Accidental shooting kills one on set of new Alec Baldwin movie

[Milk Tray Guy]

Guess he hasn't spoken to a lawyer yet.

 

[Pennywise]

 

[Sithborg]

Not surprisingly, the media are interviewing various movie prop masters and weapons masters (“armorers”). And to hear them tell it, there are multiple protections and fail-safes involved with gun handling. Therefore, even if one (or more) of these safeguards fails, others inevitably catch the problem. The main protection seems to be the prohibition of live rounds on set. So assuming this is followed, it wouldn’t matter that an inexperienced armorer accidently loaded a gun with blanks (instead of leaving it empty — a so-called “cold gun”). It wouldn’t matter that an AD absentmindedly grabbed the blank-loaded “hot gun” (rather than the “cold”). It wouldn’t matter that the AD didn’t inspect the gun to confirm it was unloaded/”cold.” (BTW, why’s the AD handling guns at all?) It wouldn’t matter that Baldwin didn’t inspect the weapon himself. And it wouldn’t matter that Baldwin’s aim was reckless. Without a live round, the likelihood of an injurious outcome (let alone a fatal one) is miniscule.

The investigation is ongoing. But at this point, culpability seems to be pointing towards the weapons master. Under what circumstances did she allow (or fail to notice) live rounds on set?

The way I've seen it described to me, is that the AD is the final say in set safety. In charge of the nitty gritty of running a set.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

This is interesting...

Legal Analysis: Does Alec Baldwin Have Criminal Exposure After Shooting Woman Dead In Apparent Mistake?

 

[OutOfBoose]

Banning real guns on sets seems absurd, another inevitable hot idea. It's a tragic accident for sure, but we don't ban cars because of car accidents. Both are dangerous if mishandled and that's why there are safety rules.

 

[Dr.]

The way I've seen it described to me, is that the AD is the final say in set safety. In charge of the nitty gritty of running a set.

Apparently, the AD is one of the busiest guys on set — juggling many balls at once. And it may be true that in an overall, administrative sense, safety is one of those balls. But one armorer I saw interviewed specifically faulted the AD for inserting himself into the “chain of custody” of the stunt weapons. As far as he was concerned, the armorer is the last person to touch a gun before it’s handed to the actor for the scene and the first person to retrieve the gun after. Indeed, the only way that a call of “hot gun” or “cold gun” has any value is when it comes from someone with intimate knowledge of the gun’s chain-of-custody and its ammo and load status. That’s the armorer; not the AD.

 

[samsnee]

The way I've seen it described to me, is that the AD is the final say in set safety. In charge of the nitty gritty of running a set.

I think it’s the armorer who has final say since they are supposed to know guns best

 

[Pennywise]

 

[Sawyer]

Hoo boy…

 

[Pennywise]

 

[Pennywise]

Alec Baldwin 'Canceling Other Projects' After Rust Shooting Death, 'Inconsolable for Hours' Says Source

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Didn't Baldwin have a beard shooting Rust? Pics that I believe were taken after the tragedy show him clean shaven, so maybe that's an indication he won't be returning.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Further to the link I posted above (Legal Analysis: Does Alec Baldwin Have Criminal Exposure After Shooting Woman Dead In Apparent Mistake?), this paragraph is interesting

Could this shooting death be characterized as an accident? In fact, there is a legal defense of accident, much like there is a legal defense of self-defense for cases of intentional shootings, and both are “perfect” defenses—meaning, if accepted by legal process, the legal defense of accident frees the person of all legal liability (both criminal and civil).

 

[Pennywise]

https://nypost.com/2021/10/23/baldwin-ignored-no-1-rule-of-gun-safety-hollywood-weapons-expert/

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

https://nypost.com/2021/10/23/baldwin-ignored-no-1-rule-of-gun-safety-hollywood-weapons-expert/

No offense but the POST is a RW Rag that is on over time to try to get Baldwin convicted not because they give two ****s about set safety but because Baldwin is a loud Liberal Dem that made fun of their Orange God.

Baldwin probably is on the hook for something, and even as a IN NAME ONLY producer, if there were issues on set with safety he probably should have known if he didn't, sure, but we've seen movies where the gun is pointed at the camera a billion times in our lives with no thought about there being human beings directly behind the lens while filming. If Baldwin is "guilty" then every other actor that did so in uncountable films are too.

 

[Dr.]

https://nypost.com/2021/10/23/baldwin-ignored-no-1-rule-of-gun-safety-hollywood-weapons-expert/

I appreciate the movie-set safety maxim: always assume that the gun is loaded — with blanks. The fact is, firing a blank charge, especially in close quarters, can be dangerous (or even fatal, as the sad case of Jon-Erik Hexum attests). What I find more difficult to believe is that the onus of life or death falls to a random actor possessing marksman-like skills. E.g., “So point the gun in this direction and fire. But if you’re off by a foot or two, someone could die!” Indeed, movie gunplay often happens within a bigger action sequence. Thus, the actor might have to run, jump, duck or break down a door (etc.) before he fires his weapon. And it beggars belief that other cast or the crew would be willing to stake their lives on said actor having good aim in every take. No, the crucial failsafe isn’t “never point a gun at another person”; it’s never have live rounds on a movie set.

 

[Pennywise]

 

[Spider-Fan]

Honestly, I am not at all against no real guns on set being law of the land. You can manufacture convincing fire arms that are fake for movies, and gun flashes are stupid easy to put in post. Maybe they won't look as good as the real thing in most cases, but that I think is better than something like what happened here.

 

[Drizzle]

Banning real guns on sets seems absurd, another inevitable hot idea. It's a tragic accident for sure, but we don't ban cars because of car accidents. Both are dangerous if mishandled and that's why there are safety rules.

At no point do you need real guns on a film set unless law enforcement is required on set.

 

[OutOfBoose]

At no point do you need real guns on a film set unless law enforcement is required on set.

Beside the point.

 

[Drizzle]

Beside the point.

It's not beside the point. You can easily craft fake guns that look real and you can easily use CGI or other VFX techniques to make them look like they're being fired. Comparing that to banning cars is apples and oranges.

 

[OutOfBoose]

It's not beside the point. You can easily craft fake guns that look real and you can easily use CGI or other VFX techniques to make them look like they're being fired. Comparing that to banning cars is apples and oranges.

And I didn't say that you can't craft any of those. Go ahead and ban anything dangerous, because you can draw all that stuff in CGI. Instead of, you know, doing something useful like improving working conditions, hire enough people to reduce human factor because of work overload etc.

 

[Drizzle]

And I didn't say that you can't craft any of those. Go ahead and ban anything dangerous, because you can draw all that stuff in CGI. Instead of, you know, doing something useful like improving working conditions, hire enough people to reduce human factor because of work overload etc.

I'm all for that too. But at a certain point there's a line that can be drawn between safety and necessity. This was absolutely a case where working conditions were more of a factor in the accident but it still doesn't change the fact that real guns aren't necessary when it comes to filming.

 

[Monsieur Xavier]

No offense but the POST is a RW Rag that is on over time to try to get Baldwin convicted not because they give two ****s about set safety but because Baldwin is a loud Liberal Dem that made fun of their Orange God.

Baldwin probably is on the hook for something, and even as a IN NAME ONLY producer, if there were issues on set with safety he probably should have known if he didn't, sure, but we've seen movies where the gun is pointed at the camera a billion times in our lives with no thought about there being human beings directly behind the lens while filming. If Baldwin is "guilty" then every other actor that did so in uncountable films are too.

There is an article on a French online news paper, Trump Junior is now selling T shirt related to this incident. Very poor taste...

 

[henzINNIT]

I'm all for that too. But at a certain point there's a line that can be drawn between safety and necessity. This was absolutely a case where working conditions were more of a factor in the accident but it still doesn't change the fact that real guns aren't necessary when it comes to filming.

In the year 2021 I refuse to believe that a real looking, non firing gun can't be made. There should be absolutely no risk of shooting a projectile and killing someone. But we're talking about an industry from America and they love their guns.