Alec Baldwin killed a woman on set with prop gun (1 Viewer)

[ghostguy123]

if you get handed a potential lethal gun (not a complete prop) you should check it yourself and not rely on anyone else.

How exactly is he supposed to check it? Does he know the difference between prop gun and real gun? Blanks and live rounds?

He was in charge of the shoot. He allowed live rounds on the set. He allowed loaded weapons to be sitting out on the set. He allowed people to handle the weapons that weren't supposed to(he was handed the gun by the first assistant who grabbed it randomly off a table of loaded weapons).

No idea if that is enough to land him a manslaughter charge, but he IS complicit in the death of the woman.

that's not how movie sets work. that's like asking tom cruise to oversee the pyrotechnics and the fighter jets in top gun. professionals handle that. he may hire them, but it's a stretch to charge him for their incompetence.

Union staff had left a few days before citing "safety concerns". The producers(Alec included) chose to hire non-union staff instead of addressing the concerns. Main concerns had to due with multiple misfires of weapons on set..... before this accidental misfire.

Armorer was on lunch break when the assistant director handed Baldwin the gun. Whether he could tell a blank from live round is irrelevant if he knew the armorer hadn't been there to check the weapon.

The safety shield(literally a bullet proof shield to protect the cameramen) wasn't present. You might not be able to tell a live round from a blank, but it's pretty simple to see if a big *** shield is in place.

Baldwin pulled the trigger without being told to. Pretty simple idea. Don't pull the trigger on any gun unless you expect it to shoot.

Cool. Agree.
Criminal??? Prison time????

 

[DA RAIDERS]

if you get handed a potential lethal gun (not a complete prop) you should check it yourself and not rely on anyone else.

How exactly is he supposed to check it? Does he know the difference between prop gun and real gun? Blanks and live rounds?

He was in charge of the shoot. He allowed live rounds on the set. He allowed loaded weapons to be sitting out on the set. He allowed people to handle the weapons that weren't supposed to(he was handed the gun by the first assistant who grabbed it randomly off a table of loaded weapons).

No idea if that is enough to land him a manslaughter charge, but he IS complicit in the death of the woman.

that's not how movie sets work. that's like asking tom cruise to oversee the pyrotechnics and the fighter jets in top gun. professionals handle that. he may hire them, but it's a stretch to charge him for their incompetence.

Union staff had left a few days before citing "safety concerns". The producers(Alec included) chose to hire non-union staff instead of addressing the concerns. Main concerns had to due with multiple misfires of weapons on set..... before this accidental misfire.

Armorer was on lunch break when the assistant director handed Baldwin the gun. Whether he could tell a blank from live round is irrelevant if he knew the armorer hadn't been there to check the weapon.

The safety shield(literally a bullet proof shield to protect the cameramen) wasn't present. You might not be able to tell a live round from a blank, but it's pretty simple to see if a big *** shield is in place.

Baldwin pulled the trigger without being told to. Pretty simple idea. Don't pull the trigger on any gun unless you expect it to shoot.

i have no dog in this fight. it all sucks. in a court of law, baldwin walks

I agree that's very likely, but given that a person can be given involuntary manslaughter for driving a vehicle with a known defect and killing someone, I don't think charging Baldwin with it given his involvement in it all is an overcharge.

I think most probable outcome is a plea deal to a lesser charge that involves fines and probation. No chance Baldwin wants to go to court on this issue. Even if he wins its another loss for his PR.

never said it was an overcharge. it is what happened. but in a court of law, no way.

 

[ghostguy123]

Also not sure the driving a car with a known defect is a good analogy. After all, the main part of that is the KNOWN part.
Unless Baldwin knew there was a live round, it's not even analogous.

 

[Dezbelief]

Also not sure the driving a car with a known defect is a good analogy. After all, the main part of that is the KNOWN part.
Unless Baldwin knew there was a live round, it's not even analogous.

Baldwin knew the weapons on set were being used for plinking at cans with live rounds a short drive from the church.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

Also not sure the driving a car with a known defect is a good analogy. After all, the main part of that is the KNOWN part.
Unless Baldwin knew there was a live round, it's not even analogous.

Baldwin knew the weapons on set were being used for plinking at cans with live rounds a short drive from the church.

Doesn't really matter. The prosecutor said that it's the actor's job to make sure the weapon is safe, which it absolutely is not. If she tries that one going to trial, she will lose bigly. Why does she think there are people assigned to this job?

 

[ghostguy123]

Also not sure the driving a car with a known defect is a good analogy. After all, the main part of that is the KNOWN part.
Unless Baldwin knew there was a live round, it's not even analogous.

Baldwin knew the weapons on set were being used for plinking at cans with live rounds a short drive from the church.

And?? Still not sure how that equates to knowing he was holding a gun with live rounds.
If you take your car in to a mechanic with faulty brakes, do we assume they never got fixed??

 

[ghostguy123]

Also not sure the driving a car with a known defect is a good analogy. After all, the main part of that is the KNOWN part.
Unless Baldwin knew there was a live round, it's not even analogous.

Baldwin knew the weapons on set were being used for plinking at cans with live rounds a short drive from the church.

Doesn't really matter. The prosecutor said that it's the actor's job to make sure the weapon is safe, which it absolutely is not. If she tries that one going to trial, she will lose bigly. Why does she think there are people assigned to this job?

Exactly. If they prosecute in that, actors could pretty easily be set up for murder.
That said, using real guns in a movie is dumb

 

[[icon]]

if you get handed a potential lethal gun (not a complete prop) you should check it yourself and not rely on anyone else.

Not if you are acting in a movie and there are people hired and trained to do that for you.

Mentalities like this are why people get hurt with guns.

The worst part is, people who think like this are usually the "guns are dangerous we should ban them" set

Not saying joba in particular is anti-gun... unaware of his stance,

 

[ghostguy123]

if you get handed a potential lethal gun (not a complete prop) you should check it yourself and not rely on anyone else.

Not if you are acting in a movie and there are people hired and trained to do that for you.

Mentalities like this are why people get hurt with guns.

The worst part is, people who think like this are usually the "guns are dangerous we should ban them" set

Not saying joba in particular is anti-gun... unaware of his stance,

Let's say we all agree that he SHOULD have checked the gun............I still don't see any criminal activity here.

 

[Runkle]

Also not sure the driving a car with a known defect is a good analogy. After all, the main part of that is the KNOWN part.
Unless Baldwin knew there was a live round, it's not even analogous.

I believe the union crew walked off the set because they had been an earlier misfire in a similar situation. So everyone was aware the mistake had already been made once before on that set. He doesn't have to know exactly that the very next round to fire is live, the charge is about negligence and the event being accidental, not intentional.

 

[ghostguy123]

Also not sure the driving a car with a known defect is a good analogy. After all, the main part of that is the KNOWN part.
Unless Baldwin knew there was a live round, it's not even analogous.

I believe the union crew walked off the set because they had been an earlier misfire in a similar situation. So everyone was aware the mistake had already been made once before on that set. He doesn't have to know exactly that the very next round to fire is live, the charge is about negligence and the event being accidental, not intentional.

Even if he knew there had been misfires.......so?? Were they misfires with live rounds?

 

[Dezbelief]

Also not sure the driving a car with a known defect is a good analogy. After all, the main part of that is the KNOWN part.
Unless Baldwin knew there was a live round, it's not even analogous.

I believe the union crew walked off the set because they had been an earlier misfire in a similar situation. So everyone was aware the mistake had already been made once before on that set. He doesn't have to know exactly that the very next round to fire is live, the charge is about negligence and the event being accidental, not intentional.

Even if he knew there had been misfires.......so?? Were they misfires with live rounds?

Yes, he knew the protocols on set were faulty and yet he still recklessly handled a tool engineered for killing people.

 

[[icon]]

if you get handed a potential lethal gun (not a complete prop) you should check it yourself and not rely on anyone else.

Not if you are acting in a movie and there are people hired and trained to do that for you.

Mentalities like this are why people get hurt with guns.

The worst part is, people who think like this are usually the "guns are dangerous we should ban them" set

Not saying joba in particular is anti-gun... unaware of his stance,

Let's say we all agree that he SHOULD have checked the gun............I still don't see any criminal activity here.

This has been off my radar for a while but wasn't there a pattern of cost cutting and lackluster safety on set leading up to the incident?

 

[Psychopav]

Also not sure the driving a car with a known defect is a good analogy. After all, the main part of that is the KNOWN part.
Unless Baldwin knew there was a live round, it's not even analogous.

Baldwin knew the weapons on set were being used for plinking at cans with live rounds a short drive from the church.

Doesn't really matter. The prosecutor said that it's the actor's job to make sure the weapon is safe, which it absolutely is not. If she tries that one going to trial, she will lose bigly. Why does she think there are people assigned to this job?

This is the contention which will be interesting to watch. I understand that there's prevailing opinion that this is the case, but I wonder if that has been challenged in the courts. If Baldwin lets this go to trial, it may end up going up the appeals chain. Personally, I don't really care what is "standard in the industry", if you hold a real weapon in your hand, I feel like you personally should be responsible for it. Just because your "industry" tells you that someone else is responsible, I don't really feel like that should absolve you of the responsibility to understand how the weapon works and to make sure that the rounds used are not live.

 

[Psychopav]

Also not sure the driving a car with a known defect is a good analogy. After all, the main part of that is the KNOWN part.
Unless Baldwin knew there was a live round, it's not even analogous.

Baldwin knew the weapons on set were being used for plinking at cans with live rounds a short drive from the church.

And?? Still not sure how that equates to knowing he was holding a gun with live rounds.
If you take your car in to a mechanic with faulty brakes, do we assume they never got fixed??

I don't think this is as apt an analogy as folks are making it out to be. The purpose of a car is to convey passengers from one point to another. The purpose of a gun is to destroy. The responsibility of an operator is to reasonably ensure that the machine works as intended. The operator does not have to be an expert, but does have to be knowledgeable about the machine and how it is appropriately operated.

So if the brakes work, and then stop working, it's the driver's responsibility to recognize their inefficacy and take appropriate action. The driver is responsible for continually assessing the effectiveness of the brakes, isn't he? Why isn't the gun wielder responsible for knowing the basic function and operation of the weapon, whether it is loaded, and whether the rounds are live? The driver does not cede his responsibility to the mechanic or to a passenger. Why would the actor holding a gun cede his responsibility to make sure the gun is safe? Just because his company tells him to?

In the interview linked above, the DA said she had spoken to many actors, some "A-list" and some not, who do check their weapons before use. I think that standard should reasonably apply to ANYONE operating a weapon, regardless of who they work for or the reason they are using it.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

if you get handed a potential lethal gun (not a complete prop) you should check it yourself and not rely on anyone else.

Not if you are acting in a movie and there are people hired and trained to do that for you.

Mentalities like this are why people get hurt with guns.

The worst part is, people who think like this are usually the "guns are dangerous we should ban them" set

Not saying joba in particular is anti-gun... unaware of his stance,

Let's say we all agree that he SHOULD have checked the gun............I still don't see any criminal activity here.

Do we? If he has little to no experience in this area, what does that accomplish? For people in this situation, it generally doesn't end well. That's why there are professionals available. Consistentcy matters here.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

In the interview linked above, the DA said she had spoken to many actors, some "A-list" and some not, who do check their weapons before use. I think that standard should reasonably apply to ANYONE operating a weapon, regardless of who they work for or the reason they are using it.

This is just unrealistic. I'm guessing you must have some idea of just how many different firearms there are out there. Unless one is specifically trained in a wide variety of weapon types, one is unlikely to know how to check all of them. There's always someone who opens the chamber, looks down the empty barrel, and thereby chambers a round.

Live ammo should never be on set. Someone didn't do their job, but it wasn't the actors.

 

[ghostguy123]

if you get handed a potential lethal gun (not a complete prop) you should check it yourself and not rely on anyone else.

Not if you are acting in a movie and there are people hired and trained to do that for you.

Mentalities like this are why people get hurt with guns.

The worst part is, people who think like this are usually the "guns are dangerous we should ban them" set

Not saying joba in particular is anti-gun... unaware of his stance,

Let's say we all agree that he SHOULD have checked the gun............I still don't see any criminal activity here.

Do we? If he has little to no experience in this area, what does that accomplish? For people in this situation, it generally doesn't end well. That's why there are professionals available. Consistentcy matters here.

That's my point. We certainly do NOT all agree that the actor should check the gun. Even if we did, and he SHOULD have checked the gun, I still don't see anything that warrants prison time.

 

[ghostguy123]

if you get handed a potential lethal gun (not a complete prop) you should check it yourself and not rely on anyone else.

Not if you are acting in a movie and there are people hired and trained to do that for you.

Mentalities like this are why people get hurt with guns.

The worst part is, people who think like this are usually the "guns are dangerous we should ban them" set

Not saying joba in particular is anti-gun... unaware of his stance,

Let's say we all agree that he SHOULD have checked the gun............I still don't see any criminal activity here.

This has been off my radar for a while but wasn't there a pattern of cost cutting and lackluster safety on set leading up to the incident?

I also recall that. Even if so, prison time??

 

[ghostguy123]

Basically, seems like a tragedy that could have and should have been avoided. The victims families should have one heck of a civil lawsuit.
Baldwin facing prison??? Silly.
I hope they don't use real guns on movie sets anymore. It's so, so stupid. Zero reason for it.

 

[culdeus]

Involuntary manslaughter is always a felony offense in California. If you are convicted of violating California Penal Code Section 192(b), the legal penalties include 2, 3, or 4 years in a California state prison, felony probation, and a fine up to $10,000.

 

[ghostguy123]

Um, you all know the max sentence for this is 6 months probation right?

For manslaughter?

 

[culdeus]

Um, you all know the max sentence for this is 6 months probation right?

For manslaughter?

Misread something and edited it. Was confusingly written. They can get probation but that's not the max.

 

[[icon]]

if you get handed a potential lethal gun (not a complete prop) you should check it yourself and not rely on anyone else.

Not if you are acting in a movie and there are people hired and trained to do that for you.

Mentalities like this are why people get hurt with guns.

The worst part is, people who think like this are usually the "guns are dangerous we should ban them" set

Not saying joba in particular is anti-gun... unaware of his stance,

Let's say we all agree that he SHOULD have checked the gun............I still don't see any criminal activity here.

This has been off my radar for a while but wasn't there a pattern of cost cutting and lackluster safety on set leading up to the incident?

I also recall that. Even if so, prison time??

For involuntary manslaughter in California? Yes.

 

[[icon]]

In the interview linked above, the DA said she had spoken to many actors, some "A-list" and some not, who do check their weapons before use. I think that standard should reasonably apply to ANYONE operating a weapon, regardless of who they work for or the reason they are using it.

This is just unrealistic. I'm guessing you must have some idea of just how many different firearms there are out there. Unless one is specifically trained in a wide variety of weapon types, one is unlikely to know how to check all of them. There's always someone who opens the chamber, looks down the empty barrel, and thereby chambers a round.

Live ammo should never be on set. Someone didn't do their job, but it wasn't the actors.

The VAST majority to of firearms used on sets will fall under 3-4 basic platforms.

Anyone who's spent ANY time with a firearm will be able to figure out how to check clear almost any firearm in seconds. There is generally a charging handle that's pulled back from the side or rear of the firearm. AK platform safety can be tricky for noobs but that's why there is an expert on set.

Not to mention protocol when handling a firearm in company anytime (not just on set) is to "show clear" meaning the first person (on set firearms expert) should show the actor the weapon is "clear" by pulling back the charging handle and showing the empty chamber to the recipient.

The recipient should then take possession of the firearm and perform the check themselves. The whole exchange takes 10-15 seconds.

Then every time the firearm leaves their possession (set down, handed off) and comes back, it should be checked again.

This is literally firearms 101.

 

[Da Guru]

Involuntary manslaughter is always a felony offense in California. If you are convicted of violating California Penal Code Section 192(b), the legal penalties include 2, 3, or 4 years in a California state prison, felony probation, and a fine up to $10,000.

Correct me if I am wrong but I think you can get prison time in Cally for an auto accident if someone is killed even if you were sober. Baldwin was responsible for the death even if it was an accident. So is it the same?

 

[Dezbelief]

In the interview linked above, the DA said she had spoken to many actors, some "A-list" and some not, who do check their weapons before use. I think that standard should reasonably apply to ANYONE operating a weapon, regardless of who they work for or the reason they are using it.

This is just unrealistic. I'm guessing you must have some idea of just how many different firearms there are out there. Unless one is specifically trained in a wide variety of weapon types, one is unlikely to know how to check all of them. There's always someone who opens the chamber, looks down the empty barrel, and thereby chambers a round.

Live ammo should never be on set. Someone didn't do their job, but it wasn't the actors.

Baldwin as producer ignored industry standards to cut costs, several actions/inactions on his part led to this tragedy.

 

[Dezbelief]

One thing I'm wondering about is that the article I came across said Baldwin was being charged with 2 counts of manslaughter. I thought the other person struck by the round Baldwin fired survived.

 

[ghostguy123]

if you get handed a potential lethal gun (not a complete prop) you should check it yourself and not rely on anyone else.

Not if you are acting in a movie and there are people hired and trained to do that for you.

Mentalities like this are why people get hurt with guns.

The worst part is, people who think like this are usually the "guns are dangerous we should ban them" set

Not saying joba in particular is anti-gun... unaware of his stance,

Let's say we all agree that he SHOULD have checked the gun............I still don't see any criminal activity here.

This has been off my radar for a while but wasn't there a pattern of cost cutting and lackluster safety on set leading up to the incident?

I also recall that. Even if so, prison time??

For involuntary manslaughter in California? Yes.

Well, yeah, if actually convicted of manslaughter.
That's not the point here though

 

[ghostguy123]

In the interview linked above, the DA said she had spoken to many actors, some "A-list" and some not, who do check their weapons before use. I think that standard should reasonably apply to ANYONE operating a weapon, regardless of who they work for or the reason they are using it.

This is just unrealistic. I'm guessing you must have some idea of just how many different firearms there are out there. Unless one is specifically trained in a wide variety of weapon types, one is unlikely to know how to check all of them. There's always someone who opens the chamber, looks down the empty barrel, and thereby chambers a round.

Live ammo should never be on set. Someone didn't do their job, but it wasn't the actors.

Baldwin as producer ignored industry standards to cut costs, several actions/inactions on his part led to this tragedy.

Agreed.
Prison time?? Very much disagree

 

[FreeBaGeL]

if you get handed a potential lethal gun (not a complete prop) you should check it yourself and not rely on anyone else.

Not if you are acting in a movie and there are people hired and trained to do that for you.

Mentalities like this are why people get hurt with guns.

The worst part is, people who think like this are usually the "guns are dangerous we should ban them" set

Not saying joba in particular is anti-gun... unaware of his stance,

I own 3 guns and am very big on gun safety. But this still seems crazy to me, although I admittedly have not been following this story closely. How far do we take this with actors and movie props?

If an actor drives a car for a movie and it has a blowout that results in a crash that kills someone, is he responsible for not checking the tire pressure first? If an actor gets a ray-gun in a sci-fi flick, is he responsible for making sure it doesn't actually shoot death lasers first?

I doubt most actors are trained in gun safety. Isn't that why they literally hire someone whose entire job is to take care of that part of it?

 

[Cowboysfan8]

In the interview linked above, the DA said she had spoken to many actors, some "A-list" and some not, who do check their weapons before use. I think that standard should reasonably apply to ANYONE operating a weapon, regardless of who they work for or the reason they are using it.

This is just unrealistic. I'm guessing you must have some idea of just how many different firearms there are out there. Unless one is specifically trained in a wide variety of weapon types, one is unlikely to know how to check all of them. There's always someone who opens the chamber, looks down the empty barrel, and thereby chambers a round.

Live ammo should never be on set. Someone didn't do their job, but it wasn't the actors.

The VAST majority to of firearms used on sets will fall under 3-4 basic platforms.

Anyone who's spent ANY time with a firearm will be able to figure out how to check clear almost any firearm in seconds. There is generally a charging handle that's pulled back from the side or rear of the firearm. AK platform safety can be tricky for noobs but that's why there is an expert on set.

Not to mention protocol when handling a firearm in company anytime (not just on set) is to "show clear" meaning the first person (on set firearms expert) should show the actor the weapon is "clear" by pulling back the charging handle and showing the empty chamber to the recipient.

The recipient should then take possession of the firearm and perform the check themselves. The whole exchange takes 10-15 seconds.

Then every time the firearm leaves their possession (set down, handed off) and comes back, it should be checked again.

This is literally firearms 101.

Pretty sure this was a .45 colt but I agree. No excuses here imo

 

[John123]

In the interview linked above, the DA said she had spoken to many actors, some "A-list" and some not, who do check their weapons before use. I think that standard should reasonably apply to ANYONE operating a weapon, regardless of who they work for or the reason they are using it.

This is just unrealistic. I'm guessing you must have some idea of just how many different firearms there are out there. Unless one is specifically trained in a wide variety of weapon types, one is unlikely to know how to check all of them. There's always someone who opens the chamber, looks down the empty barrel, and thereby chambers a round.

Live ammo should never be on set. Someone didn't do their job, but it wasn't the actors.

Disagree. There are a finite number of firearms in use on the set of THIS movie. The actors should be trained on using the specific firearms they will be handling in THIS movie. That just seems like common sense.

 

[John123]

One thing I'm wondering about is that the article I came across said Baldwin was being charged with 2 counts of manslaughter. I thought the other person struck by the round Baldwin fired survived.

I think the DA discusses this in the video I posted. Both counts relate to the one death. They piggyback on each other somehow, and he would only be sentenced for one count.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

In the interview linked above, the DA said she had spoken to many actors, some "A-list" and some not, who do check their weapons before use. I think that standard should reasonably apply to ANYONE operating a weapon, regardless of who they work for or the reason they are using it.

This is just unrealistic. I'm guessing you must have some idea of just how many different firearms there are out there. Unless one is specifically trained in a wide variety of weapon types, one is unlikely to know how to check all of them. There's always someone who opens the chamber, looks down the empty barrel, and thereby chambers a round.

Live ammo should never be on set. Someone didn't do their job, but it wasn't the actors.

Disagree. There are a finite number of firearms in use on the set of THIS movie. The actors should be trained on using the specific firearms they will be handling in THIS movie. That just seems like common sense.

Does this actually happen in the movie industry? I know little about Hollywood but I doubt every actor that is in a movie with gun props is required to take gun safety courses first. Just like I doubt every actor that's in a movie with a car is required to take a mechanics course first.

 

[Ilov80s]

Does this actually happen in the movie industry? I no little about Hollywood but I doubt every actor that is in a movie with gun props is required to take gun safety courses first. Just like I doubt every actor that's in a movie with a car is required to take a mechanics course first.

Not sure about every actor- highly doubt this actually. However, actors that are going to handle a weapon heavily for a role are almost surely getting firearms training. Some of it is safety but much of it is for verisimilitude.

 

[ghostguy123]

Why are they using real guns again??

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

My understanding at the start of this was that if the actor opened the gun up to check it themself the safety person had to recheck it. Was that ever confirmed? That actors were taught not to do that?

 

[the moops]

Some of it is safety but much of it is for verisimilitude.

Nice word

 

[encaitar]

Why are they using real guns again??

This is a great question. With today's CGI he could be holding a rubber chicken and the editors could make it look more authentic than if he were holding and shooting a real gun.

 

[DocHolliday]

In the interview linked above, the DA said she had spoken to many actors, some "A-list" and some not, who do check their weapons before use. I think that standard should reasonably apply to ANYONE operating a weapon, regardless of who they work for or the reason they are using it.

This is just unrealistic. I'm guessing you must have some idea of just how many different firearms there are out there. Unless one is specifically trained in a wide variety of weapon types, one is unlikely to know how to check all of them. There's always someone who opens the chamber, looks down the empty barrel, and thereby chambers a round.

Live ammo should never be on set. Someone didn't do their job, but it wasn't the actors.

Baldwin as producer ignored industry standards to cut costs, several actions/inactions on his part led to this tragedy.

The fact that Baldwin was producer of the film and not just an actor in the film likely pushes safety responsibly onto him.

 

[jobarules]

In the interview linked above, the DA said she had spoken to many actors, some "A-list" and some not, who do check their weapons before use. I think that standard should reasonably apply to ANYONE operating a weapon, regardless of who they work for or the reason they are using it.

This is just unrealistic. I'm guessing you must have some idea of just how many different firearms there are out there. Unless one is specifically trained in a wide variety of weapon types, one is unlikely to know how to check all of them. There's always someone who opens the chamber, looks down the empty barrel, and thereby chambers a round.

Live ammo should never be on set. Someone didn't do their job, but it wasn't the actors.

Baldwin as producer ignored industry standards to cut costs, several actions/inactions on his part led to this tragedy.

The fact that Baldwin was producer of the film and not just an actor in the film likely pushes safety responsibly onto him.

He was one of six credited producers on the film yet none of the others were charged.

 

[Dezbelief]

In the interview linked above, the DA said she had spoken to many actors, some "A-list" and some not, who do check their weapons before use. I think that standard should reasonably apply to ANYONE operating a weapon, regardless of who they work for or the reason they are using it.

This is just unrealistic. I'm guessing you must have some idea of just how many different firearms there are out there. Unless one is specifically trained in a wide variety of weapon types, one is unlikely to know how to check all of them. There's always someone who opens the chamber, looks down the empty barrel, and thereby chambers a round.

Live ammo should never be on set. Someone didn't do their job, but it wasn't the actors.

Baldwin as producer ignored industry standards to cut costs, several actions/inactions on his part led to this tragedy.

The fact that Baldwin was producer of the film and not just an actor in the film likely pushes safety responsibly onto him.

He was one of six credited producers on the film yet none of the others were charged.

He was the big man on campus calling the shots.

 

[Psychopav]

My understanding at the start of this was that if the actor opened the gun up to check it themself the safety person had to recheck it. Was that ever confirmed? That actors were taught not to do that?

That was my understanding as well. It sounds like one of the DA's arguments (and I am leaning towards agreeing) is that just because that's what they're taught doesn't absolve them from responsibility.

Even the title of this thread is misleading. It was a "prop gun" because it was used in a movie. But it's a real gun. If nothing else, I would argue that the industry needs to rethink its position on this entire situation, and if it has to be up to our elected officials to make that happen, so be it.

 

[the moops]

Someone has to take the fall for this. I am unsure who, but there is zero reason why this should even be a possibility.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

In the interview linked above, the DA said she had spoken to many actors, some "A-list" and some not, who do check their weapons before use. I think that standard should reasonably apply to ANYONE operating a weapon, regardless of who they work for or the reason they are using it.

This is just unrealistic. I'm guessing you must have some idea of just how many different firearms there are out there. Unless one is specifically trained in a wide variety of weapon types, one is unlikely to know how to check all of them. There's always someone who opens the chamber, looks down the empty barrel, and thereby chambers a round.

Live ammo should never be on set. Someone didn't do their job, but it wasn't the actors.

Baldwin as producer ignored industry standards to cut costs, several actions/inactions on his part led to this tragedy.

The fact that Baldwin was producer of the film and not just an actor in the film likely pushes safety responsibly onto him.

Not really. Producers are just money guys. They don’t usually play a role in day to day operations on set.

 

[Runkle]

Someone has to take the fall for this. I am unsure who, but there is zero reason why this should even be a possibility.

There are supposed to be multiple redundancies in the system so that no single person's (honest) mistake can be a sole point of failure. Everyone who had a share in each of those redundancies failing bears some fault for the situation.

 

[John123]

I posted this earlier in this thread but I'll repost it as it seems relevant to the charges:

To this point, here is a link to the rules of gun safety from one of the unions for actors:


https://www.actorsequity.org/resources/Producers/safe-and-sanitary/safety-tips-for-use-of-firearms/


The text of the rules:
Safety Tips for Use of Firearms
Use simulated or dummy weapons whenever possible.
Treat all guns as if they are loaded and deadly.
Unless you are actually performing or rehearsing, the property master must secure all firearms.
The property master or armorer should carefully train you in the safe use of any firearm you must handle. Be honest if you have no knowledge about guns. Do not overstate your qualifications.
Follow all instructions given by the qualified instructor.
Never engage in horseplay with any firearms or other weapons. Do not let others handle the gun for any reason.
All loading of firearms must be done by the property master, armorer or experienced persons working under their direct supervision.
Never point a firearm at anyone including yourself. Always cheat the shot by aiming to the right or left of the target character. If asked to point and shoot directly at a living target, consult with the property master or armorer for the prescribed safety procedures.
If you are the intended target of a gunshot, make sure that the person firing at you has followed all these safety procedures.
If you are required to wear exploding blood squibs, make sure there is a bulletproof vest or other solid protection between you and the blast packet.
Use protective shields for all off stage cast within close proximity to any shots fired.
Appropriate ear protection should be offered to the cast members and stage managers.
Check the firearm every time you take possession of it. Before each use, make sure the gun has been test-fired off stage and then ask to test fire it yourself. Watch the prop master check the cylinders and barrel to be sure no foreign object or dummy bullet has become lodged inside.
Blanks are extremely dangerous. Even though they do not fire bullets out of the gun barrel, they still have a powerful blast than can maim or kill.
Never attempt to adjust, modify or repair a firearm yourself. If a weapon jams or malfunctions, corrections shall be made only by a qualified person.
When a scene is completed, the property master shall unload the firearms. All weapons must be cleaned, checked and inventoried after each performance.
Live ammunition may not be brought into the theatre.
If you are in a production where shots are to be fired and there is no qualified property master, go to the nearest phone and call Actors' Equity Association. A union representative will make sure proper procedures are followed.
State and federal safety laws must be honored at all times.
If any of the above safety tips conflict with the instructions given by a qualified instructor, abide by the instructions from the qualified instructor. If you are still not sure, contact your Equity Business Representative.

 

[Zow]

Alec Baldwin rejects allegations of non-compliance with shooting probe

Police have been attempting to get hold of the actor's phone, which officers hope can aid their investigation.

But despite getting a search warrant more than three weeks ago, officials have been unable to obtain the device.

Mr Baldwin says specifying exactly what is needed from the phone takes time.

Hmmm

This may actually be true based on the search warrant itself and the limitations contained therein,* as well as the make and model of the phone (e.g. Apple phones are actually very difficult to extract data from).


*I have not read a copy of the search warrant.

 

[ghostguy123]

Someone has to take the fall for this. I am unsure who, but there is zero reason why this should even be a possibility.

By take the fall,hopefully you mean be held responsible.
Certainly some people should bear some responsibility.
However, manslaughter charges and prison??? Lol, no