bullet out he would have seen it was indeed a blank. He would have had to take the bullet out and hold the barrel up to the light with the chamber open to see a previous bullet was stuck in the barrel.
Yes. Any layman with 15min of instruction (with THAT firearm, not even another of the same kind, THAT ONE) should be able to unload and show clear, OR they don’t get greenlit to hold a real gun, nonfiring replicas only.
We’re only giving him a pass because he’s an “actor,” I used to be a pizza driver and showed my boss my carry one night, before I passed it to him I gave him a basic run down on how to make sure it was safe, handed it to him and he reproduced it instantly. You’re telling me, that I can expect a Jordanian man who has never held a gun, who is just an owner-operator of a local pizza spot, to check if the gun is safe, but not Alec Baldwin who was Jack Ryan in The Hunt for Red October (had gun), a cop in The Departed (had gun), 30 Rock (one episode he had gun), was in Miami Blues (with a gun), The Getaway (with a gun), The Juror (had a gun), The Edge (gun), Pixie (guns), and he can’t be bothered to learn how to use them safely? Fuck that.
Checking a revolver to confirm they type of prop ammo is very different than a regular weapon check.
Different shots require different ammo. You may have a shot where the revolver is seen from the business end, so there needs to be a bullet of some kind in the cartridge - so maybe it’s a real bullet with no powder or primer. Or maybe the shot shows an open cylinder, so you need primers but no bullets. Or maybe you need to show the actor loading, so it’s a plastic primer or entirely fake round. Or maybe it’s being fired, so you need a blank…
The mixture of different kinds of prop ammo is how Brandon Lee was killed on set. A bullet came dislodged from a round being used for a previous scene and was still in the barrel when a blank was fired. That effectively made a live round that killed Lee.
So the barrel also needs to be checked for squibs if it’s goong to be loaded with blanks.
It’s not as simple as a regular press-check or opening the cylinder. I carry a gun every day and am a firm believer in gun safety at all times, but props are treated differently because they are different.
As a part of their job, actors will point guns at each other and pull the triggers. The normal firearm safety procedures just don’t work with them.
Actors’ job isn’t to be as knowledgeable as a firearm consultant, hence why they hire one. The same way they trust any scene has been safely planned out before hand and the giant boulder is assumed to be fake and not a real rock, and the harnesses that suspend them weren’t set up wrong so they fall and break their neck.
Checking a revolver to confirm they type of prop ammo is very different than a regular weapon check.
And YOU should learn how to check the gun in YOUR hand, regardless of if it is a Colt SAA or a Jimenez.
Some of that should be handled by the armorer, as in Brandon Lee’s case the armorer pulled the bullet and powder, but reseated the bullet onto the fresh primer. He should have popped the primer and punched it back to normal with a pin punch, then reseat and engrave on the casing “inert” with a dremel. That was 100% his fault.
This one could have been solved simply by basic gun safety that I’d expect from friends who aren’t in the industry as well, that is why I blame both Baldwin and the armorer.
Frankly, all actors who use real guns in movies should be required by SAG to take a basic safety course. They don’t have to go full Keanu, just go to the nearest range and ask any RSO if they’d like a SAG job, teaching people with the brain of a fifth grader some gun safety (had to get in a dig on them lol), should be good enough. Then the armorer should spend an hour familiarizing you with your gun on set before live rounds are even brought on set. Guns are dangerous and we shouldn’t just throw gun safety out the window because some rich guy with a bullshit job thinks it is below him to learn it, they actually need to learn it better than most with the nature of their job sometimes requiring them to break a rule (like sometimes they have to point them at people, which, while that is a no-no it can be done more safely than it currently is, and that frankly shouldn’t be controversial.)
Range safety is a class that takes less than an hour to teach, and Alec Baldwin had to go through one of these classes for the movie. You don’t need to be a gun nut to understand how to check a firearm and be safe.
Also, don’t lump me in with the NRA. They’re a racist, psychotic organization
I don’t think any knowledge can be permanently retained from a one-hour class. There are things I’ve learned for my job weeks ago that directly correlate to my field of expertise, that I still constantly need to look up from time to time.
Not to mention, I doubt a one hour course could cover the mechanisms of every uniquely-operated firearm in existence.
I don’t think any knowledge can be permanently retained from a one-hour class.
I learned how to build AR-15s in an hour and retained it, they can learn how to do this and this in an hour and if they can’t they can’t handle real guns until they can.
Not to mention, I doubt a one hour course could cover the mechanisms of every uniquely-operated firearm in existence.
While most will be the same as their class of weaponry (i.e semi autos mostly all function the same, revolvers mostly all function the same, and single action revolvers mostly all function the same), you really just need to sit them down for a few minutes before the shoot and get them familiarized with the gun they’ll be using. For instance, an actor in a cowboy movie should be sat down before filming and learn how to safely handle the Winchester and Colt he’ll be using for the duration of filming, but we don’t need to teach him how to change barrels on an MG-42 because that won’t be “invented” for another 80yrs. Similarly, a WWII german soldier actor in saving private ryan needs to learn about his “issued” Luger or Walther p38, and his Kar98k, not the cowboy’s SAA and Model 1891. And Tom Hanks needs to learn about his Colt 1911, but not “the enemy” actor’s Luger, so long as he isn’t touching the Luger. They don’t need to be weapons experts, just have absolutely basic knowledge of the thing in their hand that is capable of killing someone whether they “meant to” or not. It is the same thing I expect from pizza drivers, butchers, baristas, etc, I don’t care what you do for a living if you touch guns you should know basic safety procedures involving them, why should he get a pass because he’s an actor, when I wouldn’t give a pass to the equally unrelated-to-firearms job of accounting?
I’m not a gun guy and think this is a weird take that leans into the weird fantasy the NRA pushes of every person (who touches a real gun) becoming a gun aficionado knowledgable about basic safety procedure regarding the tool in their hand that has the ability to take another’s life whether you meant to or not.
Ftfy.
You don’t want to learn how to use guns safely? Don’t use a gun. You don’t want to learn how to use a chainsaw safely? Don’t use a chainsaw. It really isn’t as hard as you guys make it seem, either memorize this 8min video or you don’t get no guns. It is the absolute most basic prerequisite for handling a firearm.
As a human, if you are handed a gun, you check to see if it’s loaded and what it’s loader with. That is the first thing you do when handed a gun. Anything else is irresponsible.
“Wait, so what do I need to do to uncock it so that I can check it over?”
“Actually, it’s weird. You need to pull the trigger halfway, and it releases. But do it carefully.”
“…uh…”
“Okay, after nearly shooting my foot off, I’ve opened the gun, and there appear to be rounds inside!! Stop the shoot!”
“Oh. Those are blanks.”
“Wait, how do I know they’re blanks?”
“Same way you know how to uncock it.”
Actually, it’s weird. You need to pull the trigger halfway, and it releases. But do it carefully."
Let people who know how guns operate have this debate, ok champ? You clearly don’t understand how guns function at a basic level. What you’ve described is how a total of 0% of guns work. It sounds like you are talking about actually breaking down the gun to clean it, but just to check if it is loaded all you need to be able to do is follow this idiot. If he can do it Baldwin can too, the Armorer should teach them how to do it if they don’t know before filming starts, and if they can’t grasp it they only get nonfiring replicas because they have not met this minimal standard that I expect from everyone that touches a gun.
The consequences of ignoring safety in the name of job titles is dead people on set, it’s worth it to just fucking learn Col. Jeff Cooper’s Four Rules instead of kill someone accidentally, whether you can abate your guilty conscience by blaming others and deferring responsibility due to job titles or not.
In short: Revolvers, like you, are dumb. They are designed to not allow the hammer to release unless the trigger is pulled. The full release techniques are more intricate than what I jokingly described, but it still involves the trigger.
Calling out a comment you see as being potentially inaccurate can still be done politely without insulting and degrading people. Others have done it for information I’ve actually gotten wrong elsewhere in this post, and I appreciate their tone.
In short, no u. We were talking about unloading and showing clear, not decocking. See, if the hammer is cocked before you’ve done this, you have already fucked up.
This part, with the time code, shows him “unloading and showing clear.”
The part where he presses the button to open the cylinder and visually inspect that there are no rounds present. That’s all. No trigger involved. The single action revolver’s cylinder in the movie doesn’t even swing out like this btw, he has to do this, specifically, as this was the type of gun used (notice how the nice man didn’t touch the trigger? In fact he made sure to say DON’T touch the trigger? Finger high on the frame? Yeah, as I said, no u, cheesedick) and he absolutely should have been instructed on how and expected to do it every time he picks up a gun, just like anyone else on the planet who doesn’t have the all powerful excuse of “I’m just an actor bro.”
Ah, so you can call me dumb, but if I insult you back I get reported and my comment gets removed, eh? Logical. Well, while I await response from the mods here regarding sending me that text so I can edit it more palpably for the children in the audience, I’ll reconstruct why you’re actually the one who posseses the attributes ascribed to both me and revolvers by you above.
Not only did that man not touch the trigger while he did what one would describe as “unload and show clear,” this is a video on “decocking,” which is an entirely different principle. In the video you sent he actually does it without touching the trigger at around the 32sec mark (there was a link with a time code included in my OG comment, but this time you’ll have to put in the work because I have youtube running), when he presses the lever, opens the cylinder, and visually inspects the cylinder to verify the lack of ammunition, in order to make the gun safe for demonstration purposes. Not one time in that process did he touch the trigger (besides waiting 30sec in to do it, note to youtuber: Bad guntuber, that is the first thing you do and you know that, bad guntuber! Feel shame!)
That also wasn’t the kind of revolver used in Rust, they were using a Colt SAA, like this one. This is how to unload and check the gun that was in Baldwin’s hand when he shot that lady. Notice how the nice man in the video doesn’t pull the trigger? Actually, did you hear him specifically say not to touch the trigger? Instead to keep your finger high on the frame? Yeah, who posesses the properties you ascribe to revolvers now, you revolver? (Shucks, I hope I can get away with that one, golly gee.)
Baldwin absolutely should have been expected to know how to do this, not because “everyone should” or some such nonsense as most of this thread purports my side’s argument to be, but because he was holding one. Had he not been holding one I wouldn’t be saying he needs to learn about it. For instance, you aren’t holding one, so you don’t have to learn (besides the fact that I’m correcting your misinformation and teaching it to you, so in a sense you do), but if you were going to go buy a Cimmaron or Uberti Colt SAA clone, yes, I would expect that you learn how to use one safely. Hell, if I got one and was showing it to you at my house, I would teach it to you before I even let you touch it.
Baldwin is not absolved of responsibility due to his job title not being related to firearms, I expect every human who touches a gun to know how to do so safely and if they don’t, don’t touch them. This is the absolute bare minimum expectation, and it is so that innocent people don’t needlessly die, it is a good thing not an imposition. He may be legally cleared due to his money and connections, but on a “karmic” level for lack of a better word he is at least as responsible as that armorer, if not more when you throw in all the behind the scenes stuff like “he was also the producer, and much of their gun safety team had walked off citing safety complaints, after they’d already had two noninjurious negligent discharges, and in fact were off set that day, and they chose not only to film, but to pick up that gun and point it at the camera for not a scene but just the lolz.”
How’s that? I insulted you but only by referrencing your insult, does that squeak past the censors?
But… What if I’m an actor who’s never seen a gun… Do i quit or is it too much of an expectation for an expert to be present and why the hell would that gun be real to begin with?
Just my two cents, and I absolutely am not pretending to have any experience with this. I’d assume so long as the actor isn’t negligent or grossly irresponsible they’re in the clear. Actors are not firearms experts, and training every actor to be Keanu Reeves/John Wick is super expensive. So whomever is the firearms expert, and whomever was involved with the contracting of that expert face liability.
That’s why Baldwin the actor isn’t responsible, but Baldwin as producer might be. Since as a producer he’d bear responsibility for hiring and contracting.
I think the whole firearms expert/armorer issue distracts from what I’m really trying to get at. What if this had been a knife instead of a firearm?
If an actor had stabbed someone with a real knife instead of a prop knife, would we absolve them of responsibility because they are not a knife expert?
Here is what I’m trying to get at: at what point does treating everything on set as a prop become negligent if not everything on set is a prop? Never?
Then you don’t get to touch the gun until you’ve proven to me with airsoft you can follow these four rules. Simple as. Gun safety is to be expected from any single human who touches a real gun regardless of their job description, anything less could lead to, oh, idk, an innocent woman being killed on the set of Rust.
This seems to be the case. Personally I’m clearly on the side of the gun world, I think it’s high time we stop letting actors treat guns as toys, it is so irresponsible and clearly leads to deaths, and it is litterally just this video. Sure, accidents can still happen like Brandon Lee’s, but Cooper’s Four Rules is an absolute bare minimum standard that they should have to meet before holding a gun capable of firing live rounds (even if there are no live rounds on set, it is an 8 minute video, it really isn’t that much.
Every time you go to a new indoor range, they require you to watch a breif safety video like the one above, this is literally the one they make you watch at one of my local ranges. I’m not asking for a dissertation on the mechanical workings of the Krag, I’m asking for the most basic safety precautions.
In the gun world (the real world), I’m my own armorer. I don’t have someone on payroll who is supposed to be an ever-present expert to safety check, store, and catalog everything for me. I’m willing to bet that most of these actors may have never even handled a gun off-set… but I’m absolutely not against giving them basic safety training. It would certainly stand to reason.
He pulled a Boeing max basically. Where in they refused to pay for pilot training which led to many deaths until someone was convicted and they were forced to pay for pilot training. Cutting corners shouldn’t come at a cost of complete negligence for human life.
I partially agree, but as a literal armorer myself I disagree with “Alec Baldwin the Actor isn’t to blame” here.
I don’t give a shit what his job title is, if he is a person who touches a real gun he should know how to do it safely or he no get real gun! Gun safety is for everyone who touches a gun, regardless of job description or other lame excuses. It’s as simple as learning Col. Cooper’s Four Rules, it isn’t like they have to take a college level course on the impact of guns throuought history, it’s basic safety information akin to “don’t touch the stove when it’s hot,” it isn’t as hard as “Mr. Big Dick” from the 82nd airborne over here with his blown out knees would have you believe.
Actors SHOULD be expected to check the gun, just as I’d expect my bartender friend, or my 82nd airborne vet friend, or literally anyone, to do if I showed them something I picked up.
I don’t get the blame deflection. An actor that has to do stunts gets stunt lessons. An actor that has to drive gets driving lessons. An actor that has to box gets boxing lessons. Am actor that has to speak a different language gets language lessons. And on and on and on… And then we have: AN ACTOR THAT HAS TO HANDLE GUNS DOES NOT NEED TO HAVE GUN SAFETY LESSONS!?!
Seriously, it’s baffling! I think the disconnect comes from none of these people knowing how to use guns and thinking it somehow involves a masters degree to know how to check for rounds, when all people are really saying is to learn four whole rules of safety and how to do this, this, and this, (and depending on the gun you use you only have to even learn 1 of these 3)!
If you watched all four of those videos and retained the information, congrats, you’re ready, and you wouldn’t have killed that lady. It is that easy, do y’all see why we think he’s partially culpable now?
That really depends on what kind of producer he was. Many times getting a producer credit just means you’re a major stakeholder or own some rights involved in the project. A producer isn’t a blame magnet, and negligence can be proven at a level lower than a producer.
An actor that has to do stunts gets stunt lessons. An actor that has to drive gets driving lessons. An actor that has to box gets boxing lessons. Am actor that has to speak a different language gets language lessons. And on and on and on… And then we have: AN ACTOR THAT HAS TO HANDLE GUNS DOES NOT NEED TO HAVE GUN HANDLING AND SAFETY LESSONS!?!
Not to be a downer or anything, but I feel like the person who challenged the story wasn’t really in the wrong here?
It’s not that the story isn’t true or the person who reported it isn’t who they said it was. It’s that, they didn’t mention their credentials right off. Now that we’re living in an era when misinformation is rife, especially now that some people appear poised to flood us with a sea of LLM-generated shit, citations and backing up your information up front are becoming more important.
People make confident and bold assertions all the time. Some of them will know what they’re talking about, but some of them won’t, and many times they’ll look the same until someone challenges them.
Every range I did in the military, they stressed that everyone on the range was a safety officer, and that anyone can call cease fire at any time if they felt conditions were unsafe. So yeah, that’s how I see it.
Alec Baldwin was a producer on the movie and thus was involved in the decision making process to have nonunion crew on set. IATSE armorers have a near-perfect track record with firearms on set. As somebody with the clout to make it happen, Baldwin should have insisted on the shoot being a union set.
The 82nd Airborne Division is an airborne infantry division of the United States Army specializing in parachute assault operations into denied areas with a U.S. Department of Defense requirement to “respond to crisis contingencies anywhere in the world within 18 hours”.
I just don’t think they’re very knowledgeable about modern warfare. They need to do some research like I have, the ac-130 level is my favorite to play with friends, I learned so much from it.
The issue is, as I understand it, that Baldwin was handed the revolver from a producer or someone of similar standing and he should have handed it to the armorer for checking, regardless of what he was told.
We don’t need to. Only 3 people have died by guns on film sets in over 30 years, and every time it’s cause some idiot used real ammo in it at some point. Just never use real ammo in your prop guns, and they are always fine.
That’s not what happened. The guns were used with real ammo at a range to go shooting, then used as prop guns later without properly checking that there were no live rounds or lodged bullets in the guns.
And I’m not minimizing them, I’m telling you the actual solution isn’t modifying the firing pin, or changing the rules, since the rules work. These deaths were due to idiots breaking the rules, but the rules have worked to prevent thousands of deaths, and if followed no one will ever dies.
No idea why you are getting so much hate. Anyone who has been taught how to handle a firearm knows to treat every weapon as if it was loaded. It doesn’t matter if it’s a training firearm which can be a very bright color and has parts visibly drilled out so you can see it will not function, guns firing blanks, an airsoft gun, even something like a pneumatic nail gun, etc. Verify the source of ammunition is empty and there is not a round in the chamber visibly and physically.
I’m not saying everyone in the world should know this, but anyone handling any form of firearm should. Alec Baldwin has been in enough movies and shows where guns were handled that he must have been taught this and seen it as the protocol multiple times.
This is gun safety and it’s not a bad thing,.I’m not a huge gun fan myself but promoting firearm safety isn’t anything to look down on.
Then he’s a moron, and I’m gonna ask my buddy who was in the 82nd Airborne if he happens to know this fool. My dude was actually at my house yesterday and I showed him a new gun, I picked it up, unload and show clear, pass it to him, he shows it’s clear as well, and now it is safe, that is paramount any time you touch a real gun, I don’t care what your fucking job title is, I don’t care what your experience level is, if you can’t do that you DO NOT get to touch real guns, use airsoft until you can learn a modicum of responsibility. It isn’t even that hard to do, it is literally “Press button, see bullets? No? Good. Yes? Bad.” It is absolutely basic shit that a fucking 10yo could do (not that they maybe should lol, but they are physically and likely mentally capable of checking for rounds).
And accidents can happen at any level, this “squat leader’s” cavalier attitude towards gun safety is actually pretty fucking dangerous, and I hope he’s not some kind of instructor these days. He’s liable to have an accident himself with this attitude (“Oh I was a squad leader I know what I’m doing.” BANG,friend at the bbq has a new hole “Whoops sorry Jerry.”) Hell, I know a dude who served as a grunt who recently got fired for having an ND at work (thank god nobody got hurt by that “experienced soldier” but all of us who never served and got on him for safety practices ended up being able to finally say I fuckin’ toad-a-so.)
Tl;dr I don’t fucking care what either of their job titles are, IF YOU TOUCH A REAL GUN, LEARN GUN SAFETY FIRST End of story, that is it, no other details matter, not your job, age, experience level, nothing.
The number of military people who don’t understand firearm safety is amazing. I’ve got a buddy in the navy and one time we were hanging out and drinking. He wanted to show off his gun and everyone around just told him to stop, put his gun somewhere else safe and that he could have it back when he was sober. Why he needed a bunch of civilians to tell him that I don’t know.
Complacency kills, accidents can and do happen at any experience level. In fact I’d argue they may happen more with those who have grown too comfortable with firearms, usually the newbies are appropriatly cautious. I’d be real interested to see some data on that but idt anyone is compiling it.
If I had my guess as to “why,” your buddy sounds like he falls into this trap (at least when drunk, which tends to exacerbate feelings of “Ah shut up I know what I’m doing.” Lol) Hopefully he’s better about it these days!
You’re coming across as argumentative and needlessly aggressive. That kind of behaviour is not welcome in this community. Please take more care to follow the rules if you’d like to continue participating in this community. Thank you.
I take gun safety seriously, and yes, I will argue people who say gun safety is not necessary because “he is an actor.” People die from negligent disgarges every day, this is a serious issue. Thank you.
Just a word of advice, any time you’re talking about gun safety, gun violence, or potential death especially by firearm, it’s going to come off as aggressive. Firearms are aggressive.
As for argumentative, why is that against the rules? You aren’t allowed to disagree? What if someone is saying something totally wrong that will cause harm? What if someone says that sucking on the barrel of a gun is a good way to relieve a toothache? Is no one allowed to argue against that?
Thank you for your input. As stated in the sidebar, discussion is welcome but arguments are not. I consider arguments to contain a measure of aggression or unpleasantness, unlike discussion and debate which remain civil. You are allowed to disagree and correct misinformation.
I took exception with OPs comment because they weren’t replying to anyone or engaging in a discussion or debate, they came straight out of the gate being extremely aggressive and unpleasant. However, I am aware that gun safety can be an emotive issue for some so I was lenient - I didn’t remove OPs comment or give them an official warning, I just reminded them to follow the rules. In OPs reply to me they were still passionate and seemed to disagree with me, but they weren’t aggressive about it and that is completely acceptable.
Lemmy.org’s citizen code of conduct is pretty clear on what behaviour is and isn’t expected. Here’s a few relevant snippets:
Please be kind and courteous. There’s no need to be mean or rude.
Respect that people have differences of opinion and that every design or implementation choice carries a trade-off and numerous costs. There is seldom a right answer.
Please keep unstructured critique to a minimum.
We will exclude you from interaction if you insult, demean or harass anyone. That is not welcome behavior.
Lemmy.world’s code of conduct expands on these rules a little:
[the code of conduct] is intended to ensure that our platform is as welcoming and inclusive as possible, to create a supportive environment, where people freely share their passions and are excited and positive about each other’s successes.
Do not engage in name calling, ad hominem attacks, sealioning or any other uncivil behaviour. Remember to criticise ideas, and not people.
Bullies, trolls, and disruptors are not welcome in Lemmy.World. We will moderate accordingly.
We are committed to providing a friendly, safe and welcoming environment for all
This is a voluntary community. You chose to be here. When you choose to join, you have implied that you agree with this Code of Conduct and will follow it.
They are not my rules, they are the rules everyone agrees to follow by participating here. I’m expected to implement the rules, primarily by responding to mod reports.
Finally, it’s not my role to tell people what they can or can’t discuss as long as it doesn’t break any rules:
The moderators are not morality or thought police. They are guided by this Code of Conduct. Post what you want, as long as your post follows the rules, principles, and goals outlined on this page.
I think people underestimate how “strict” the rules are on lemmy, and as a lone moderator it is really difficult to decide when to step in. I can only try my best and promise to be as transparent as possible when I delete, warn or ban a subscriber. To help with this I have made a stickied post requesting additional moderators and welcoming feedback and suggestions. I’ve had no takers. I will update the sidebar with links to the code of conducts I cited because they’re not particularly easy to find. Hopefully our entire community can work together to make this a pleasant place to be.
I’m not super up to date with the situation—Why is it that it happened in 2021 (from what I can find) and there’s a bunch of people talking about it right now?
The trial started this week so it’s somewhat topical. But there are no time limits for posts here. If you’d like that rule to change, please comment in the stickied post with your reasoning and suggestion for what the limit should be. Thanks.
43 people died on sets in the U.S. and more than 150 had been left with life-altering injuries.
But only two of those deaths in that time were from firearms.
I’ve done some digging, and I can only find 3 people who’ve died from firearms accidents in Hollywood’s history: Jon-Erik Hexum, Brandon Lee, and Halyna Hutchins. Does anybody know of another production worker killed by firearms?
Can any industry or profession that regularly deals with firearms compare with this kind of safety record? People in law enforcement, the military, and regular gun owners who lecture Hollywood on firearms safety probably need to STFU.
Sqaud leader in the 82nd is such a limp dick flex. Look out for this E4 promotable to E6! Motherfuer could have been a squad leader in finance. Doesn’t mean shit. And I am more willing to bet that he wasn’t wasn’t in combat arms by this shitty take. Anyone that has spent time around guns knows full well that you always check the load of a weapon first thing.
OP should really just delete all this. It’s bad and you should feel bad.
The 82nd airborne division is the primary fighting arm of the airborne corps. As squad leader I imagine it’s highly likely that he’s seen combat at one time or another. And as he said, he’s worked on film sets in an advisory capacity before.
I’m the op and mod here. As stated in the sidebar, the views expressed in the screenshots are not necessarily my own. Also in the sidebar are the rules of this community. You are breaking rule 1: don’t be a dick. You are being needlessly aggressive, argumentative and insulting. That behaviour is not welcome here.
This is your warning; if you break the rules again you will be banned.
Moded. Thank you for sticking your neck out for us, I’m disabled and I would be dead immediately if it was not for the armed forces. In all of the countries protecting their citizens, I have respect for every kid putting their life on the line daily.
Pretty sure the law doesn’t give a shit what conventions Hollywood has developed and followed over the years. You have a gun in your hand, you pull the trigger, you are responsible for the outcome. Don’t like it? Learn gun safety, ignore what the person handing you the gun claims, check that it’s unloaded yourself. Hollywood conventions need to change to align with reality.
Edit: I’ve been out of the loop. I wasn’t aware they dropped charges against Baldwin. That’s really fucked up in my opinion, as per the above.
It absolutely does matter. Alec Baldwin also asserts that he never pulled the trigger, and the FBI’s analysis found a flaw in the weapon that could cause it to fire without pulling the trigger.
In order to be convicted of a crime, the state needs to prove mens rea (i.e., the intent to commit the crime). You can’t be convicted of a crime unless the state can prove you either intended, or should have known, your action would be a criminal act.
If I’m at a gun range, the instructor who is teaching me hands me a gun and says it’s safe to fire downrange, and I shoot it, but it turns out someone is in fact downrange out of my visibility and is injured as a result of my shot, could I be convicted of assault with a deadly weapon? The clear answer is no, because I reasonably relied on the expertise of someone whose job it was to ensure the situation was safe before I performed the dangerous action.
Similarly, there was someone on the set whose job it was to ensure the gun was safe to use. That person handed Baldwin the gun and asserted it was safe to use. Baldwin reasonably relied on that person’s expertise when he handled the gun and did not do anything unreasonable with it while handling it, so it doesn’t make sense to charge him. If he had some role in the presence of live ammunition, then he might be liable in some way, but in his role as an actor, he bears no responsibility.
Last I saw, they had proven the gun could be discharged without touching the trigger. They also use dummy rounds in revolvers to make it look like the gun has real rounds instead of blanks (cheaper than CGI and less likely to miss one), the only way to tell they aren’t real is to remove each round and shake them as they have rattles. I don’t expect an actor to be an expert in firearms, just like I don’t expect them to be experts on politics or climate change.
How does that apply to a weapon that is supposed to be loaded? It’s a movie set, it’s not always intended to be unloaded, it’s intended to be LOADED but with blanks. That’s part of the reason why a movie set has personnel dedicated to ensuring the safety of every firearm. Additional reasons include: they’re swapping out identical guns for different takes, they’re doing multiple takes, actors have dramatically different levels of experience with handguns, they’re EXPECTED to point the gun at people, etc etc etc
A Hollywood movie set isn’t the same as your basement dry-fire LARPing sessions just because they both involve acting.
If you handle a firearm, it is your responsibility to know whether that firearm is loaded, simple as that. Hollywood shouldn’t get a pass just because Hollywood has been irresponsibly handling firearms for its entire existence. The responsibility lies both on the armorer and Baldwin, they both failed in this moment.
If there is a possibility that there are real guns on set or they cannot distinguish, then they need to learn how to distinguish or not agree to point one at another human.
If you handle a prop on a movie set, it’s not your responsibility to know that this time it’s not a prop but real loaded gun this time. It’s inconceivable to me how it’s even possible that a gun even there, but I guess I am not American enough to understand that
Add comment