Alec Baldwin fatally shot someone on movie set with gun mishap

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ it wasn’t Baldwin at fault. It was the employee that gave him a loaded gun telling him it was a cold gun(clear of ammo). That’s the one negligent.

It’s the responsibility of the person holding the gun to make sure it is not loaded. Period.

That makes the sheriff's job easy.

Why doesn't he know that?

It’s only been a few days. Alec Baldwin will 100% face manslaughter charges at some point.

In every article I have read it says “a” gun not “the” gun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"It’s the responsibility of the person holding the gun to make sure it is not loaded. Period."

Says who? In a normal situation when a person voluntarily shoots a gun without supervision, sure.

But lets say I am an actor with little or no knowledge of guns. I attend the required gun safety meeting.(Union was still there for that.) It's explained that the armorer will check the weapon. After that, the assistant director will check it to make sure it isn't loaded, and then hand it to me.

Here the gun was one of 3 guns on a cart outside the building. The armorer had checked them. The AD grabbed one off the cart. He was supposed to check it--despite several comments above that that wasn't his job, it sure sounds from reported protocols that it was. He probably should have attempted to fire it outside. We don't know it he did. Then he came into the building where AB was and handed it to AB saying "cold gun." Cold gun means there are NO blanks in the gun.

I don't think it's all that awful if the actor, who is not familiar with guns, assumes that the armorer and AD have checked the gun and there's nothing in it. AB might have thought the AD tested it outside the building where it was safer to do it. And he probably assumed that both the armorer and the AD were far more capable of checking the gun than he is.

Now there are reports that there were previous misfiring incidents. Company's release says there were no written complaints of any.

There is absolutely NO substantiated reports of ANY claim that the misfirings involved the same gun BaLdwin was using. Nor is there anything to indicate AB was aware of the misfirings. Please don't give me the "he was the producer" line. There were 3 other producers and an execurive producer.

Some of the claims that the union's complaints included gun safety were made AFTER the killing.

Neither the armorer nor the AD started working on the film after the union members quit. I have not seen ANY evidence that the presence of "scabs" was causually related in any way to the killing.

Personally, I think the union behaved badly by putting out the report that the gun had a live bullet, knowing full well that readers would think this means regular bullets.

Why don't we wait and see what the police investigation shows.

I agree. The Union really muddied the water with its statement. I wish professionals would just behave responsibly at let the investigators do their jobs and publish their findings. All these statements to the press no helping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ETA my sentiment about checking a weapon is not to hold Baldwin culpable--just to say that in situations like this, gun safety should be everyone's priority, not just the armorer, because clearly mistakes are made.

By this logic, an actor about to drive a car on a movie set should also check the engine before starting the car.

Not really. A gun is used to shoot things such that they are killed or maimed or incapacitated. Any reasonably cogent and sentient person knows that you don't point a gun, loaded or unloaded, at another person or live being unless you are intending to kill, maim or incapacitate them. Yet Alec Baldwin did. That's a problem. He was holding the gun and he squeezed the trigger while pointing the gun at people. He, and he alone, is responsible for that.

[Anonymous]

I want thank those of you who shared your knowledge about use of guns and gun safety protocol in the film industry. It has really helped give me context with regard to this horrible tragedy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

"It’s the responsibility of the person holding the gun to make sure it is not loaded. Period."

Says who? In a normal situation when a person voluntarily shoots a gun without supervision, sure.

I'm not the PP, but I concur with the sentiment. I am sure actors and other staff assume and trust the armorers all the time. I just know that no one is ever going to be as concerned about my safety as I am.

I am curious to hear from people who know more about movie sets than I do why they still use weapons that can shoot anything.

I just don’t see actors stopping and checking a prop gun every time it’s handed to them and the assistant director and armorer say cold gun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ETA my sentiment about checking a weapon is not to hold Baldwin culpable--just to say that in situations like this, gun safety should be everyone's priority, not just the armorer, because clearly mistakes are made.

By this logic, an actor about to drive a car on a movie set should also check the engine before starting the car.

Not really. A gun is used to shoot things such that they are killed or maimed or incapacitated. Any reasonably cogent and sentient person knows that you don't point a gun, loaded or unloaded, at another person or live being unless you are intending to kill, maim or incapacitate them. Yet Alec Baldwin did. That's a problem. He was holding the gun and he squeezed the trigger while pointing the gun at people. He, and he alone, is responsible for that.

It's not clear that Baldwin pointed the gun at anyone or if it misfired and shot something in an unpredictable direction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"It’s the responsibility of the person holding the gun to make sure it is not loaded. Period."

Says who? In a normal situation when a person voluntarily shoots a gun without supervision, sure.

I'm not the PP, but I concur with the sentiment. I am sure actors and other staff assume and trust the armorers all the time. I just know that no one is ever going to be as concerned about my safety as I am.

I am curious to hear from people who know more about movie sets than I do why they still use weapons that can shoot anything.

I just don’t see actors stopping and checking a prop gun every time it’s handed to them and the assistant director and armorer say cold gun.

I would be terrified to point a gun to someone's head or chest without first checking if it was loaded. It takes 2 seconds. Assuming cold gun means unloaded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a good review of the legal issues:

https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/10/legal-analysis-does-alec-baldwin-have-criminal-exposure-after-shooting-woman-dead-in-apparent-mistake/

And, it essentially says he’s likely to face at the barest of minimums - significant civil liability

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a good review of the legal issues:

https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/10/legal-analysis-does-alec-baldwin-have-criminal-exposure-after-shooting-woman-dead-in-apparent-mistake/

And, it essentially says he’s likely to face at the barest of minimums - significant civil liability

It's not a great blog article, TBH.

And while anyone can sue anyone for anything, that doesn't mean they'll get very far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ETA my sentiment about checking a weapon is not to hold Baldwin culpable--just to say that in situations like this, gun safety should be everyone's priority, not just the armorer, because clearly mistakes are made.

By this logic, an actor about to drive a car on a movie set should also check the engine before starting the car.

Not really. A gun is used to shoot things such that they are killed or maimed or incapacitated. Any reasonably cogent and sentient person knows that you don't point a gun, loaded or unloaded, at another person or live being unless you are intending to kill, maim or incapacitate them. Yet Alec Baldwin did. That's a problem. He was holding the gun and he squeezed the trigger while pointing the gun at people. He, and he alone, is responsible for that.

It's not clear that Baldwin pointed the gun at anyone or if it misfired and shot something in an unpredictable direction.

Thanks for the clarification. I guess we won't know until the investigation is done. This is a horrible tragedy. I feel so badly for that young woman and her family. What a waste.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ it wasn’t Baldwin at fault. It was the employee that gave him a loaded gun telling him it was a cold gun(clear of ammo). That’s the one negligent.

It’s the responsibility of the person holding the gun to make sure it is not loaded. Period.

That makes the sheriff's job easy.

Why doesn't he know that?

It’s only been a few days. Alec Baldwin will 100% face manslaughter charges at some point.

Considering we don't always charge adults with a crime when they knowingly leave a gun around and a kid fires it and kills or injures someone I doubt Alec Baldwin is going to face any charges.

This LA Times story indicates he may not have even fired/discharged the gun - that is misfired when he took it from the holster while he was practicing for the scene:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-22/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-set

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ it wasn’t Baldwin at fault. It was the employee that gave him a loaded gun telling him it was a cold gun(clear of ammo). That’s the one negligent.

It’s the responsibility of the person holding the gun to make sure it is not loaded. Period.

That makes the sheriff's job easy.

Why doesn't he know that?

It’s only been a few days. Alec Baldwin will 100% face manslaughter charges at some point.

Considering we don't always charge adults with a crime when they knowingly leave a gun around and a kid fires it and kills or injures someone I doubt Alec Baldwin is going to face any charges.

This LA Times story indicates he may not have even fired/discharged the gun - that is misfired when he took it from the holster while he was practicing for the scene:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-22/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-set

Gun manufacturers should be held liable for misfiring when it hurts or kills someone. Car manufacturers couldn’t get away with cars that occasionally have all the wheels falling off or the steering wheel flying off and killing people. I don’t know why gun companies aren’t held to higher standards to ensure they don’t kill anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ it wasn’t Baldwin at fault. It was the employee that gave him a loaded gun telling him it was a cold gun(clear of ammo). That’s the one negligent.

It’s the responsibility of the person holding the gun to make sure it is not loaded. Period.

That makes the sheriff's job easy.

Why doesn't he know that?

It’s only been a few days. Alec Baldwin will 100% face manslaughter charges at some point.

Considering we don't always charge adults with a crime when they knowingly leave a gun around and a kid fires it and kills or injures someone I doubt Alec Baldwin is going to face any charges.

This LA Times story indicates he may not have even fired/discharged the gun - that is misfired when he took it from the holster while he was practicing for the scene:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-22/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-set

Gun manufacturers should be held liable for misfiring when it hurts or kills someone. Car manufacturers couldn’t get away with cars that occasionally have all the wheels falling off or the steering wheel flying off and killing people. I don’t know why gun companies aren’t held to higher standards to ensure they don’t kill anyone.

Improper cleaning isn't really the fault of the gun manufacturer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ it wasn’t Baldwin at fault. It was the employee that gave him a loaded gun telling him it was a cold gun(clear of ammo). That’s the one negligent.

It’s the responsibility of the person holding the gun to make sure it is not loaded. Period.

That makes the sheriff's job easy.

Why doesn't he know that?

It’s only been a few days. Alec Baldwin will 100% face manslaughter charges at some point.

Considering we don't always charge adults with a crime when they knowingly leave a gun around and a kid fires it and kills or injures someone I doubt Alec Baldwin is going to face any charges.

This LA Times story indicates he may not have even fired/discharged the gun - that is misfired when he took it from the holster while he was practicing for the scene:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-22/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-set

Gun manufacturers should be held liable for misfiring when it hurts or kills someone. Car manufacturers couldn’t get away with cars that occasionally have all the wheels falling off or the steering wheel flying off and killing people. I don’t know why gun companies aren’t held to higher standards to ensure they don’t kill anyone.

Improper cleaning isn't really the fault of the gun manufacturer.

Maybe, but with cars, there are safety mechanisms in place for when people fail to perform maintenance, so that they aren’t out killing innocent people. Firearms need that as well.

[Anonymous]

I feel badly for all involved. A shooting death by accident is always tragic. Horrible. I can’t imagine what it would feel like to have been involved.