Reply to Alec Baldwin now charged with involuntary manslaughter by New Mexico authorities

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Alec Baldwin now charged with involuntary manslaughter by New Mexico authorities "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][b]Don’t know why it took this long,[/b] but it seems like it was the obvious course of action all along. I can only imagine the evidence must be damning, because otherwise they wouldn’t have brought charges.

Will be interesting to watch this all unfold. [/quote]

This.

He should have been arrested from Day 1.

It was either manslaughter or murder, but it was clear that 1) there was a dead person and 2) Baldwin was the shooter[/quote]

No it is more complicated. He is responsible but it is not like he was driving a car drunk and hit someone. He should have been more careful but a jury will take into consideration that he didn’t know the gun was armed. One thing that will not be helpful and I found out later is that you are never supposed to actually point at someone in a shot-editing makes it look real. Apparently he was asked to point for the shot but he should have declined. I do not think putting him in jail is helpful. I am sure he will live with this forever.[/quote]

Is it SOP for an actor to check the gun? If not, I don’t think it’s his fault. If yes, then he was being negligent.

To me, it’s comparable to the difference between driving a car while being distracted by your phone and hitting someone vs. driving without any distractions and still hitting them. You most likely won’t be charged in the latter cases and that’s because they can’t prove negligence. Accidents do happen and people aren’t punished for true accidents where they did nothing wrong (meaning, no drinking, no drugs, no phone, no speeding, etc.).

So if it is not SOP for actors to check the gun, I don’t see how he is at fault for negligence.[/quote]

It is the responsibility of the person holding the gun to confirm it is not loaded.  Period. That is gun safety 101.  It is irrelevant who else said it is ok first.

This would be like him driving drunk and his excuse being "They told me I was not drunk, so I drove"[/quote]

This doesn’t make sense. Sounds like it is not SOP for actors to check their guns though.[/quote]

No gun owner is going to find that reasonable. Even just a veteran who has been though basic would laugh at that excuse [/quote]

Real gun owners will think it was a reasonable mistake. [/quote]

The only gun owners who would find it reasonable are the ones that manage to shoot themselves cleaning unloaded guns [/quote]

That’s exactly who real gun owners are, or it’s their brother or cousin who did something like that.

They see it as a reasonable mistake.

A non gun owner thinks WTF you need to be able to take anpart and put together a gun blindfolded before you get a license.

[b]Gun owners think oh well sh!t happens[/b].[/quote]

No, real gun owners think you need to treat every gun like it is loaded, and not point them at people, because that is what you’re taught. 
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics