Alec Baldwin Fires Prop Gun on Set, Killing Cinematographer

[The Cool Thatguy]

This is also silly. Movie scenes are not safe just because "hey its a movie so its ok." Ever heard of Vic Morrow? Brandon Lee? Oh they were movies so its ok and everything was actually safe.

Whether its a hit job is irrelevant to the fact that someone died and gun safety is a real need on movie sets where they use guns that can fire. Right?

No one is saying that a movie set automatically makes gun use safe.

Rather, what people are saying is that the nature of movies requires the people in them to ignore the NRA suggestions (and yes, that's all they are) regarding gun use.

Also, given human nature and the repetition required of the actors, there's a reason why there's a person who's sole job is safety with regards to gun use.

[Gray Lensman]

No one is saying that a movie set automatically makes gun use safe.

Rather, what people are saying is that the nature of movies requires the people in them to ignore the NRA suggestions (and yes, that's all they are) regarding gun use.

Also, given human nature and the repetition required of the actors, there's a reason why there's a person who's sole job is safety with regards to gun use.

Basically this. The standard rules don't apply, but that doesn't mean there aren't rules in place. I bet some of the safety rules on movie sets involving firearms would seem useless to your basic shooter on a target range - but on the movie set they make all the difference. Provided they are followed, of course.

[JBatmanFan05]

Interesting testimony here:

Halls, the safety coordinator on set . . . acknowledged on the witnesses stand that he "was negligent in checking the gun properly" because he didn't examine all the rounds inside.

When asked by the prosecutor why he agreed to testify, Halls said he wanted "the truth be known."

"That Halyna's husband and son, her family, know the truth of what happened," Halls said. "It's important that the cast and the crew, producers of Rust know what happened. And it's important that the industry, the motion picture and television industry, knows what happened so that this never happens again."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rust-fa...-feel-my-legs/

[numberthirty]

You are telling the armorer how fast to do their job, but you were just an actor...

[numberthirty]

Interesting testimony here:

Halls, the safety coordinator on set . . . acknowledged on the witnesses stand that he "was negligent in checking the gun properly" because he didn't examine all the rounds inside.

When asked by the prosecutor why he agreed to testify, Halls said he wanted "the truth be known."

"That Halyna's husband and son, her family, know the truth of what happened," Halls said. "It's important that the cast and the crew, producers of Rust know what happened. And it's important that the industry, the motion picture and television industry, knows what happened so that this never happens again."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rust-fa...-feel-my-legs/

In addition to that...

You have another actor on this film saying very clearly that the armorer checked the gun right in front of him.

[thwhtGuardian]

You are telling the armorer how fast to do their job, but you were just an actor...

I mean, actors make demands all the time so why is this any different? It's the armorer and assistant director's job to say"no, that's not safe."

[numberthirty]

I mean, actors make demands all the time so why is this any different? It's the armorer and assistant director's job to say"no, that's not safe."

Because it is an instance where folks are attempting to make the case along the lines of "Got Nothing To Do With This Guy. It's On Everyone Else..."

Meanwhile, the actual reality of the thing is that the guy is clearly right there ignoring even basic safety with what he is calling for.

You can't be attempting to decide how things will go, and have "Zero..." responsibility as far as if thing are actually "More..." or "Less..." safe.

Attempting to speed the process up when guns are involved creates a situation where things are "Less..." safe. Simple as that.

[thwhtGuardian]

Because it is an instance where folks are attempting to make the case along the lines of "Got Nothing To Do With This Guy. It's On Everyone Else..."

Meanwhile, the actual reality of the thing is that the guy is clearly right there ignoring even basic safety with what he is calling for.

You can't be attempting to decide how things will go, and have "Zero..." responsibility as far as if thing are actually "More..." or "Less..." safe.

Attempting to speed the process up when guns are involved creates a situation where things are "Less..." safe. Simple as that.

I don't see how it changes that.

Is it unsafe for him to want to go faster?

Definitely.

Is it his job to ensure safety?

I haven't seen evidence of that.

It was the jobs of the Director, Assistant Director and the Armorer to say, "No Alec, that's not safe we need to go slow."

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Interesting testimony here:


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rust-fa...-feel-my-legs/

And this should end it here...this guy is admitting he is the one who failed on set. Its over...Baldwin may have been an actor making a demand , but these folks who are supposed to be the ones who step up.

The case is pretty much DOA.

[achilles]

I don't see how it changes that.

Is it unsafe for him to want to go faster?

Definitely.

Is it his job to ensure safety?

I haven't seen evidence of that.

It was the jobs of the Director, Assistant Director and the Armorer to say, "No Alec, that's not safe we need to go slow."

It also is the responsibility of the producers to ensure safety. Let's see, who produced this and was on-set? Who as a producer was violating safety rules left and right, unless the armorer told him in the safety briefing he wouldn't go to that it was fine to use a gun as a pointer?

What's emerging from this trial is that this was a failure on the part of a number of people. The armorer, the producers who hired her and did not fire her when it became apparent she had no idea what she was doing. The AD. Baldwin, who evidently treated safety like it was Job # 1,000,000,003, rather than the priority.

Honestly, if I were a Hollywood type, I'd never work with any of them, and especially Baldwin, (the others directly implicated will likely never get the opportunity to work in movies or TV again anyway, but he will). His contempt for the safety of others, his refusal to take responsibility for his own actions and lack of actions....he won't change, and he's too dangerous to work with.

[achilles]

And this should end it here...this guy is admitting he is the one who failed on set. Its over...Baldwin may have been an actor making a demand , but these folks who are supposed to be the ones who step up.

The case is pretty much DOA.

Which case, the one against the armorer? She's toast. There's no way anyone will find her not guilty. And considering her conduct, I suspect a long sentence. As for Baldwin, he may or may not be toast, but that video of him waving around his gun and using it as a pointer, not to mention getting caught in the lie that he didn't pull the trigger, and the accounts that he ignored the safety briefing....well let's say I wouldn't be too surprised if he was convicted of negligent manslaughter or similar charge.

[JBatmanFan05]

And this should end it here...this guy is admitting he is the one who failed on set. Its over...Baldwin may have been an actor making a demand , but these folks who are supposed to be the ones who step up.

The case is pretty much DOA.

I think we have an indictment here because there's enough for what Baldwin is charged with, prosecutors can possibly prove their case here, and because a human is dead. So, I don't think the case is DOA. That doesn't mean I think the prosecution will win. I just don't know. I think the prosecution will argue that the gun was of such a dangerous nature that producer/gun holder Baldwin needed to check/do more than what he did here. And I can see a jury finding egregious negligence, and I can see a jury not finding enough here. We'll see (assuming the trial happens).

[inisideguy]

I think we have an indictment here because there's enough for what Baldwin is charged with, prosecutors can possibly prove their case here, and because a human is dead. So, I don't think the case is DOA. That doesn't mean I think the prosecution will win. I just don't know. I think the prosecution will argue that the gun was of such a dangerous nature that producer/gun holder Baldwin needed to check/do more than what he did here. And I can see a jury finding egregious negligence, and I can see a jury not finding enough here. We'll see (assuming the trial happens).

I am a retired cop. Been to a lot of trials. The chances of him being found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by 12 jurors in a case like this are slim to none. That being said if I am wrong, I will admit it.

[The Cool Thatguy]

Given the trigger pull was halved on the gun, I'm hard pressed to believe there will be a conviction.

[achilles]

Given the trigger pull was halved on the gun, I'm hard pressed to believe there will be a conviction.

Why? The trigger still didn't pull itself. And the gun didn't point itself at people.