Alec Baldwin shoots and kills a woman, injures a man.

[pmv]

Did he point a weapon at a person?

Was that person harmed?

If you answered Yes, to both question, he can ONLY be guilty.

Seems a very weak argument. If you deliver a take-out meal to someone (because it's your job) and they die of food-poisoning can you only be guilty?

I again say I don't much care if Baldwin is convicted or does jail time or not, but my sense is he won't, because it seems a very weak case.

[Edit] And, amazed that this is still unresolved and this thread is still going. The US justice system is slower than video game developers.

 

[outriding]

Question from someone who doesn't know a lot about guns.

Why can they make firearms with barrels a slightly smaller caliber for movies so live rounds don't fit?

How about removing the firing pin and cgi in the guns action

 

[cytg111]

Question from someone who doesn't know a lot about guns.

Why can they make firearms with barrels a slightly smaller caliber for movies so live rounds don't fit?

Cause you might still want to cycle the gun with blanks, get authentic recoil and a muzzle flash? Just stabbing here(!).

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

So this lady's life and Brandon Lee's life are not worth the cost of making live rounds NOT fit? You only have to fix the guns that get "fired" at people on set.
That's a lame argument.

What I mean is, nobody is making .21cal (or equivalent) barrels for a thousand different firearms and blanks because armorers can't figure out how to keep .22's off-set. You're asking for an entire manufacturing base to be built for one industry, AND an entire regulation infrastructure to ensure a) it's required to be used and b) nobody else makes use of it for live rounds. It's an overbuilt solution for a very, very specific problem. It would probably be easier to just regulate that film can't have any functional weapons on-set, force them all to use plastic, and do all 'firing' in post-production.

And not to go too car analogy or school shooting on you, but I'd wager more movie/tv cast members are lost to vehicle accidents on the way to the studio/set than are to firearm failures of this type, tragic though they are.

 

[iRONic]

18 months.

New Mexico judge sentences “Rust” movie armorer to 18 months in prison for fatal on-set shooting by Alec Baldwin

New Mexico judge sentences “Rust” movie armorer to 18 months in prison for fatal on-set shooting by Alec Baldwin

abcnews.go.com

Yer Up Alex!

Oh no! Trebek shot someone?!?!

 

[NWRMidnight]

Did he point a weapon at a person?

Was that person harmed?

If you answered Yes, to both question, he can ONLY be guilty.

You are kind of ignoring one basic, but huge fact, or should I say facts:

1) the weapon you are referring to was a movie prop, that was not supposed to have live rounds in it.

2) would have it been possible for the same outcome (someone killed by the same movie prop) if he waited and used the gun on set during filming and it had the same live rounds it?

3) who is responsible for ensuring the proper ammo is in the movie prop, and who is responsible for all ammo on set? Who is required to have a license to fill that roll? (Hint: it's not the actor or producer).

 

[NWRMidnight]

Cause you might still want to cycle the gun with blanks, get authentic recoil and a muzzle flash? Just stabbing here(!).

The problem with this though, is if you are close enough (usually point blank range) a blank can still be lethal.

 

[cytg111]

The problem with this though, is if you are close enough (usually point blank range) a blank can still be lethal.

Sure, so it makes sense to have someone in charge of safety…

edit: plus in terms of problems, I'd argue that a blank is still the lesser problem.

 

[cytg111]

So this lady's life and Brandon Lee's life are not worth the cost of making live rounds NOT fit? You only have to fix the guns that get "fired" at people on set.
That's a lame argument.

A blank is usually shorter than its live version, a small welding spot(or glue or whatever..) at the right spot would make the gun unable to load a live round but fit a blank just fine.

- I have to imagine these things we talk about is already done in the wild?

 

[Paratus]

A blank is usually shorter than its live version, a small welding spot(or glue or whatever..) at the right spot would make the gun unable to load a live round but fit a blank just fine.

- I have to imagine these things we talk about is already done in the wild?

But a blank in a revolver looks like a blank not a bullet as you can see the heads of the rounds in a revolver. For the revolvers they tend to use dummies (rounds with a bullet but no powder) for the visible chambers.

 

[cytg111]

But a blank in a revolver looks like a blank not a bullet as you can see the heads of the rounds in a revolver. For the revolvers they tend to use dummies (rounds with a bullet but no powder) for the visible chambers.

Heh… was thinking that id still rather have the gun blow up rather than actually fire a bullet…. But that would hurt the expensive actor and not some likely stunt double..

But then again maybe actors gonna check their props then?

 

[andy2000]

But a blank in a revolver looks like a blank not a bullet as you can see the heads of the rounds in a revolver. For the revolvers they tend to use dummies (rounds with a bullet but no powder) for the visible chambers.

Fix it with CGI? Or, considering how many other unrealistic props are used in movies, maybe we can live with seeing a gun that's not 100% perfectly authentic.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Poor @imported_tajmahal blowing his load over nothing.
WOMP WOMP

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

Fix it with CGI? Or, considering how many other unrealistic props are used in movies, maybe we can live with seeing a gun that's not 100% perfectly authentic.

I could live with not seeing guns in movies at all.

 

[igor_kavinski]

I could live with not seeing guns in movies at all.

I don't think you see movies at all.

Are blasters fine?

 

[tcsenter]

I could live with not seeing guns in movies at all.

Everyone can live without movies at all, for that matter. Go back to reading books.

 

[thraashman]

So this lady's life and Brandon Lee's life are not worth the cost of making live rounds NOT fit? You only have to fix the guns that get "fired" at people on set.
That's a lame argument.

Brandon Lee wasn't killed by a live round. He was killed by a blank that propelled a squib stuck in the barrel from a previous firing of a badly made dummy round.

 

[you2]

My opinion and only an opinion is the armorer was guilty of gross negligence because it was her job to ensure the gun was loaded with blanks. She clearly was not fit to do the job and this was likely obvious prior to the incident but I'm not a lawyer and can't say if the studio (or production team) was negligence for not replacing her from a legal perspective.

Baldwin was sloppy and negligence for not checking the gun but legally i suspect he was not guilty because that was not his job. Also if the gun discharged without his pulling the trigger or intending to pull the trigger that would likely be the armorer responsibility (faulty weapon); but again i can't say if that would legally be the case.

So in my non lawyerly opinion i would say Baldwin is likely innocent though he should feel miserable about the matter.

 

[Paratus]

My opinion and only an opinion is the armorer was guilty of gross negligence because it was her job to ensure the gun was loaded with blanks. She clearly was not fit to do the job and this was likely obvious prior to the incident but I'm not a lawyer and can't say if the studio (or production team) was negligence for not replacing her from a legal perspective.

Baldwin was sloppy and negligence for not checking the gun but legally i suspect he was not guilty because that was not his job. Also if the gun discharged without his pulling the trigger or intending to pull the trigger that would likely be the armorer responsibility (faulty weapon); but again i can't say if that would legally be the case.

So in my non lawyerly opinion i would say Baldwin is likely innocent though he should feel miserable about the matter.

I don’t agree he was negligent for not checking. You don’t want an actor messing with a gun that the armorer has safed. If a second check is required (and I hope it is) an assistant armorer should be checking the weapon before handing it to the actor.

 

[dank69]

I don’t agree he was negligent for not checking. You don’t want an actor messing with a gun that the armorer has safed. If a second check is required (and I hope it is) an assistant armorer should be checking the weapon before handing it to the actor.

Yeah this is why I said he won't be found guilty as an actor for not checking the gun. If anything he will be found liable as a producer who was aware of the highly unsafe conditions on set.

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

Trial underway ... finally.

Opening statements to give road map to involuntary manslaughter case against Alec Baldwin​

A jury is set to hear opening statements at the involuntary manslaughter trial of Alec Baldwin in the fatal shooting of a cinematographer in a trial that will delve into the confluence of gun safety, high-wattage celebrity and a low-budget Western film on a remote movie ranch.

 

[you2]

Trial underway ... finally.

Opening statements to give road map to involuntary manslaughter case against Alec Baldwin​

A jury is set to hear opening statements at the involuntary manslaughter trial of Alec Baldwin in the fatal shooting of a cinematographer in a trial that will delve into the confluence of gun safety, high-wattage celebrity and a low-budget Western film on a remote movie ranch.

I wonder which case is more political - prosecuting Baldwin for this accident or prosecuting Trump for hush money payment.

 

[dank69]

I wonder which case is more political - prosecuting Baldwin for this accident or prosecuting Trump for hush money payment.

You misspelled "falsified business records."

 

[Bitek]

I wonder which case is more political - prosecuting Baldwin for this accident or prosecuting Trump for hush money payment.

You misspelled "hand waiving away" Baldwin's responsibility for this accident.

As the persecution argued today, this is a case where an equipment operator AND executive was playing make believe with real firearms and killed someone carelessly.

A rich, famous and well connected and well lawyered actor dumping all the responsibility for the appalling disregard for safety in the workplace on the little person is horrific, but also a story as old as time.

Thought Democrats were better for protecting workers, and not just siding with management/owners, but I guess not when the rich guy also dunks on Trump.

 

[fskimospy]

You misspelled "hand waiving away" Baldwin's responsibility for this accident.

As the persecution argued today, this is a case where an equipment operator AND executive was playing make believe with real firearms and killed someone carelessly.

A rich, famous and well connected and well lawyered actor dumping all the responsibility for the appalling disregard for safety in the workplace on the little person is horrific, but also a story as old as time.

Thought Democrats were better for protecting workers, and not just siding with management/owners, but I guess not when the rich guy also dunks on Trump.

The armorer’s entire job is basically to ensure that the firearms on the set are safe.

I definitely agree that Baldwin as a producer should be liable in a civil sense but I’m sorry, that woman’s conduct was egregious.