Alec Baldwin Firearm Accident

[Hawkmoon]

The reload has a good explanation that suggests the probability is a finger on the trigger:

https://thereload.com/analysis-yes-alec-baldwins-gun-could-have-fired-without-him-pulling-the-trigger/

Another expert agrees:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZdXGX61pao

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGZ_wDNRYQs

[Hawkmoon]

There's a reason why you only carry five rounds in a Peacemaker and a non-transfer bar clone. Especially ones with a worn sear. I could easily see a cheapo knock-off, one made with softer metals and used as a movie prop that's been cycled a billion times, having a sear that's pretty much worn almost smooth.

The gun involved has been reported by multiple sources as being a Pietta 1873 clone. Over the years I have owned three of them. I'm sure not everyone will agree but, in general, I rate them as being AT LEAST as good in terms of metallurgy, fit, and finish as an authentic Colt SAA of the late 1800s.

[AZRedhawk44]

From what I've read about movie set gun safety, there are (among others) two safety rules that had to be violated here:

• NEVER point a gun AT another person -- point it just off target so that, if there is an unintended discharge, the bullet won't strike the person
• When the script calls for a gun to be pointed at the camera, the camera is supposed to be behind a bullet-proof shield

The problem with someone like Alec Baldwin, is it doesn't matter what he says he was or wasn't pointing the gun at.

The man is incompetent in weapons handling, so his perception of pointing is different than the reality of pointing.

Much like anyone who starts shooting pistols, you may WANT the bullet to go in the middle of the bullseye, but it's not going there unless you do everything correctly.  And you never do everything correctly.

A nitwit gun illiterate like him is NOT doing everything correctly, so aiming "slightly away from the camera" doesn't mean sh!t if his trigger press is so sloppy that it yanks the gun back towards the camera a good 10 degrees due to sh!t technique.

Doesn't matter if he didn't MEAN to have sh!t technique or didn't THINK he had sh!t technique.  The only reality that matters is the 800fps trajectory of that hunk of lead that his actions ignited and sent downrange.

As for "he didn't pull the trigger..." I just don't care.  SAA's don't discharge without significant human effort.  You thumb that hammer, you're in charge of it.

[Hawkmoon]

The problem with someone like Alec Baldwin, is it doesn't matter what he says he was or wasn't pointing the gun at.

The man is incompetent in weapons handling, so his perception of pointing is different than the reality of pointing.

Much like anyone who starts shooting pistols, you may WANT the bullet to go in the middle of the bullseye, but it's not going there unless you do everything correctly.  And you never do everything correctly.

A nitwit gun illiterate like him is NOT doing everything correctly, so aiming "slightly away from the camera" doesn't mean sh!t if his trigger press is so sloppy that it yanks the gun back towards the camera a good 10 degrees due to sh!t technique.

Doesn't matter if he didn't MEAN to have sh!t technique or didn't THINK he had sh!t technique.  The only reality that matters is the 800fps trajectory of that hunk of lead that his actions ignited and sent downrange.

As for "he didn't pull the trigger..." I just don't care.  SAA's don't discharge without significant human effort.  You thumb that hammer, you're in charge of it.

^^^

You're preaching to the choir, at least as far as I'm concerned. IMHO, he owns that bullet.

[Ben]

Interesting perspective from George Clooney, who I never thought of as a gun guy, or having a familiarity with guns, and then Baldwin's response. In fairness to Baldwin, I expect a lot more actors are on his side of the argument than on Clooney's, though I applaud Clooney's methodology. Note that Baldwin's response suggests he has (in his mind) a better than average familiarity with firearms on sets.

"How do you respond to actors like George Clooney who say that every time they were handed a gun, they checked it themselves?" the news anchor asked.

"Well, there were a lot of people who felt it necessary to contribute some comment to the situation, which really didn't help the situation," Baldwin said. "At all."

ALEC BALDWIN 'RUST' SHOOTING INTERVIEW: FIVE MOST SHOCKING REVELATIONS

"If your protocol is you check the gun every time, well, good for you. I've probably handled weapons as much as any other actor in films with an average career. Again, shooting or being shot by someone," he continued. "And in that time, I had a protocol and it never let me down."

Clooney said on the podcast "WTF with Marc Maron" that he always personally checks a weapon after someone hands it to him on a set.

"I've been on sets for 40 years and the person that hands you the gun, the person that is responsible for the gun is either the prop or the armorer, period," Clooney reflected. "Now every single time I'm handed a gun on the set, every time they hand me a gun I look at it, I open it. I show it to the person I'm pointing it to, I show it to the crew. Every single take you had to back to the armorer when you're done… You do it again and part of it is because of what happened to Brandon [Lee], everyone does it. Everybody knows and maybe Alec did that, hopefully he did do that."

A rep for Clooney did not immediately return Fox News' request for comment.

Baldwin explained that when he was a young actor a prop person told him not to manipulate a weapon before a scene.

"The prop person said, 'Don't do that,' when I was young," he explained. "And they'd say, 'One thing you would need to understand is we don't want the actor to be the last line of defense against any catastrophic breach of safety with the gun. My job is to make sure the gun is safe and then I hand you the gun and I declare the gun is safe. The crew is not relying on you to say that it's safe. They're relying on me to say that it's safe.'"

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-reacts-george-clooney-comments-gun-safety-rust-shooting

[Hawkmoon]

Clooney said on the podcast "WTF with Marc Maron" that he always personally checks a weapon after someone hands it to him on a set.

"I've been on sets for 40 years and the person that hands you the gun, the person that is responsible for the gun is either the prop or the armorer, period," Clooney reflected. "Now every single time I'm handed a gun on the set, every time they hand me a gun I look at it, I open it. I show it to the person I'm pointing it to, I show it to the crew. Every single take you had to back to the armorer when you're done… You do it again and part of it is because of what happened to Brandon [Lee], everyone does it. Everybody knows and maybe Alec did that, hopefully he did do that."

This matches up with what every professional prop master or cinema armorer I've seen interviewed has said. Every ... single ... one.

Baldwin explained that when he was a young actor a prop person told him not to manipulate a weapon before a scene.

"The prop person said, 'Don't do that,' when I was young," he explained. "And they'd say, 'One thing you would need to understand is we don't want the actor to be the last line of defense against any catastrophic breach of safety with the gun. My job is to make sure the gun is safe and then I hand you the gun and I declare the gun is safe. The crew is not relying on you to say that it's safe. They're relying on me to say that it's safe.'"

I very much doubt this. It is possible that some prop person once told him that, but I can't believe that over the subsequent course of his career nobody has ever told him that's not the way it works. The reality is that gun safety on a Hollywood set, just like gun safety in the real world, relies on a protocol of overlapping, redundant safety rules that are there so that if one rule gets broken, the others still prevent someone getting shot or killed. One of those rules is exactly what Clooney described -- I've heard professional prop masters and armorers say the same thing. Before a scene involving a firearm, the firearm is brought out onto the set by the armorer. The armorer shows the actor and the crew that the gun is clear. The actor verifies that the gun is clear, and any crew member who wants to is also allowed to inspect the gun to verify that it's clear. The armorer then shows the rounds before they are loaded. If they're dummy rounds, the armorer and the actor shake each round so the BB inside can be heard rattling around, verifying that they are dummies. If they are blanks, they'll have a crimped nose rather than a bullet. The armorer then loads the gun, declares it a "Hot" gun, and hands it to the actor.

Apparently, "Rust" was a low budget film that was running late, so they didn't follow the industry standard protocols. Baldwin was the producer (or one of the producers). That makes him ultimately responsible for safety on the set.

My understanding is that those gun safety protocols are written into industry standard contracts.

As for Baldwin:

ALEC BALDWIN 'RUST' SHOOTING INTERVIEW: FIVE MOST SHOCKING REVELATIONS

"If your protocol is you check the gun every time, well, good for you. I've probably handled weapons as much as any other actor in films with an average career. Again, shooting or being shot by someone," he continued. "And in that time, I had a protocol and it never let me down."

Correction: It never let you down until it let you down. And when it finally let you down, it did so with disastrous consequences.

[gunsmith]

The problem with someone like Alec Baldwin, is it doesn't matter what he says he was or wasn't pointing the gun at.

The man is incompetent in weapons handling, so his perception of pointing is different than the reality of pointing.

Much like anyone who starts shooting pistols, you may WANT the bullet to go in the middle of the bullseye, but it's not going there unless you do everything correctly.  And you never do everything correctly.

A nitwit gun illiterate like him is NOT doing everything correctly, so aiming "slightly away from the camera" doesn't mean sh!t if his trigger press is so sloppy that it yanks the gun back towards the camera a good 10 degrees due to sh!t technique.

Doesn't matter if he didn't MEAN to have sh!t technique or didn't THINK he had sh!t technique.  The only reality that matters is the 800fps trajectory of that hunk of lead that his actions ignited and sent downrange.

As for "he didn't pull the trigger..." I just don't care.  SAA's don't discharge without significant human effort.  You thumb that hammer, you're in charge of it.

 that is the best summary of what probably happened on the internet

[WLJ]

Baldwin deleted his primary twitter account. Rumors charges could be/maybe coming.

Alec Baldwin Deletes His Twitter Account Days After Shock ABC Interview
https://deadline.com/2021/12/alec-baldwin-deletes-his-twitter-account-days-after-shock-abc-interview-1234885348/

Alec Baldwin On The Run! Deletes Twitter (Evidence) After Disasterous TV Interview! Charges Pending
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzJaPXyM9oo

[MechAg94]

As for Baldwin:

Correction: It never let you down until it let you down. And when it finally let you down, it did so with disastrous consequences.

Yeah, that is the thing about safety procedures, you can get away with short cuts for a quite some time.  It takes a combination of failures for an incident to occur, but if you take shortcuts that combination eventually does come around. 

[Fly320s]

Yeah, that is the thing about safety procedures, you can get away with short cuts for a quite some time.  It takes a combination of failures for an incident to occur, but if you take shortcuts that combination eventually does come around.

Swiss cheese model.

As long as the holes don't line up, everything is fine.

[Hawkmoon]

I am having a great deal of difficulty wrapping my head around the fact on some of the "gun" forums, there are actually people who are defending Baldwin, and arguing that he bears zero responsibility for the woman's death.

[230RN]

They may be thinking in terms of whomever and however the live round got in the gun without realizing (as has been pointed out several times) that there are overlapping safety rules, and in this case Baldwin must take responsiblity for handling the somehow-loaded gun in an unsafe manner.

Inexpertise, misplaced trust in the armorer, "magic," or whatever, he pointed the gun where he couldn't fix the hole (or holes) while playing with it and should have known better.

If the armorer competently checked the gun then someone had to place live rounds in it at some point after that, and there were live rounds involved in the "target practice."

I'd be interested in knowing about gun safety rules in their contracts, as Hawkmoon mentioned previously:

"My understanding is that those gun safety protocols are written into industry standard contracts."

Terry, 230RN

[zxcvbob]

I am having a great deal of difficulty wrapping my head around the fact on some of the "gun" forums, there are actually people who are defending Baldwin, and arguing that he bears zero responsibility for the woman's death.

You might can defend Baldwin the actor but doing so just shifts that portion the blame to Baldwin the director, who already bears much of the blame.

[cordex]

You might can defend Baldwin the actor but doing so just shifts that portion the blame to Baldwin the director, who already bears much of the blame.

Yeah. Or producer maybe?

Regardless, I am not defending Alec, I simply don’t believe actors in general are competent enough to trust with a grilled cheese, much less a gun. If your safety regime uses them as a critical component then you are hosed. The presumption must be that they are utterly incompetent as well as maliciously dangerous and they still must not be able to hurt anyone.  That is why you hire experts who are able to maintain safety. Actors also shouldn’t be responsible for checking the rigging of wires for stunts, or the safety of the lighting fixtures because they are idiots as far as those things go.

[zxcvbob]

I meant producer. 

[AmbulanceDriver]

This is exactly why I teach my daughters that *EVERY* time you pick up the gun, even if you just checked it a minute ago, if the chamber is closed, you check it again.  My oldest is 7, so I joked with her about the "Magic Bullet Fairies". That "if you put the gun down, with the action closed, and turn your back, the Magic Bullet Fairy may have put a bullet in the gun while you weren't looking.   So you check it again. "  Those overlapping layers of defense, those good habits that help keep everyone safe.  Yeah, I put it in a silly way for her, but it's those good habits that keep everyone safe.  It needs to be automatic, ingrained.  Just the other day I was at my LGS looking at a couple of handguns (had heard they'd gotten a Keltec P50 and wanted to handle it).  Clerk takes the gun down from the wall, checks the chamber, hands it to me with the chamber closed.  I automatically recheck the chamber.  Because if he messed up and missed something, I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE [UNPRINTABLE] GUN IS IN MY [CENSORED] PAW!

[Regolith]

Yeah. Or producer maybe?

Regardless, I am not defending Alec, I simply don’t believe actors in general are competent enough to trust with a grilled cheese, much less a gun. If your safety regime uses them as a critical component then you are hosed. The presumption must be that they are utterly incompetent as well as maliciously dangerous and they still must not be able to hurt anyone.  That is why you hire experts who are able to maintain safety. Actors also shouldn’t be responsible for checking the rigging of wires for stunts, or the safety of the lighting fixtures because they are idiots as far as those things go.

The rules of firearm safety are so simple you can teach them to a child. If an actor can't muster up the intelligence and maturity of a child, perhaps they should only ever be given dummy props.

[230RN]

230RN said:

"I suspect that ammunition can actually tiptoe around, hiding in small dark places, until it finds a suitable chamber to slip into and rest until awakened."

Ambulance Driver said:

"My oldest is 7, so I joked with her about the 'Magic Bullet Fairies'. That if you put the gun down, with the action closed, and turn your back, the Magic Bullet Fairy may have put a bullet in the gun while you weren't looking.   So you check it again. "

That explains it a hell of a lot better !

Thanks !



Terry

[Hawkmoon]

This is exactly why I teach my daughters that *EVERY* time you pick up the gun, even if you just checked it a minute ago, if the chamber is closed, you check it again.  My oldest is 7, so I joked with her about the "Magic Bullet Fairies". That "if you put the gun down, with the action closed, and turn your back, the Magic Bullet Fairy may have put a bullet in the gun while you weren't looking.   So you check it again. " 

That's almost verbatim what I teach students in my NRA classes, but I call them "the elves," rather than Magic Bullet Fairies.

It's a bit anal but, if it saves one cinematographer ...

There seems to be an argument raging over whether Baldwin should have checked the gun when it was handed to him. Multiple Hollywood prop masters and armorers have been interviewed on YouTube and, surprise, surprise, their explanations of industry "standard" protocols don't agree. Supposedly the Screen Actors Guild has standards written into their collective bargaining agreement, but nobody has yet (as far as I've seen) published the actual language.

[MechAg94]

I don't understand anyone saying Baldwin bear zeros responsibility.  I can see saying he shouldn't get a murder charge since he apparently did not do it intentionally, but manslaughter or some lesser charge is certainly a possibility since he is the one who held the gun and pointed it at the deceased.  That is why I think the actor should take some responsibility for gun safety on the set.  They are the ones holding the gun and and pulling the trigger.  Blind trust in some "expert" is a recipe for more injuries. 

The parallel is if someone is hanging out at a friends house and a person hands them a gun saying "don't worry, it isn't loaded", what will happen if that person points the gun at someone and fired off a shot? 

Preaching to the choir here I guess.  I like the "magic bullet fairies" idea. 

[Ben]

You know, I was thinking - celebrities are always screaming about "No one should be able to own a gun without rigorous firearms training."

Maybe what Hollywood needs to do is to require that any actor who needs a prop gun in a role, even just a background actor in a Western walking by with a holstered .45, is required to take a minimum 24 hour certification course, class + range time, from a reputable training organization. No training cert, no roles involving firearms. You know, kinda like the, "You need a license to drive a car" argument that liberals make.

Heck, if nothing else, it might educate some of these knuckleheads about firearms, so we can eliminate some of the chainsaw AR crap.

I'd be interested to know how Keanu Reeves and Halle Berry handle firearms on set after the training they had for the Wick movies.

[fifth_column]

I am having a great deal of difficulty wrapping my head around the fact on some of the "gun" forums, there are actually people who are defending Baldwin, and arguing that he bears zero responsibility for the woman's death.

Probably shills hired by his publicity team.

[griz]

That's a pretty good idea.  Maybe make them get a carry permit before even handling any real gun.  Training, fingerprints, background check, the whole process.  As Hawkmoon said, "if it saves just one cinematographer".

[MechAg94]

I saw a parody today that had this video then switched over to Baldwin saying he wasn't responsible.  It was played on someone's livestream and I couldn't see who had it. 

I Take Responsibility
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhbydhzQUzU

[AZRedhawk44]

You know, I was thinking - celebrities are always screaming about "No one should be able to own a gun without rigorous firearms training."

Maybe what Hollywood needs to do is to require that any actor who needs a prop gun in a role, even just a background actor in a Western walking by with a holstered .45, is required to take a minimum 24 hour certification course, class + range time, from a reputable training organization. No training cert, no roles involving firearms. You know, kinda like the, "You need a license to drive a car" argument that liberals make.

Heck, if nothing else, it might educate some of these knuckleheads about firearms, so we can eliminate some of the chainsaw AR crap.

I'd be interested to know how Keanu Reeves and Halle Berry handle firearms on set after the training they had for the Wick movies.

I'm still awaiting someone to explain why the extra speshul magic of being a bone-afied genyou-ine hollywood actor absolves you of what happens when you point at gun at something and pull the trigger.

I understand that the act of filming a fictional/dramatic story requires the suspension of conventions like assault with a deadly weapon.  Pointing a weapon at another actor or towards the camera is a requisite for the scene.  Even discharging blanks in the general direction of peers.

If it were a wax round, or a fragment off a blank's crimp, that'd be one thing.  It's still negligent homicide, but it's not a real round.  I don't think I can fault an actor for a plugged barrel and a wax lump discharged by a blank.  That's a bad weapons master, not a bad actor. 

A live round though, is dumbshit gun safety 101.

And it seems to me if you're going to make BIG MONEY filming hollywood shoot-em-ups, you need to PERSONALLY be better than dumbshit gun safety 101.  You, the dumbshit with the Colt SAA in your hands and stetson on your head, probably the single easiest firearm to check for safety out there, other than a single-shot breechloading long gun.