Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Alec Baldwin indicted

alarson said:
The person that should be (and has been) in trouble for it is the armorer on set who was responsible for the safety of weapons on set.
Click to expand...
I agree. I've been a little confused as to why they keep going after him. There has to be more to the story than what we're hearing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Urbandale2013
Sigmapolis said:
My father taught me in no uncertain terms you never point a weapon at something you're not intending to and willing to shoot. Period. Loaded or not, safety on or not. No exceptions.

I can only assume police and military personnel are trained in a similar way.

So, I get where you're coming from.

Actors are kind of a weird exception, though. Part of acting in a Western like that is pointing a gun at somebody you are very much not intending to and not willing to shoot.
Click to expand...
Yes, but they are still responsible. Like I said, just because it was a freak tragic accident does not negate the fact that he pulled the trigger.
If I am carrying a firearm, walking down the street and it "misfires" some how, I am liable and responsible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drew0311 and cyclones122
alarson said:
This just simply isn't how firearms work on movie sets, nor will it ever. The rules that apply for private gun use in a military\home\hunting setting don't apply. The rules are different for a reason. They specifically don't want actors messing with the guns once they are inspected by the armorer.
Click to expand...
Firearms are firearms. It does not matter if they are on a movie set or used in hunting or war. Alec Baldwin said he did not know the gun had a live round in the chamber. IIMC the armour also said that she did not put the live round in the chamber. Who is right? How did it get there?
This goes back to you treat a firearm like it is fully loaded, ready to fire.
Should Baldwin go to jail?? That is for a jury of his peers to decide, but he should be charged and appear in court.
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: CY88CE11, 3TrueFans and alarson
Rabbuk said:
So we're supposed to have someone with no relevant training override the person with actual expertise? What makes Alec Baldwin able to deduce any of the things mentioned here better than someone who is a professional at it? I get that this is like the whole responsible gun owner trope at work here but it seems dumb.
Click to expand...
Alec Baldwin pulled the trigger period. If he is going to be working around firearms he had better know the difference between a "blank round" and a "live round".
I don't think that he intended to kill anyone, but he did. Why was he pointing at the director anyway? Anytime you point a firearm at someone you are taking responsibility.
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: CY88CE11, Urbandale2013 and alarson
ianoconnor said:
It was supposed to be a safe prop weapon - which I'm assuming Alec has been around and used several times before. The actors are there to act, not be armory experts.
Click to expand...

This.

He's been handed prop guns for 40+ years. It's not like you can pretend to pull the trigger and still shoot the scene.

getaway.jpg


MV5BMjI5NTg1OTAxMl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNjcxODI1NA@@._V1_.jpg
 
ISUTex said:
Uh, he killed a person. There is a reason you don't point a REAL gun at someone and pull the trigger. They weren't even filming when this happened were they? He didn't even shoot another actor. He pointed the gun at the cinematographer and pulled back the hammer. Why would you do that?
Click to expand...

I read a story that they were shooting a scene where the gun is pointed at the camera and the cinematographer was understandably behind the camera for the shot. Could be wrong but that's what I read when the story first broke.

The whole point of the shot is to actually pull the trigger, and have the gun look like it's actually firing, they want it to look real.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Urbandale2013 and VeloClone
Drew0311 said:
Very true. However, I think it boils down to him hiring an inexperienced prop master to save money. That might play a roll into it. I don't know the law well enough to understand thought. I mean if you get into a car accident and kill someone, they still can and do charge some with manslaughter if it was their fault.
Click to expand...
Maybe that’s why and there’s some damning facts we don’t know about, but it still seems really weird to me. Let’s say you need to replace your breaks so you take your car in to the cheapest place you can find. Instead of replacing your breaks they remove them completely, and you get into an accident that kills someone because you didn’t have breaks. Should you be prosecuted for that? I don’t think so

Lineup said:
he is a complete ******* lock him up for ever
Click to expand...
If that’s the standard, can I nominate posters on here to be locked up forever?
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Urbandale2013, alarson and isufbcurt
cyclonespiker33 said:
Say goodbye to every action movie if he is convicted. Why would any actor take the risk of holding a gun on set?
Click to expand...

Or the actor will be more safe now. He will check his weapon. He will make sure it’s not a live round. 99.9 percent of action movies, nobody gets shot. There have been 3 that I know about. They will never quit doing action movies but the actor better make sure it’s not a real bullet, the producers better damn well make sure they hire a quality fire arms expert.
 
cyclones122 said:
I guess my view is that when you have a gun in your hands, regardless of the situation, you are responsible. I keep seeing that "the rules are different on set", but I was taught in all the courses and trainings I have ever taken that you ALWAYS treat a gun as if it is loaded, and you ALWAYS confirm for YOURSELF that is is not. NEVER take anyone else's word for it. Ever. I don't care if I'm an actor on a set, if I am handed a gun, I'm confirming that it is not loaded, and if there are "rounds" in chamber or magazine, I'm confirming myself that they are blanks. I guess that's just what's I've been taught - and what makes sense. I'd never take someone else's word - even if they are supposed to be an arms expert for that reason.
Click to expand...
Okay, so as an actor how do you confirm they are blanks?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CY88CE11, CloniesForLife, Cy83ag and 2 others
wintersmd said:
Alec Baldwin pulled the trigger period. If he is going to be working around firearms he had better know the difference between a "blank round" and a "live round".
I don't think that he intended to kill anyone, but he did. Why was he pointing at the director anyway? Anytime you point a firearm at someone you are taking responsibility.
Click to expand...
He wasn't pointing it at the director per se. They were rehearsing a scene where the camera was pointed at him and he was going to "fire" the gun towards the camera. I think the director was also injured by the same round.
It was a real gun and sounds like a single action revolver. The hammer was probably cocked and that made the trigger extremely sensitive. He may not have pulled with any force but any minor touch could have released the hammer.
And there is no reason to have live firearm. You can remove the firing pin, block the barrel, or have the cylinders not accept live rounds.
 
Drew0311 said:
Or the actor will be more safe now. He will check his weapon. He will make sure it’s not a live round. 99.9 percent of action movies, nobody gets shot. There have been 3 that I know about. They will never quit doing action movies but the actor better make sure it’s not a real bullet, the producers better damn well make sure they hire a quality fire arms expert.
Click to expand...
What do you do when an actor does something which results in someone getting hurt because they didn’t just let the expert handle it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VeloClone
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom