Stand behind Alec Baldwin…

[CTS Tactical]

if your wife was an actress and the set armorer handed her a weapon... She fires, co-star dies.... Are you calling for your wife to be locked up? Please, save the bs stories about how your wife would know better and all that horse shyt... just a yes or no will suffice.

And along with @Bear44 , I can't believe I'm having to defend the douche bag either.

Your cars brakes go out because the certified ASE mechanic was drunk on the job and caused your brake problem.. you plow over some kids crossing the street... Are you turning yourself in for vehicular homicide?

I am not trying to give you or anyone else a hard time but in my opinion, anyone who believes Baldwin has no culpability in this death is mistaken. Baldwin has been making movies for decades and many of them included handling firearms. They have safety training sessions regularly or at least they are supposed to. There was absolutely no reason for him to be pointing the gun at another person to begin with in this case. From what I understand he was practicing his draw and fire. Cameras were not rolling, no reason for him to point it at anyone just to practice draw and fire. The fact he pointed it at someone is negligent in itself. I am not married but if I was, my wife has nothing to do with anything being discussed here. Make up all the possible scenarios you want and that doesn't change the facts of what happened.

 

[CTS Tactical]

A firearm that can fire blanks - which you ALSO shouldn't fire at people - is a firearm that is capable of firing a live round.

Why would you have live rounds on a film set? Good question. However, people at the production site WERE out plinking with firearms when filming wasn't going on. That too was probably not a good idea either. That whole production was run like the wild west. No prudent person (least of all the owners of the production company) would have dismissed that as not being a risk factor.

The blanks we fired in the military required the barrels to be plugged in order to cycle the action. Why is that not a requirement in the film industry? I know there is no action to cycle but a plugged barrel or mostly plugged will still fire a blank and make a bang. No reason to have guns on the set that are capable of firing a live round to begin with that I can see.

 

[BHPSteel]

The blanks we fired in the military required the barrels to be plugged in order to cycle the action. Why is that not a requirement in the film industry? I know there is no action to cycle but a plugged barrel or mostly plugged will still fire a blank and make a bang. No reason to have guns on the set that are capable of firing a live round to begin with that I can see.

It's a fair point. When this all happened, I wondered the same thing, and I went and did some research and as I remember it, some sets do use partially plugged barrels. There's still wadding and other material ejected when a round is fired, so I can understand why you wouldn't want to start out with a fully plugged barrel. Indeed, there's little need nowadays for having any functioning firearm on a set, given post-production CGI. But making that believable (and acceptable to knowledgable audiences, like us) is expensive to do well. Which brings me to another point.

I don't want to make presumptions about the Rust set, but it does look as though many many corners were cut with respect to budget, and seemingly to safety, up to and including actors not attending mandatory safety briefings, and people plinking on the set with live rounds, so not wanting to spend "extra" money on non-standard firearms seems to me to be par for the course.

The negligence I refer to in earlier postings relates not only to the acting talent on the set.

 

[CTS Tactical]

It's a fair point. When this all happened, I wondered the same thing, and I went and did some research and as I remember it, some sets do use partially plugged barrels. There's still wadding and other material ejected when a round is fired, so I can understand why you wouldn't want to start out with a fully plugged barrel. Indeed, there's little need nowadays for having any functioning firearm on a set, given post-production CGI. But making that believable (and acceptable to knowledgable audiences, like us) is expensive to do well. Which brings me to another point.

I don't want to make presumptions about the Rust set, but it does look as though many many corners were cut with respect to budget, and seemingly to safety, up to and including actors not attending mandatory safety briefings, and people plinking on the set with live rounds, so not wanting to spend "extra" money on non-standard firearms seems to me to be par for the course.

The negligence I refer to in earlier postings relates not only to the acting talent on the set.

If I remember correctly, three people walked off the set either earlier that day or the day before citing safety concerns as their reason.

 

[Asbestos]

I am not trying to give you or anyone else a hard time but in my opinion, anyone who believes Baldwin has no culpability in this death is mistaken. Baldwin has been making movies for decades and many of them included handling firearms. They have safety training sessions regularly or at least they are supposed to. There was absolutely no reason for him to be pointing the gun at another person to begin with in this case. From what I understand he was practicing his draw and fire. Cameras were not rolling, no reason for him to point it at anyone just to practice draw and fire. The fact he pointed it at someone is negligent in itself. I am not married but if I was, my wife has nothing to do with anything being discussed here. Make up all the possible scenarios you want and that doesn't change the facts of what happened.

I basically agree with everything you said with the exception of who should be charged. He's the talent (and I use that term loosely). Charge the armorer and whoever loaded and handed him the gun.

Baldwins job is to do as he's told from the "experts" on set. I'm not saying he's not negligent in everything, but his job on that set wasn't to be the weapons expert... nor IS he a weapons expert. I seriously doubt he'd have any idea what a real bullet vs a blank looks like.

 

[lostchild]

If I remember correctly, three people walked of the set either earlier that day or the day before citing safety concerns as their reason.

Believe reports said most of crew was non-union. Much as I have come to dislike unions, you do get the training and skill set that you pay for.
Sounds like Baldwin was trying to cheap out on the whole movie, hired a bunch of poorly trained/qualified posers.

 

[Asbestos]

Believe reports said most of crew was non-union. Much as I have come to dislike unions, you do get the training and skill set that you pay for.
Sounds like Baldwin was trying to cheap out on the whole movie, hired a bunch of poorly trained/qualified posers.

Now, I can absolutely get behind this. If they can prove HE cut corners on production and sacrificed experienced armorers in favor of cheaper alternatives, charge the hell out of him.

 

[CTS Tactical]

Why Alec Baldwin was charged over 'Rust' shooting, according to Santa Fe district attorney

Here's why the New Mexico first judicial district attorney decided to file charges.

www.kcra.com

 

[Asbestos]

Why Alec Baldwin was charged over 'Rust' shooting, according to Santa Fe district attorney

Here's why the New Mexico first judicial district attorney decided to file charges.

www.kcra.com

ok, ok... good enough for me

 

[CTS Tactical]

ok, ok... good enough for me

As much as I would love to see it, I don't think Baldwin deserves any lengthy sentence over this but I do think he should be charged and fined very heavily if found guilty.