If I'm an actor on a film set and somebody hands me a gun, I'm going to confirm it's status,.. But that's just me.
Alec Baldwin and prop lady to be charged with 2 counts of involuntary manslaughter.
- Thread starter FAUlty Gator
- Start date
If I'm an actor on a film set and somebody hands me a gun, I'm going to confirm it's status,.. But that's just me.
So unless you knew how to tell the difference before hand the average non-gun owner would not know the difference.
So let's say they're making a movie about zombie apocalypse and there's a scene where a kid grabs a gun dropped by a parent when the zombie attacks and shoots it.
Is that kid liable if there's a live round in there? Should the kid have opened up the gun and checked all the rounds after the armorer said it good? Should they have to be tested on the differences between live and blank rounds before they're allowed on set and sign a waiver that they are responsible every time they pull the trigger?
The actor does when they receive the gun.
I mean say you are filming a scene where you shoot yourself in the foot. Do you think you would not yourself want to check to make sure that what is loaded in that gun are blanks?
Everyone who touches the gun should check it. The main responsibility is on the armorer. But the actor as a person handling the gun should check it.
Any actor participating in the use of guns on a set needs at least rudimentary firearm training...
I personally can't stand the guy. But if I was on the jury, I would rule it as a horrible accident.
What I do or you do or Rifler does is not a process or a safety procedure. They have armorers for a reason. They’re trained!
I'm not suggesting that the actor in your scenario should bear primary responsibility,.. I'm just saying that anyone who picks up a firearm bears some level of personal responsibility for knowing what it contains and how to safely use it...
I know when this whole thing happened a few actors said that weapons training was mandatory for them on all movie sets where there was a gun used. Not sure if that's industry standard or was specific to those movies. I also wonder if him being a producer added anything to this.
The big question for me from the beginning is "Why was there any live ammo on the set at all?"
I'm sure I read that the armorer and her buddy (now dead) were playing with the gun between scenes - using it for target practice. Just kinda forgot to switch back to blanks for the scene.
I'm sure I read that the armorer and her buddy (now dead) were playing with the gun between scenes - using it for target practice. Just kinda forgot to switch back to blanks for the scene.
Probably not,.. unless, as might be the case with Baldwin, the firearm was handled carelessly.
It probably is something that happens on most sets. Seems like it wasn't the appropriate training here after hearing how the person who was in charge here should not have had that role.
Man, that’s awful. I really don’t see how Baldwin is liable for pulling the trigger in this scenario.
Now as @Aardvark86 and @hawkifann have already asked, maybe he’s being charged for running a loose set with no safety protocols and letting something like this happen. Seems a stretch to me, but might be more likely.
Not criminal liability but I do think it should be an added step for extra safety.
I could see the argument being made for Baldwin mishandling the gun,.. Blanks or not, guns don't fire themselves while pointed at people.
Whenever death is an end consequence of an activity involving the use of an inherently lethal item, the propriety of criminal liability has to at least be considered.
How many people have died this way? Is there reason to believe that the industry procedures are wrong or did something happen on this set that was outside normal procedures?
Ahh, yes. The comeback of morans. Well done. I assume anyone using the word snowflake has a low IQ, certainly fits the bill here.
A dummy is not to be confused with a blank, a cartridge for a firearm that contains propellant and a primer but no bullet or shot; a dummy does not produce an explosive sound like a blank does.
Problem is that isn't really close to what happened here based on what we've heard. Now if the kid were to pick up the gun before the scene, start messing around with it, aims at a staffer, pulls the trigger and a live round fires and kills someone, then you might have an apt comparison... and you'd probably also have a case for involuntary manslaughter.
What do you think was so different? He was pointing the gun at the camera (as you see in countless movies) during a rehearsal run.
No one really knows for sure but the main difference would be one is part of the scripted routine your make believe child was supposed to be following and the other was careless and off script. This sounds like what Baldwin was doing which I assume is at least partly why he's being charged.
There are no accidents involving firearms, just negligence.
Off-script? "Alec Baldwin was rehearsing a scene that involved pointing a revolver “towards the camera lens” when the gun — which the crew had been told did not contain live rounds — suddenly went off and killed the cinematographer, according to the film’s director, who was quoted in an affidavit released Sunday night."
Since when is rehearsing "off script?"
Uhm.. No accidents?! Really that's going to be the hill you will fight for.
Guns go off all the time. People sometimes die.
For one I've heard differing accounts of whether or not he was really "rehearsing a scene" when this occurred but more importantly, guns don't just "suddenly go off".
If it comes out in this scene AB was supposed to point the gun at the camera and pull the trigger then yes it might be a little more understandable.
That said he's being charged for a reason. DA's don't just charge powerful Hollywood actors for fun, they know there will be major scrutiny on the case so its safe to assume they have ample evidence of negligence on his part.
No they don't. People pull the trigger. Guns don't just randomly go off by themselves. Understanding this is a basic foundation of firearm safety.
Maybe you've been reading crap. Did you see the part about "who was quoted in an affidavit"?
I haven't seen a mainstream site claim otherwise.
We'll see I guess. I had read on a few mainstream sites AB was drawing his gun from his holster in a careless manner a few times before the scene was to be filmed and wasn't supposed to even pull the trigger but did so. Regardless the larger point is there should have never been a live round near that set much less a gun he was using. All bad.
except they are loaded, they're simply loaded with blanks. The actor would have to not only unload all the ammo in the gun and visually inspect each one, but also know enough about ammo to be able to distinguish a blank from a live round.
rudimentary firearm training doesn't cover distinguishing the difference in the look of a live vs blank round. They're made to look like live rounds, they just don't have a projectile. It takes more specialized training from what I've read to distinguish them, which is why there are better procedures to do that involving people who are trained. Should they also be required to check the brake lines and tire pressures on cars they drive or make certain food they serve doesn't actually contain poison?
Again, in all the years of shooting movies this is the first time it's EVER happened. It's a bit ridiculous to demand actors understand all the ins and outs of every prop they handle.
Some of you guys couldn’t be more predictable if you tried.
No, but it’s a pretty basic rule not to point a gun at someone and pull the trigger.
Don’t need a whole lot of firearms knowledge to know that.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Missouri State Transfer WR Raylen Sharpe Visiting Iowa on Tuesday- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
-
-