Alec Baldwin fatally shot someone on movie set with gun mishap

[Anonymous]

That union statement makes it sound like the production used non-union labor to do this cheap or maybe because they were worried about the threatened IATSE strike and didn’t want to worry about closing the shoot.
I doubt local 44 would put out a statement like that if it was staffed by a sister IATSE local. This reads to me as a less tacky way to say “this is what happens when you hire untrained, underpaid and overworked scabs to do skilled union work….” And they are probably right. People are dismissive of the work that labor does and don’t recognize the value of having people that are trained, rested, compensated fairly (so they stay in the job longer), and don’t feel pressure to do their job in a slipshod way because they are worried about being fired if they are slow.

[Anonymous]

Or that he was too irresponsible/cheap to pay for properly trained weapons manager and an innocent woman was killed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That union statement makes it sound like the production used non-union labor to do this cheap or maybe because they were worried about the threatened IATSE strike and didn’t want to worry about closing the shoot.
I doubt local 44 would put out a statement like that if it was staffed by a sister IATSE local. This reads to me as a less tacky way to say “this is what happens when you hire untrained, underpaid and overworked scabs to do skilled union work….” And they are probably right. People are dismissive of the work that labor does and don’t recognize the value of having people that are trained, rested, compensated fairly (so they stay in the job longer), and don’t feel pressure to do their job in a slipshod way because they are worried about being fired if they are slow.

Thank you for taking the time to write this analysis.

[Anonymous]

I just heard the news and they are STILL saying it was a prop/fake gun.

[Anonymous]

More about union vs. non-union film shoots:
https://ny411.com/blog/post/navigating-union-vs-non-union-projects

[Anonymous]

How would a live, real gun even end up on the set?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How would a live, real gun even end up on the set?

The props ARE real guns.

[Anonymous]

Interesting comment from Reddit about the safety protocol on non-union shoots in Utah:

So here in Utah, every time a prop gun is used on set this is what happens:
-a notice in the email that we get the day before the shoot there's a gun.
-in the Call Sheet attachment that came with the email, there's a column listing off all the significant items being used that day & what department is responsible for it. A gun, even a rubber one would have the Prop dept, production dept, & a REAL armorer listed.
-BEFORE the gun is even brought on set, we have to have a safety meeting.
-When the gun is brought on set, the AD checks that the gun isn't loaded & sometimes will shoot in the air to "clear the chamber" or whatever
-Then they have to ask if any of the crew want to check the gun as well
-after that, only the armorer & the actor that'll be using it is allowed to touch it.

Also…. If there WAS supposed to be blanks in the gun for special effects, all crewmembers would have to be reminded in the safety meeting that NO ONE is allowed to be in front of the gun when it’s supposed to go off. A couple years ago, we filmed two actors shooting blanks all over the places & only the essential crew members needed were allowed to be on set. We all had those police face shields on, & a massive heavy blanket that I assume was somewhat bulletproof was draped in front of us… Then one of the Unionized crew dudes told Production that they still felt a little unsafe… So, they had us wait until a huge piece of safety glass was brought to set that us essential crew dudes could all stand behind.

So yeah, that’s all the safety precautions that a low-budget non-SAG movie in Utah goes through

Police are likely looking into the armorer they hired in New Mexico. Who is this person? What is their ideology? Any mental illness? That's the person who hands off a gun with a live round to Alec Baldwin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now I actually do wonder if it was tampered with, and would they be able to catch that person.

Someone disgruntled in the workplace.

It's an ugly thing to say at this moment, but I am going to say it anyway. Alec Baldwin has a reputation for explosive anger and he is widely disliked. It is absolutely possible that a disgruntled person decided to really complicate his life, with total disregard for how this would affect others (death), or thinking that Alec would follow gun safety protocol and not point the weapon at anyone. If they were trying to shut the set down, having a gun fire a live round is a pretty surefire way to do it.

IF this was a deliberate setup to hurt Alec Baldwin, it's far more likely that the motivation was political, not personal, despite Baldwin's reputation. The political climate right now is pretty freaking dangerous, and Baldwin did the worst possible thing-- he mocked the other side.

[Anonymous]

Something is just very sketchy about this.

[Anonymous]

Who’s gonna play Alec Baldwin in the SNL murder skit?


I vote for Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who’s gonna play Alec Baldwin in the SNL murder skit?


I vote for Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just heard the news and they are STILL saying it was a prop/fake gun.

A prop gun is not a fake gun.

[Anonymous]

When do actors turned directors (or producers or whatever fancy title they take on when they are probably really only qualified to be an actor) learn all of these requirements?

Do professional crew roll their eyes about the current trend of actors calling themselves more elevated titles because they really don't know how to fulfill that more complicated role professionally? Plus, I would think (having worked with some celebrities,but never on a movie set) that movie stars don't take well to being constrained in any way or told No.

Would love to hear back from some of you with relevant experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now I actually do wonder if it was tampered with, and would they be able to catch that person.

Someone disgruntled in the workplace.

It's an ugly thing to say at this moment, but I am going to say it anyway. Alec Baldwin has a reputation for explosive anger and he is widely disliked. It is absolutely possible that a disgruntled person decided to really complicate his life, with total disregard for how this would affect others (death), or thinking that Alec would follow gun safety protocol and not point the weapon at anyone. If they were trying to shut the set down, having a gun fire a live round is a pretty surefire way to do it.

IF this was a deliberate setup to hurt Alec Baldwin, it's far more likely that the motivation was political, not personal, despite Baldwin's reputation. The political climate right now is pretty freaking dangerous, and Baldwin did the worst possible thing-- he mocked the other side.

This. And who decides to go into the line of work as film armorer? A person really, really into guns. You can probably guess their political inclinations.