gun safety rule# 1 alec baldwin

[kc17 539]

2 hours ago, 124gr9mm said:

Interesting.

Do you think there should be any guns used in movies?

John Wick

Saving Private Ryan

Kindergarten Cop

Lethal Weapon

Etc, etc, etc...

Just trying to understand where you're coming from.

If you're angry that guns were used in any of those movies I applaud you for your consistency.  In all of those movies guns were handled in a way where other actors and people on set were flagged, fingers were on triggers, etc...

I'm not sure if you're asking what I think about guns being used in the storyline in general or the usage of guns during filming.

What I was trying to portray, which I may not have done well enough, is many people believe what they see in movies/shows is an accurate portrayal. I think some of these people then mimic what they see when they pickup a firearm, possibly subconsciously. There is a difference in someone picking up a gun and intentionally pulling the trigger vs picking up a gun and immediately putting their finger on the trigger causing a negligent discharge. That's already happened way too often. Is it because of what they see on tv? I don't know. Do I think it is a possible factor? Yes. 

I've taken many first time shooters to the range and too many have the tendency to pickup a gun and immediately put their finger on the trigger. In fact, I took a first timer today. She was the only one I've not had to correct for finger placement at least once. Yes, I go over safety and proper handling before I hand them a gun. Then I hand them an unloaded one and have them show me it's clear and build up from there. But the impulse is there too often. Is it because they are mimicking what they see on tv? Is it due to some hardwiring in our brains? Is it from the design of the gun matching the shape of our hands? I don't know. Is it too much to ask for Hollywood to be a bit more aware? I don't think so. 

If you're asking about the filming of the movies... Do I think it is ever ok to point or sweep a loaded firearm at person that is not a threat? Absolutely not. Do I believe every single person that is handed a firearm is responsible for the safe handling of the firearm no matter what someone told them? Without a doubt, yes. If I did not believe I could trust someone with a firearm, I'd never hand it to them or leave one where they could access it. 

To your last paragraph, I guess I'm angry that a woman is dead due to negligence and once again this tragedy will be used against responsible gun owners in an attempt to take away our rights. 

[124gr9mm 456]

11 hours ago, kc17 said:

If you're asking about the filming of the movies... Do I think it is ever ok to point or sweep a loaded firearm at person that is not a threat? Absolutely not. Do I believe every single person that is handed a firearm is responsible for the safe handling of the firearm no matter what someone told them? Without a doubt, yes. If I did not believe I could trust someone with a firearm, I'd never hand it to them or leave one where they could access it. 

 

I don't think you'll find many people that would disagree with your points about flagging people while holding a loaded gun, or with the general inept impulses of people who have never handled a firearm.

I think there is a nuance that could be discussed with the definition of a "loaded" weapon and how it's handled on a movie set.  I think it would be impossible to film a movie like John Wick without the actors flagging other actors and crew.

[gleninjersey 1,725]

1 hour ago, 124gr9mm said:

 

I don't think you'll find many people that would disagree with your points about flagging people while holding a loaded gun, or with the general inept impulses of people who have never handled a firearm.

I think there is a nuance that could be discussed with the definition of a "loaded" weapon and how it's handled on a movie set.  I think it would be impossible to film a movie like John Wick without the actors flagging other actors and crew.

If it's a real gun capable of firing live ammunition then treat it as a loaded gun.  If you are an actor using a real gun as a "prop? then you should treat it as a real gun and you, as the lastt person to hold it and the only person pulling the trigger, bear some responsibility in checking that it safe to use as "prop" and it's okay to point it at someone and pull the trigger.  

Unless it's very obvious it's not a real gun then treat it like a real gun.  More than likely most of the extras on movies with LOTS of guns (John Wick, Saving Private Ryan, etc) aren't using real firearms.  Probably just the main characters and probably just for certain scenes. 

More and more movies use CGI to simulate muzzle flash and smoke.  Look at some of the "Expendable" movies.  If you slow it down it's obvious it's fake.  Not sure why all movies aren't doing this?

IMHO anyone actor handling live guns as props should seriously consider taking a firearm safety class.  It should also be stressed to them that while a prop and while others have checked the weapon that they bear some responsibility in the safe operation of the firearm.

I would have to search Google but it would be interested to see if there similiar accidents when westerns were big.  I wonder if the culture then compared to now effected who actors handled guns.  Back in the 40s and 50s gun laws were much more relaxed and people seemed to have more of a sense of personal responsibilty.  I doubt there were many "antigun" people back then.  Back then perhaps they had more personal experience handling firearms and more of a respect for them.  Rather than now where "it's just a prop" and "it's someone else's responsibilty to make sure it's safe".
 

[kc17 539]

27 minutes ago, gleninjersey said:

I would have to search Google but it would be interested to see if there similiar accidents when westerns were big.  I wonder if the culture then compared to now effected who actors handled guns.  Back in the 40s and 50s gun laws were much more relaxed and people seemed to have more of a sense of personal responsibilty.  I doubt there were many "antigun" people back then.  Back then perhaps they had more personal experience handling firearms and more of a respect for them.  Rather than now where "it's just a prop" and "it's someone else's responsibilty to make sure it's safe".
 

I've had that thought the last few days as well. Similar to "mass shootings" and shootings taking place in schools. That topic is an entire different thing however. 

So many other differences between then and now also. I think back then directors and special effects people relied on camera angles and forced prospective to trick the eye more than they may do now. So although it appeared to the viewer a gun was pointed at someone, it wasn't in reality. There's also the speed and near unrestricted capability at which information travels now. Back then there were fewer media outlets and they controlled nearly all dissemination of news. It was much easier to cover things up. Now the vast majority of the population of most nations can spread both truth and lies or propaganda viewable to the masses as quickly as they can type and hit send. 

The big take away for me is personal responsibility. I find it greatly lacking in our society. I think it was more prevalent back then. I base that mostly on watching it become even more lacking through the years I've been alive to witness it. 

[124gr9mm 456]

7 minutes ago, kc17 said:

So many other differences between then and now also. I think back then directors and special effects people relied on camera angles and forced prospective to trick the eye more than they may do now. So although it appeared to the viewer a gun was pointed at someone, it wasn't in reality.

Depends on how far back you go.  Up until the 1930's it was common to use "sharpshooters" with live ammo to make things look realistic.

James Cagney was instrumental in having live ammunition banned from movie sets (through the Screen Actors Guild) after one too many close calls on set.

Here's a scene where a real Tommy Gun was used to create a dramatic scene...almost eliminating Cagney.

 

 

[kc17 539]

I was not aware of that, which is why I used the phrase "I think". I was also basing my belief on various documentaries I've seen that discussed how special effects were done in the days prior to CGI. 

[CMJeepster 1,623]

5 hours ago, kc17 said:

...personal responsibility. I find it greatly lacking in our society. I think it was more prevalent back then. I base that mostly on watching it become even more lacking through the years I've been alive to witness it. 

You and I might be kindred spirits.  What's you position on the pork roll versus Taylor Ham issue? 

[YankeeSC 1,003]

On 10/23/2021 at 3:36 PM, kc17 said:

Another thing I find infuriating is how Hollywood perpetuates the poor handling of firearms. How often do you see an actor immediately put his/her finger on the trigger?

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-accidental-shooting-details-halyna-hutchins-death

Quote

Baldwin was working with the director and the cinematographer demonstrating how he was going to draw his revolver from its holster and where his arm would be for the new shot. While demonstrating, the firearm went off.

I guess his finger was on the trigger.

[10X 2,299]

13 minutes ago, YankeeSC said:

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-accidental-shooting-details-halyna-hutchins-death

I guess his finger was on the trigger.

I guess his finger pulled the trigger.

[SW9racer 259]

13 minutes ago, 10X said:

I guess his finger pulled the trigger.

Weren’t these single action style revolvers, so he cocked the hammer and pulled the trigger, all with people standing in front of him. If they weren’t all so anti nra, the one hour nra basic safety course could be given each morning of filming action scenes, even a just 15 minute lecture to everyone and she would be alive. 

[124gr9mm 456]

31 minutes ago, YankeeSC said:

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-accidental-shooting-details-halyna-hutchins-death

I guess his finger was on the trigger.

Also interesting from the article:

"Souza said three people were handling the gun for the scene. Armorer Hanna Gutierrez Reed reportedly handled prop guns left on a cart outside the structure they were shooting in due to coronavirus restrictions. Assistant director Dave Halls handed one of those guns to Baldwin. According to a Santa Fe court, Halls announced that it was a "cold gun" before giving it to the actor, lingo meaning that the firearm was unloaded. As a result, Baldwin and the two people who were wounded believed the firearm was safe to use in the staging of the scene. Both the director and Russell noted that cameras were not rolling at the time as they were still setting up the shots.

Souza said in the warrant that the cast and crew prepared the scene before lunch and then had their meal away from the shooting location around 12:30 p.m. He was not sure if the gun was checked again when everyone returned from lunch..."

So they put the gun(s) down and went away to lunch.  When they came back did they follow the same rigor of inspecting the gun(s) ?

[10X 2,299]

2 minutes ago, SW9racer said:

Weren’t these single action style revolvers, so he cocked the hammer and pulled the trigger, all with people standing in front of him. 

Yes, he had three chances to break the accident chain; don't point the gun at someone, don't cock it, and don't pull the trigger.  It sounds like the armorer and perhaps others on the set also had opportunities to break the chain.  Multiple failures here.

[Krdshrk 3,027]

9 minutes ago, SW9racer said:

Weren’t these single action style revolvers

I'm not 100% sure it was a revolver.  I've heard it was a shotgun.  Not 100% on this - they haven't said what type of gun it was besides "prop gun"

[YankeeSC 1,003]

I swear when I first read the article on my phone it mentioned that recreational shooting with those firearms had been allowed on set, but now it's not there.  Interesting to see what comes of that ...

[Displaced Texan 8,032]

11 minutes ago, Krdshrk said:

I'm not 100% sure it was a revolver.  I've heard it was a shotgun.  Not 100% on this - they haven't said what type of gun it was besides "prop gun"

I read it was a single action revolver. The shot was supposed to be him doing a ‘cross draw’ and firing towards the camera. 
He practiced the draw before the scene shoot, and wound up discharging the weapon. 
 

He would have had to cocked the hammer and pulled the trigger to discharge the pistol. 
 

I have also heard there was recreational shooting of the weapons allowed on scene. I’d say there were several blatant safety violations on this set. 

 

 

 

This won’t end well for Baldwin, or the guy acting as the armorer. 

[kc17 539]

I've seen reports he was cross-drawing from a holster. That and the era the movie was based on seems a valid assumption that it was at least a revolver. I've read much speculation it was a single action only revolver, but I don't think I've seen anything that confirms that.  

I've seen multiple claims that live fire target practice not related to the actual filming was done with the same guns. I've not seen who authorized that activity. I believe that claim came from some of the union workers that walked off the set that morning. 

[njJoniGuy 1,875]

[Lawnmower2021 56]

I'm not really surprised that it's always referred to as a "prop," and that the press immediately highlighted whatever the armorer said in the past about her lack of confidence.

He's very clear about the issue: "No one ever handed me a hot gun!". The guns weren't taken seriously or treated with respect.

It is really unfortunate. Nothing can be done about it now but hope her family finds peace.

[124gr9mm 456]

On 10/25/2021 at 9:40 AM, kc17 said:

I've seen reports he was cross-drawing from a holster. That and the era the movie was based on seems a valid assumption that it was at least a revolver. I've read much speculation it was a single action only revolver, but I don't think I've seen anything that confirms that.  

I've seen multiple claims that live fire target practice not related to the actual filming was done with the same guns. I've not seen who authorized that activity. I believe that claim came from some of the union workers that walked off the set that morning. 

Multiple sources now confirm the reports you saw.

The armorer and AD cleared the gun and it was handed to Baldwin for staging/blocking...but the cast/crew then broke for lunch and some crew members WENT PLINKING WITH THE GUNS!

Armorer, AD, and Baldwin obviously didn't clear the gun prior to resuming things, and Baldwin shot the girl.

 

[kc17 539]

26 minutes ago, 124gr9mm said:

Multiple sources now confirm the reports you saw.

The armorer and AD cleared the gun and it was handed to Baldwin for staging/blocking...but the cast/crew then broke for lunch and some crew members WENT PLINKING WITH THE GUNS!

Armorer, AD, and Baldwin obviously didn't clear the gun prior to resuming things, and Baldwin shot the girl.

 

I've also read covid is to blame, due to restrictions on the number of people allowed on set or in the armory at one time. They claim that is why the guns were left unsupervised outside of the armory on a cart. This NY Post article is one of the more detailed I've seen. It's also where my question in another thread of what Baldwin would have done if the script called for him to put the gun to his temple and pull the trigger came from. 

https://nypost.com/2021/10/25/no-denying-alec-baldwins-role-in-shooting-mishap-tragedy/

 

[njJoniGuy 1,875]

52 minutes ago, kc17 said:

... It's also where my question in another thread of what Baldwin would have done if the script called for him to put the gun to his temple and pull the trigger came from...

We might still be partying like it's 1999!

[mustang69 462]

On 10/22/2021 at 7:44 PM, Displaced Texan said:

I don’t think this incident will make AB any less of a douchebag when it comes to LEO shoots, or firearm owners. 
 

I think it will strengthen his push against both. 

This.  If anyone is held accountable it will be whoever told him it was a "cold" gun.  But he certainly bears some responsibility along with anyone else in the chain of custody (and him again because he's the producer).  We all know/feel he should have checked it himself since he was the final person in the chain of custody.  In the liberal mind it's the gun's fault.  No gun = no death, so he won't be held accountable.  I doubt even a New Mexico prosecutor would file charges against him.  Unfortunately, he's so arrogant I believe he'll just blame someone else for it and just move on with his life.  The insurance will cover a settlement and it won't cost AB anything - not even his conscience.

[raz-0 1,037]

42 minutes ago, mustang69 said:

This.  If anyone is held accountable it will be whoever told him it was a "cold" gun.  But he certainly bears some responsibility along with anyone else in the chain of custody (and him again because he's the producer).  We all know/feel he should have checked it himself since he was the final person in the chain of custody.  In the liberal mind it's the gun's fault.  No gun = no death, so he won't be held accountable.  I doubt even a New Mexico prosecutor would file charges against him.  Unfortunately, he's so arrogant I believe he'll just blame someone else for it and just move on with his life.  The insurance will cover a settlement and it won't cost AB anything - not even his conscience.

I doubt he can walk away from the financial impact of this. I don't see how he can avoid civil liability. Insurance is definitely something to watch, if their insurance coverage says they don't owe money because of the management of the set, it's probably a good indication this will get messy across the board. 

 

[kc17 539]

A common statement I see in defense of Baldwin is "actors are not responsible, that's what a prop master, armorer and/or AD are for". Also, "it's the way Hollywood does it, they've always done it that way". That reminds me of the defenses of the casting couch behavior as well, but that's not what this thread is about. 

Ian Hudson was an actor on Rust and on the same set. Here is what he was quoted as saying: 

<Hudson says the other, more experienced actors checked their weapons 2 or 3 times after they received them from the armorer, and it didn't matter whether they were told the gun was "cold" or "hot." Baldwin did not check the weapon, but rather relied on the assistant director who assured him the gun was "cold."> 

So, that contradicts the common defense that actor's do not check the condition of a firearm. I think  when he said "other, more experienced actors" he means compared to himself, not the killer, but I could be wrong. Link: https://www.tmz.com/2021/10/26/rust-actor-shooting-camera-protection-alec-baldwin/

Then I came across this video of actor Jeffrey Wright. In this video he states he has never not had someone show him a gun was clear before taking possession of it. I can easily see this video being used as evidence, or Jeffrey Wright and Ian Hudson being called to the stand to refute the whole "the actor is not responsible" BS. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkeCK13G1NM 

I've also seen (didn't copy the link, but it shouldn't be too hard to find) the liability insurance policy was for "only" 6 million. And if there was a clause in the policy regarding negligence, the insurer could refuse to pay out anyway. Some media outlets are making it sound like the New Mexico DA is leaning towards bringing criminal charges against someone. Who is the big question. 

 

[124gr9mm 456]

56 minutes ago, kc17 said:

Some media outlets are making it sound like the New Mexico DA is leaning towards bringing criminal charges against someone. Who is the big question. 

Perhaps multiple people.

I'd think Baldwin (shooter and Producer), AD, armorer, and the unknown person who put live rounds in the gun could be charged.

[kc17 539]

2 hours ago, 124gr9mm said:

Perhaps multiple people.

I'd think Baldwin (shooter and Producer), AD, armorer, and the unknown person who put live rounds in the gun could be charged.

I would agree all those people should probably be charged, if everything that has been reported is accurate. What charges I wouldn't predict, I'm not familiar enough with the legal definitions, also NM's laws/definitions could be different than NJ.

There's been speculation that person(s) used that gun for live fire target practice during lunch, right before the incident. I wonder if anyone will either admit to it or other people will report who did it. 

[15636215 224]

I retired as an IATSE Local 21.  stagehand. Worked on many live shows with firearms. Actor NEVER checked firearm . Propman kept firearm in his posession at all times unless it was on stage. It always was on the prop person. That is a union position. On this set the union had walked. there were scabs running the set. 

   they will be the ones charged as well as alec.

 

 

[kc17 539]

55 minutes ago, 15636215 said:

I retired as an IATSE Local 21.  stagehand. Worked on many live shows with firearms. Actor NEVER checked firearm . Propman kept firearm in his posession at all times unless it was on stage. It always was on the prop person. That is a union position. On this set the union had walked. there were scabs running the set. 

   they will be the ones charged as well as alec.

 

I appreciate your viewpoint and actual experience. In your experience, was it common for the actor to observe somebody else checking the firearm, as described in the video I linked above?

[15636215 224]

1 hour ago, kc17 said:

I appreciate your viewpoint and actual experience. In your experience, was it common for the actor to observe somebody else checking the firearm, as described in the video I linked above?

No, never, actors really never had knowledge. But I was strictly Union shop. We did have our gun battles with blanks. NEVER had live ammo on site. Firearms always locked up in prop cage. But, They were on loan from private owners. ATF or PoPo never was invloved. When papermill playhouse burned in 82 or so. I knew there a were some privately owned firearms on property.

[tony357 384]

There is a poll in this left wing article defending Alec Baldwin and attacking Don Jr for making T shirt. 

Lets all mark it OK and be Be heard. 

Donald Trump Jr. Has Reached a New Low on the Scale of Human Empathy (msn.com)