Alec Baldwin Shooting

[Rev. Rye]

Mr Baldwin really needs to shut the fuck up. What's the matter with him? Doesn't he have a lawyer? Even if he hasn't been charged, he might be, so he needs to button it.

If the shooting of Brandon Lee is any indication, it's not likely that Baldwin will face criminal charges. And given that he was definitely supposed to shoot Brandon Lee, instead of the gun misfiring while it was pointed in the victim's general direction, Michael Massee probably had more against him for a criminal trial. That said, Michael Massee wasn't a producer on The Crow, and Baldwin was/is one for Rust, so it's possible they'll try to sue him. Then again, given that Baldwin has evidently been traumatised by the event, and that he looks like her family forgave him, it's doesn't seem likely that they'll sue him directly. Maybe as one of several producers on the movie, but not on his own.

[brewer]

Trigger does not effectively engage notch. i.e. broken tip, broken/worn down notch

A broken engagement? I suppose - but it would be pretty obvious - when the hammer would not stay cocked.....

And ultimately?

It really makes no difference. He still pointed a loaded gun at someone and fired it. He is still guilty of negligent homicide.

Or only half cocked. He said he didn't pull it back to full cock. But I agree, very unlikely.

I'm sure the story will change again.

[onlinebiker]

Mr Baldwin really needs to shut the fuck up. What's the matter with him? Doesn't he have a lawyer? Even if he hasn't been charged, he might be, so he needs to button it.

Guilty people do tend to invent stories....

---

A broken engagement? I suppose - but it would be pretty obvious - when the hammer would not stay cocked.....

And ultimately?

It really makes no difference. He still pointed a loaded gun at someone and fired it. He is still guilty of negligent homicide.

Or only half cocked. He said he didn't pull it back to full cock. But I agree, very unlikely.

I'm sure the story will change again.

Final draft -

[HappySkeptic]

Mr Baldwin really needs to shut the fuck up. What's the matter with him? Doesn't he have a lawyer? Even if he hasn't been charged, he might be, so he needs to button it.

That's what I thought when I heard clips of the interview this morning.

His "I didn't pull the trigger" may be wrong.  He may have put pressure on the trigger while pulling the hammer back.  Just shut up - it was an accident.

Of course, Biker and the right-wing hates Baldwin, and wants him put away.

[onlinebiker]

Mr Baldwin really needs to shut the fuck up. What's the matter with him? Doesn't he have a lawyer? Even if he hasn't been charged, he might be, so he needs to button it.

That's what I thought when I heard clips of the interview this morning.

His "I didn't pull the trigger" may be wrong.  He may have put pressure on the trigger while pulling the hammer back.  Just shut up - it was an accident.

Of course, Biker and the  right-wing hates Baldwin, and wants him put away.

Kindly go fuck yourself bloody.

Read the OP.  I like Mr.  Baldwin. He is a funny and entertaining guy.

He also fucked up royally and negligently killed someone.

And YOU want to forgive him because you like his politics....

If it was Clint Eastwood you would be calling for murder charges and his head on a pike.

[HappySkeptic]

Kindly go fuck yourself bloody.

Read the OP.  I like Mr.  Baldwin. He is a funny and entertaining guy.

He also fucked up royally and negligently killed someone.

And YOU want to forgive him because you like his politics....

If it was Clint Eastwood you would be calling for murder charges and his head on a pike.

I think Clint's politics is messed up, but I like him as an actor and directory.  If he did "Geriatric Dirty Harry" and accidentally shot someone in the same situation, I wouldn't have any different ideas than on Baldwin.

Your claim of his responsibility makes no sense.  If I own a gun for personal protection, I am responsible for everything that happens with it.  If a movie production company pays me to point a gun at someone, and has industry-standard protection protocols in-place, and has declared that everything is safe, then there isn't the same responsibility.  It is not a similar situation at all.

If all actors have to be gun experts, and are legally responsible for a firearm in their hands, then they better bring their own firearms, blanks, and everything from home, because they can't trust anything that someone else gives them.  But if I were on that set, I wouldn't trust anyone else's expertise with their own guns, and I'd be scared of being shot by some stupid extra with a gun.

The "every actor is responsible for the state of their own gun" is bullshit, and can never work in the real world.

[onlinebiker]

So in your universe - ignorance is a vital asset.


.
..

[HappySkeptic]

So in your universe - ignorance is a vital asset.

If every actor has to unload the bullets from his gun to make sure they are dummies or blanks, then why have any safety protocols at all?

If an actor is handed a gun, I don't want them to tamper with it in any way.  I don't want them to take bullets out and reload.  The standard protocol is that the actor and anyone on set MAY ask for proof of a gun's safety, but they do not personally mess around with the loadout.

Yeah, you would've checked the loadout.  You pride yourself in being a gun expert.  I see you futzing around with the gun on set, and I'm going to ask on set "why is he screwing around with the gun, is something wrong?".  I want to see the chain of events from prop master to the person who checks the weapons and declares them safe, to the hands of the actors, and then back on the cart.  I personally would have asked for proof of a "cold gun", but perhaps I'd start to trust the team and not bother, being focused on the next scene.


There are protocols in place for how an actor discharges a gun with blanks (you don't point it at someone within 20 feet) - but those aren't in place when the gun is declared to be "cold".  And the idea that "you never point even an unloaded gun at someone" is false when you are literally being paid and told to do just that.

[onlinebiker]

Jesus h motherfucking Christ.

You think that ignoring the FUNDAMENTALS of gun handling can be ignored because some putz has a SAG card and an "armorer".

 1. You treat every gun as if is loaded.
2. You NEVER point a gun at anything you are not willing to kill or destroy.
3. You keep your fucking finger off the trigger until you are ready to fire.
4. You know your target and what lays beyond.


These rules should NEVER NEVER NEVER BE VIOLATED.

Fucking movie making isn' t a papal special dispensation to violate these rules.

If you do - you are negligent.

If you think otherwise you are a moron who should never be allowed to handle guns.

[HappySkeptic]

Jesus h motherfucking Christ.

You think that ignoring the FUNDAMENTALS of gun handling can be ignored because some putz has a SAG card and an "armorer".

 1. You treat every gun as if is loaded.
2. You NEVER point a gun at anything you are not willing to kill or destroy.
3. You keep your fucking finger off the trigger until you are ready to fire.
4. You know your target and what lays beyond.


These rules should NEVER NEVER NEVER BE VIOLATED.

This is literally impossible when making a movie, unless we require all guns to be plastic.  If that is your point - that real guns must not be used on a movie set, why not make that point instead of blaming this tragedy all on Baldwin?