I see why Hollywood is afraid of firearms - Alec Baldwin kills set employee

[General Zod]

And that's a shame. I can't help but speculate that she was hired because of who her father was but just wasn't ready to step into shoes that big. Folks on the set figured that out and pretty much made it impossible for her to do her job properly.

Given a few years of seasoning in smaller jobs, she might have been great at the job. Now she'll never get that chance.

Yeah, this has ruined her life and her career, all because she simply lacked the experience and authority to perform the duties she was hired for. By someone who knew she wasn't qualified. To save a buck.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Baldwin was also the producer of the movie, and the armorer answered to him. That puts him in a position of responsibility for the safety environment, especially if, as the armorer has said, "prop" guns were regularly used for recreational shooting in off-hours and live ammunition was being tossed in with dummy rounds and blanks, all without her input. There's also the fact that Baldwin hired her as the production's armorer despite her having minimal experience and not having a certification she was apparently expected to have...and also making her the assistant prop master rather than having her only oversee the weapons.

She wasn't even on-set when the shooting happened. Nobody should have been handling weapons without her present.

Running that kind of negligent environment would definitely fall on Baldwin's shoulders.

What "Rust" armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed's statement reveals after charges

Gutierrez-Reed has been formally charged alongside Alec Baldwin with two counts of involuntary manslaughter, after the fatal shooting of Halyna Hutchins on set.

www.newsweek.com

Baldwin the producer has a whole bunch of questions to answer for sure, as does the armourer...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Johnny Diamond]

Baldwin the producer has a whole bunch of questions to answer for sure, as does the armourer...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Agreed, however Hollywood has not yet been stripped of its importance and immunity....that being said I believe this will cost the dipshit an annoying amount of money, but not jail time.
Wish I didn't think that, would love to be proven wrong.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

Baldwin, as the actor is responsible for ensuring the firearm is loaded with the proper ammo. He’s also responsible for not pointing it at other people and pulling the trigger. He violated both movie industry standards and basic firearms handling standards.

Theatrical Firearms · Actors' Equity Association

They, as many other professions "violate" those rules all the time, they are more like guidlines anyway.

With the right front end safety, its safe, but obviously they had some big holes in their swiss chees that all lined up.

I point guns at people...

I point guns at people I don't intend to shoot, there is simply a balance of risk of lightly muzzle sweeping a buddy vs taking too long to get in a room. Or pointing a rifle at someone through a wall or ceiling or floor or an apartment...

Even in training we often use our REAL firearm, with a bolt swapped out for sims... its a real gun pointing at a real person you dont actually want to shoot...

The "he violated basic gun safety" mantra is simple minded and shows a distinct lack of understanding.

Baldwin is a monkey playing pretend... thats it. He is given a handgun that he is told is safe to point at people, he its responsible to know what to look for to know if it is or isnt safe, they hired someone else to do that.

I've used this analogy before, but had Baldwin the host hired a chef to cook a dinner and the dinner poisoned someone and they died, that isnt the server's fault even if they personally dished out the food...

If Baldwin had been driving and the engine exploded and he crashed the car into the director and killed her was that his fault? Is the actor responsible to personally inspect each part of the engine before each take? No, thats just as ridiculous as expected a monkey play acting a part to know how to inspect a gun...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

The four rules of firearms is still on everyone that handled that revolver.

They just aren't and suggestions that they are is simply ignorance...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

Yes, but the lax safety environment should not have been allowed, and that attitude flows from the top.

"Lax" may be an understatement...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[General Zod]

"Lax" may be an understatement...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

"Repeatedly circumvented" seems more accurate, really.

 

[Havok1]

They, as many other professions "violate" those rules all the time, they are more like guidlines anyway.

With the right front end safety, its safe, but obviously they had some big holes in their swiss chees that all lined up.

I point guns at people...

I point guns at people I don't intend to shoot, there is simply a balance of risk of lightly muzzle sweeping a buddy vs taking too long to get in a room. Or pointing a rifle at someone through a wall or ceiling or floor or an apartment...

Even in training we often use our REAL firearm, with a bolt swapped out for sims... its a real gun pointing at a real person you dont actually want to shoot...

The "he violated basic gun safety" mantra is simple minded and shows a distinct lack of understanding.

Baldwin is a monkey playing pretend... thats it. He is given a handgun that he is told is safe to point at people, he its responsible to know what to look for to know if it is or isnt safe, they hired someone else to do that.

I've used this analogy before, but had Baldwin the host hired a chef to cook a dinner and the dinner poisoned someone and they died, that isnt the server's fault even if they personally dished out the food...

If Baldwin had been driving and the engine exploded and he crashed the car into the director and killed her was that his fault? Is the actor responsible to personally inspect each part of the engine before each take? No, thats just as ridiculous as expected a monkey play acting a part to know how to inspect a gun...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Whether actors normally violate those rules or not doesn’t matter. what matters is that they exist, and show his negligence. Even that is really just the icing on the cake. Your analogies do not matter even in the slightest bit because someone is not guilty, or innocent of based on some other random hypothetical scenario that you made up. They are guilty if their actions fit the wording of the crime they are being charged with, and in New Mexico v Gilliam, the Supreme Court ruled that they don’t care what someone’s excuse is for firing a gun that results in someone being killed.

 

[Lead Belly]

They are guilty if their actions fit the wording of the crime they are being charged with, and in New Mexico v Gilliam

But will he be found guilty by a Court? I sense a thumb on the Scales of Justice.

 

[Havok1]

But will he be found guilty by a Court? I sense a thumb on the Scales of Justice.

View attachment 429028

You’re probably right. I’m just stating the facts of the case.

 

[pronstar]

 

[cycleguy2300]

Whether actors normally violate those rules or not doesn’t matter. what matters is that they exist, and show his negligence. Even that is really just the icing on the cake. Your analogies do not matter even in the slightest bit because someone is not guilty, or innocent of based on some other random hypothetical scenario that you made up. They are guilty if their actions fit the wording of the crime they are being charged with, and in New Mexico v Gilliam, the Supreme Court ruled that they don’t care what someone’s excuse is for firing a gun that results in someone being killed.

I forget that I write affidavits and actually go to court and things...

"Manner of use" is important.
- I could walk into a jail with a pencil because it is not normally a weapon, but if I stab someones eye out it is now a deadly weapon

-likewise, if you smack someone with the butt of a rifle instead of shooting them, its not a deadly weapon (provided your not or not trying to cause SBI)

- a prop-gun is not expected to cause serious bodily injury or death and its use was not intended to cause SBI or death. It was akin to one actor pushing another off a building while goofing around expecting the airbag to be there, but the fan got unplugged so it was empty and the fall killed someone. A tragic accident, but not criminal.

And as for your fuddy "always responsible for checking if its loaded" bs... have you never seen bird hunts where the shooter passes an empty shotgun to a loader and the loader hands an LOADED SHOTGUN WITH A CLOSED BREACH to the shooter? I have yet to see a shooter crack the breach to see if its loaded or to confirm what it was loaded with before firing and then trading shotguns with the loader again.



Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[DoubleDuty]

You're still responsible because all guns are always loaded that is the rule. Because people don't do it doesn't make it less so it makes them negligent.

 

[Havok1]

I forget that I write affidavits and actually go to court and things...

"Manner of use" is important.
- I could walk into a jail with a pencil because it is not normally a weapon, but if I stab someones eye out it is now a deadly weapon

-likewise, if you smack someone with the butt of a rifle instead of shooting them, its not a deadly weapon (provided your not or not trying to cause SBI)

- a prop-gun is not expected to cause serious bodily injury or death and its use was not intended to cause SBI or death. It was akin to one actor pushing another off a building while goofing around expecting the airbag to be there, but the fan got unplugged so it was empty and the fall killed someone. A tragic accident, but not criminal.

And as for your fuddy "always responsible for checking if its loaded" bs... have you never seen bird hunts where the shooter passes an empty shotgun to a loader and the loader hands an LOADED SHOTGUN WITH A CLOSED BREACH to the shooter? I have yet to see a shooter crack the breach to see if its loaded or to confirm what it was loaded with before firing and then trading shotguns with the loader again.



Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

none of your excuses matter as far as the law is concerned. He may get off because he is Alec Baldwin and he is more valuable to the left when he can go give public speeches and present himself as a victim of gun violence, but the law is what it is, and there is Supreme Court precedent which I already cited for you. Your argument is a non starter.

 

[BRD@66]

View attachment 433357

$18 each https://www.lazerwerk.com/p/possibly-blanks

 

[brashears9567]

$18 each https://www.lazerwerk.com/p/possibly-blanks

THANK YOU!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[alternative]

Prosecutor in court "Mr. Baldwin, if the script had called for you to hold the gun up to your head, cock the hammer and pull the trigger would you have accepted that the gun was a cold (safe) gun and pull the trigger?"

Baldwin in court " ".

 

[Lead Belly]

Live ammo on the set was the most grievous mistake. Using the prop guns for plinking was unforgivable. Having same caliber ammo for blanks AND plinking was fatal.

If they just HAD to plink on set than she could have given the infant actors a Rough Rider in unscripted .22 caliber to fool with off camera.

Safety needs to be idiot-proof.

 

[cycleguy2300]

You're still responsible because all guns are always loaded that is the rule. Because people don't do it doesn't make it less so it makes them negligent.

That's not the rule.

Its an oversimplified model that can help safety in most cases.

Ever removed the bolt and looked down the bore?

Think of things you do when cleaning... would you put a cleaning rod or bore snake down the barrel of a loaded rifle? I sure wouldn't.

I'd like to see you load a muzzle-loader without sweeping at least some fingers...

Just this week I dropped a sim-bolt in my AR and pointed my rifle at real live people... along with other folks pointing their rifles and pistols at peope we did not actually wish to harm or kill.

No, the "every firearm is always loaded" is as accurate as as Earth, Wind, Fire, Water being the elements, or the plum-pudding atomic model, or a hand-sketched map... they will usually get you to the place you are going, but not accurately or with precision. There are certainly times when you treat a firearm as not deadly/loaded.

"Every firearm is always loaded" is a silly fudd "rule" and too simplistic to actually work in the real world.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[majormadmax]

If they just HAD to plink on set than she could have given the infant actors a Rough Rider in unscripted .22 caliber to fool with off camera.

You can go on Amazon and get .22 Ramset loads which work great in the Heritage Rough Riders...