ADVERTISEMENT

Alec Baldwin fired prop gun that killed woman on film set of Rust

Do we know all the facts yet? Marvin said Baldwin was in a shot where he was to shoot at the camera. I'm not saying that is true either, because I'm not sure they have released all the details. If you have some insider info that you are privy to and can share, have at it. If what Marvin says is the case, he knew exactly where it was pointed.
Again, I'm not a gun expert, or a legal expert, or a gun law expert, but I think we are all on the same level of knowledge of the details of this situation. We are all equally ignorant.
We know Baldwin pulled the trigger. Where the gun was pointed was his responsibility. He was not only the actor, he was the producer. He was the boss.

I doubt he should face criminal charges, but that depends on the investigation. Smugly saying we need to know more before commenting is a cop out. Baldwin fired the gun, that is undisputed. That carries responsibility only applicable to him.
 
Do we know all the facts yet? Marvin said Baldwin was in a shot where he was to shoot at the camera. I'm not saying that is true either, because I'm not sure they have released all the details. If you have some insider info that you are privy to and can share, have at it. If what Marvin says is the case, he knew exactly where it was pointed.
Again, I'm not a gun expert, or a legal expert, or a gun law expert, but I think we are all on the same level of knowledge of the details of this situation. We are all equally ignorant.
Here is the quote from USAToday:

According to a Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office affidavit released Sunday, "Rust" star Alec Baldwin, sitting in a church pew, was rehearsing drawing his weapon "and pointing his revolver towards the camera lens" during the church-setting rehearsal.​

According to that article, multiple people handled the gun and the armorer or propmaster may not have checked the gun again. They should have been checked again. In fact, no one should handle a gun on set unless it is specific to their job. I get it, these are real historic weapons. The desire would be there to handle it and maybe even fire it.
 
Hell, I thought he played the best Jack Ryan.

Yes, to get back to the important point of this thread, he WAS the best Jack Ryan. Ryan was an analyst, not an action hero. Baldwin was the perfect Ryan. Harrison Ford was too old and everyone else was rubbish.

As far as him capping people on the set, well I'm not really a Baldwin fan as he's a bit of an asshole but I'm having a tough time blaming him personally. ****-ups were made and prices will be paid. I'm not sure he's the biggest offender here though.
 
We know Baldwin pulled the trigger. Where the gun was pointed was his responsibility. He was not only the actor, he was the producer. He was the boss.

I doubt he should face criminal charges, but that depends on the investigation. Smugly saying we need to know more before commenting is a cop out. Baldwin fired the gun, that is undisputed. That carries responsibility only applicable to him.
1st paragraph: I have said that if he is the boss, he should be in trouble in that capacity, and his company should be fined into oblivion.
2nd paragraph: Your sentence on not needing to know more seems pretty strange for a serious lawyer, unless you have taken on the mantle of attorney for the victim, and if that is the case, we already know what you consider Baldwin's real crime to be, and it has nothing to do with "Rust".
 
Not a week old and much misinfo already.

Was Baldwin just an actor? Director? Producer? Combo?

Was it during filming? Rehearsal?

Was there a strike? Or did employees quit and get replaced?

Was it an accidental or intentional live round?

Another week and there will be a Trump connection.

Karma works in mysterious ways. Rubin 1:3-4.
 
Yes, to get back to the important point of this thread, he WAS the best Jack Ryan. Ryan was an analyst, not an action hero. Baldwin was the perfect Ryan. Harrison Ford was too old and everyone else was rubbish.

As far as him capping people on the set, well I'm not really a Baldwin fan as he's a bit of an asshole but I'm having a tough time blaming him personally. ****-ups were made and prices will be paid. I'm not sure he's the biggest offender here though.
My Jack Ryan opinion was based on not reading any of the books, and I think he was pretty much overshadowed by all the other characters in the movie.
 
Not a week old and much misinfo already.

Was Baldwin just an actor? Director? Producer? Combo?

Was it during filming? Rehearsal?

Was there a strike? Or did employees quit and get replaced?

Was it an accidental or intentional live round?

Another week and there will be a Trump connection.

Karma works in mysterious ways. Rubin 1:3-4.
COH's official legal stance is that we don't need to worry about info or misinfo.
 
I guess I should no longer be surprised, but there are now absurd stories going around Twitterverse and Facebookstan that Halyna Hutchins' next project was a documentary on Hollywood pedophile rings. And the story is from a website that literally allows people to create fake news stories. Says so right at the bottom of the page.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: hookyIU1990
You just answered my question about 10 seconds before I asked Marvin.
Interesting if true.
Disregard that. It was someone's opinion and not necessarily the protocol. In reading Baldwin's own comments, he was apparently shown how to check to make sure the gun was safe. That was outside the filming area though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spartans9312
Solid analysis, MTIOF. Person with the duty and authority to make sure the gun is safe is the armorist and that really is their only duty.
Ultimately/legally & otherwise, the person who is responsible to KNOW/CONFIRM the gun is loaded or unloaded, is the SHOOTER/person who points it & pulls the trigger.

Btw, Baldwin was practicing his quick draw when the fatal shot was fired. He NEVER should have been practicing it & pointing it in any person's general direction, loaded or not. He screwed up big time.

The person in charge of that gun 'on set', & person who told Alec it was a 'cold gun' are somewhat responsible, legally & otherwise, BUT, ultimately the one who pointed it at her & pulled the trigger is the most guilty.

I had a similar incident happen to me when I was about 15, & went hunting with a friend of mine. I let him borrow one of my .22 cal. semiautomatic rifles. After hunting, he took the rifle inside his home, & for some insane reason pulled the trigger. A round went off in the house, & his mom tried to blame me for her son firing a loaded gun in their home, & not knowing/caring to check to confirm if it was loaded before he pulled the trigger. I never hunted with him again.

A gun is a tool. If you shoot a nail gun at someone, it can kill them as well. A screwdriver is a tool as well. If you drop it from 40' above someone's head, & it hits them, yes it can kill them.

'Never point a (loaded or unloaded) firearm at another person, unless you intend to pull the trigger'

:O



Guns don't kill people

People kill people, & sometimes ignorant/careless people kill people
 
As I understand it, no. The armorer doesn't want the actor to mess with what they have set up.
Baldwin was practicing his quick draw when the fatal shot was fired

Alec Baldwin fired prop gun that killed woman on film set of Rust, authorities say

Cinematographer Halyna Hutchins airlifted to hospital, where she died, while director Joel Souza also injured
Common sense dictates, any time you come in to contact with a firearm, AND PLAN ON PULLING THE TRIGGER, you ALWAYS CHECK/DOUBLE CHECK to make SURE the weapon is loaded or unloaded, & NEVER take only another person's word for the loading status of that firearm.

Sounds like nobody on that set knew any common sense practices when coming into contact with a potentially loaded weapon/firearm.

Bottom line, if you plan on pulling that trigger, YOU PERSONALLY check to make SURE the gun is loaded or unloaded, including 'one in the chamber'. Baldwin did NONE of this, & now he'll pay a heavy price for it., as he should.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iuwclurker
I read this morning that having the actor check the gun violates protocol and causes the whole process to start again. I'll try to find it and link it. I was dumbfounded when I read that though.
That makes sense. Anyone opening the chamber, such as the actor, would provide an opportunity to alter the secured setup.

If true, Bottom line, if you plan on pulling that trigger, YOU ABSOLUTELY CANNOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, PERSONALLY check to make SURE the gun is loaded or unloaded.

Is that so very hard to understand?
 
Baldwin was practicing his quick draw when the fatal shot was fired

Common sense dictates, any time you come in to contact with a firearm, AND PLAN ON PULLING THE TRIGGER, you ALWAYS CHECK/DOUBLE CHECK to make SURE the weapon is loaded or unloaded, & NEVER take only another person's word for the loading status of that firearm.

Sounds like nobody on that set knew any common sense practices when coming into contact with a potentially loaded weapon/firearm.

Bottom line, if you plan on pulling that trigger, YOU PERSONALLY check to make SURE the gun is loaded or unloaded, including 'one in the chamber'. Baldwin did NONE of this, & now he'll pay a heavy price for it., as he should.
Wrong.

You guys act like this was a hunting trip.

IT WAS A MOVIE SET.

They have a person - maybe a TEAM - in charge of firearms - and LOTS of rules about handling guns ON A MOVIE SET - precisely so you DONT have to rely on some fool actor or actress to tell if a round is a blank or a live round.

You think Baldwin could tell a blank from a live round just by looking at it? Not unless it was painted orange.

The problem wasn’t Baldwin mistakenly pointing and firing a live round. The problem was that there were live rounds anywhere near that set.

I bet we will learn that EITHER (1) some employee at the ammo factory or ammo store stuck a live round in the wrong package, (and they will investigate if it was intentional or an accident), or (2) movie folks sat around a fire in the New Mexico desert drinking and drugging and shooting and howling at the moon, and just forgot to keep the real bullets separate from the fakes.

But NOBODY is gonna depend on some Hollywood bimbette or bimbob from a casting couch to decide if or when to shoot a gun on a movie set.
 
You think Baldwin could tell a blank from a live round just by looking at it? Not unless it was painted orange.
I agree with most of that, but I'll take issue with this part of the statement. It's pretty darn obvious which is which.

.45 Long Colt blanks
gV5geGl.jpg


.45 Long Colt ammo
5M2FIsh.jpg



There were multiple people that are supposed to check prior to it being declared a cold gun that would be able to tell the difference too.
 
I agree with most of that, but I'll take issue with this part of the statement. It's pretty darn obvious which is which.

.45 Long Colt blanks
gV5geGl.jpg


.45 Long Colt ammo
5M2FIsh.jpg



There were multiple people that are supposed to check prior to it being declared a cold gun that would be able to tell the difference too.
Yes, but Baldwin was still not the fail-safe point - for good reasons.

You can tell a labeled internet photo blank, but can Alex Baldwin?

They tell actors where to stand, how to move, what to say, and how to look.

Or in another context, would you trust Britney Spears to be the bimbette in charge of the final bullet check?
 
Yes, but Baldwin was still not the fail-safe point - for good reasons.

You can tell a labeled internet photo blank, but can Alex Baldwin?

They tell actors where to stand, how to move, what to say, and how to look.

Or in another context, would you trust Britney Spears to be the bimbette in charge of the final bullet check?

"bimbette" is unnecessary, but agree for the most part. I don't know enough to know Alec Baldwin's familiarity with ammunition, but the armorist is specifically there to insure the safety of any weapons used on set. That's a massive part of their job.

I'm sure more details will come out about how this awful tragedy occurred, but it sounds like there were lots of problems on that set.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Marvin the Martian
I agree with most of that, but I'll take issue with this part of the statement. It's pretty darn obvious which is which.

.45 Long Colt blanks
gV5geGl.jpg


.45 Long Colt ammo
5M2FIsh.jpg



There were multiple people that are supposed to check prior to it being declared a cold gun that would be able to tell the difference too.

It may just be an attempt by studio people to point out how much safer their films are than independent films, but it sure seems a lot of people have spoken about the rules that weren't followed. Since he was just showing them what he was going to do, I'm not sure it was even a rehearsal. It sounds more like they are blocking the scene. I don't know why any round, live or blank, would be in the gun at that point. So yes, even Baldwin should have known it was a problem. But I am sure he trusted the people who worked for the movie since this is what their expertise is. But I think when the gun is handed to an actor both the actor and the director/armorer/prop master should do a joint check. That should be protocol.

The Mythbuster seemingly handled their guns well (handling a canon was a different story). If a low-budget cable TV show can follow guidelines I don't get why movies can't.
 
It may just be an attempt by studio people to point out how much safer their films are than independent films, but it sure seems a lot of people have spoken about the rules that weren't followed. Since he was just showing them what he was going to do, I'm not sure it was even a rehearsal. It sounds more like they are blocking the scene. I don't know why any round, live or blank, would be in the gun at that point. So yes, even Baldwin should have known it was a problem. But I am sure he trusted the people who worked for the movie since this is what their expertise is. But I think when the gun is handed to an actor both the actor and the director/armorer/prop master should do a joint check. That should be protocol.

The Mythbuster seemingly handled their guns well (handling a canon was a different story). If a low-budget cable TV show can follow guidelines I don't get why movies can't.

Most movies do. There are hundreds of movies made each year and a large portion of them have guns in scenes. There have been thousands of movies with guns in them, many of them having scores of guns utilized.

Why would you have the director do a joint safety check? They don't take part in a joint safety check for any of the many other extraordinarily dangerous activities that occur on a film set. Why would a director be a good person to have take part in this safety check?
 
It may just be an attempt by studio people to point out how much safer their films are than independent films, but it sure seems a lot of people have spoken about the rules that weren't followed. Since he was just showing them what he was going to do, I'm not sure it was even a rehearsal. It sounds more like they are blocking the scene. I don't know why any round, live or blank, would be in the gun at that point. So yes, even Baldwin should have known it was a problem. But I am sure he trusted the people who worked for the movie since this is what their expertise is. But I think when the gun is handed to an actor both the actor and the director/armorer/prop master should do a joint check. That should be protocol.

The Mythbuster seemingly handled their guns well (handling a canon was a different story). If a low-budget cable TV show can follow guidelines I don't get why movies can't.
I loved Mythbusters!

Remember the one where the remote controlled car crashed through a vegetable cart, then flew over the background hill onto an active road? I think that was their biggest mistake.

They went a LONG way with that show. Thier first show, the Air Force literally hung up on them when they called to see where/how to get a JATO rocket! (They were testing how a gut hit a telephone poll halfway up. They also ran a car across the salt flats. Later budgets, they just blew stuff up for fun.)
 
Yes, but Baldwin was still not the fail-safe point - for good reasons.
Agreed, that's why I said there were other people who were responsible that would be able to tell the difference.
You can tell a labeled internet photo blank, but can Alex Baldwin?
Good grief, I'd hope so. It's not that hard and there's an obvious difference. If he can't. then everyone should take anything he says with a grain of salt.
They tell actors where to stand, how to move, what to say, and how to look.
And in his own words they showed him how to check to see if the pistol was safe when they initially had him pick one out for the movie.
Or in another context, would you trust Britney Spears to be the bimbette in charge of the final bullet check?
Who is the "bimbette Britney" in this scenario - Baldwin, Souza the assistant director, or the woman who was the armorer?
 
Most movies do. There are hundreds of movies made each year and a large portion of them have guns in scenes. There have been thousands of movies with guns in them, many of them having scores of guns utilized.

Why would you have the director do a joint safety check? They don't take part in a joint safety check for any of the many other extraordinarily dangerous activities that occur on a film set. Why would a director be a good person to have take part in this safety check?
I was thinking assistant director, since that is who handed the gun to Baldwin. Whomever hands the gun to the actor takes part in the final check. In theory that should be the prop person but it seems the union walked out on this so they weren't around.
 
2nd paragraph: Your sentence on not needing to know more seems pretty strange for a serious lawyer, unless you have taken on the mantle of attorney for the victim, and if that is the case, we already know what you consider Baldwin's real crime to be, and it has nothing to do with "Rust".
I guess you missed where I said criminal charges must wait for the investigation. My comments so far are based on undisputed facts. I have no clue about the “real crime” you mentioned. I think in your haste to always criticize me you have lost your marbles, or maybe you are spending too much time in Mark’s trailer park. That needs further investigation.
 
I was thinking assistant director, since that is who handed the gun to Baldwin. Whomever hands the gun to the actor takes part in the final check. In theory that should be the prop person but it seems the union walked out on this so they weren't around.

Ah...got it. AD sounds like they are in line with the director, but really they are a logistics position while the director is mostly creative. I don't like AD's being in the chain either other than as someone who is handling schedule and ensuring protocols are being followed. Don't even like the prop master being in the chain even though the armorist works in the prop department. IMHO, guns should be passed directly from an armorist and if there are a lot of guns, there should be multiple armorists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marvin the Martian
Ah...got it. AD sounds like they are in line with the director, but really they are a logistics position while the director is mostly creative. I don't like AD's being in the chain either other than as someone who is handling schedule and ensuring protocols are being followed. Don't even like the prop master being in the chain even though the armorist works in the prop department. IMHO, guns should be passed directly from an armorist and if there are a lot of guns, there should be multiple armorists.
So a set like this could have one armorist whose sole responsibility is to ensure the safety of the gun and be the person who hands the gun to the actor? One person; one job?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoosboot
Ah...got it. AD sounds like they are in line with the director, but really they are a logistics position while the director is mostly creative. I don't like AD's being in the chain either other than as someone who is handling schedule and ensuring protocols are being followed. Don't even like the prop master being in the chain even though the armorist works in the prop department. IMHO, guns should be passed directly from an armorist and if there are a lot of guns, there should be multiple armorists.
One of the things I read, and quoted somewhere here, was from an armorist that rules with a tight fist. He was the one cutting a scene because he saw dirt in the gun. That is what is needed, so I like your point. In this case I am not even sure their person was on set, or why else did the AD hand it over?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoosboot
Agreed, that's why I said there were other people who were responsible that would be able to tell the difference.

Good grief, I'd hope so. It's not that hard and there's an obvious difference. If he can't. then everyone should take anything he says with a grain of salt.

And in his own words they showed him how to check to see if the pistol was safe when they initially had him pick one out for the movie.

Who is the "bimbette Britney" in this scenario - Baldwin, Souza the assistant director, or the woman who was the armorer?
Until this thread, I was not familiar with the title “armorer”, but there is ONE person responsible for making CERTAIN live rounds aren’t in guns on movie sets. ITS NOT A JOB FOR A COMMITTEE. Whoever that was is what us lawyers call “the proximate cause“ of this accident.

But truthfully, because I’m a cynic by nature and my football team took a 54-7 ass whipping Saturday, I thinks there is a good chance that bullet was put there intentionally. Either a dumbass thought it would be cute and that nothing bad would happen, or a mad employee who wanted to “show those bastards” or someone at the ammo factory or ammo store.

But the proximate cause was the person responsible for the final loading, final check and final handing of a “safe“ gun to the actor.
 
Until this thread, I was not familiar with the title “armorer”, but there is ONE person responsible for making CERTAIN live rounds aren’t in guns on movie sets. ITS NOT A JOB FOR A COMMITTEE. Whoever that was is what us lawyers call “the proximate cause“ of this accident.

But truthfully, because I’m a cynic by nature and my football team took a 54-7 ass whipping Saturday, I thinks there is a good chance that bullet was put there intentionally. Either a dumbass thought it would be cute and that nothing bad would happen, or a mad employee who wanted to “show those bastards” or someone at the ammo factory or ammo store.

But the proximate cause was the person responsible for the final loading, final check and final handing of a “safe“ gun to the actor.
I know. Something seems funny
 
But truthfully, because I’m a cynic by nature and my football team took a 54-7 ass whipping Saturday, I thinks there is a good chance that bullet was put there intentionally. Either a dumbass thought it would be cute and that nothing bad would happen, or a mad employee who wanted to “show those bastards” or someone at the ammo factory or ammo store.
I was wondering about that with regards to the labor issues prior to my team also taking a 54-7 beatdown. After the ass whipping, I'm still left wondering if it wasn't intentional to prove some sort of point about "scab" labor with the expected result being non-fatal.
 
I loved Mythbusters!

Remember the one where the remote controlled car crashed through a vegetable cart, then flew over the background hill onto an active road? I think that was their biggest mistake.

They went a LONG way with that show. Thier first show, the Air Force literally hung up on them when they called to see where/how to get a JATO rocket! (They were testing how a gut hit a telephone poll halfway up. They also ran a car across the salt flats. Later budgets, they just blew stuff up for fun.)
Obligatory. 1995 Darwin Award winner.

Awesome even if it may not be true. Or is it?

 
  • Wow
Reactions: hookyIU1990
We know Baldwin pulled the trigger. Where the gun was pointed was his responsibility. He was not only the actor, he was the producer. He was the boss.

I doubt he should face criminal charges, but that depends on the investigation. Smugly saying we need to know more before commenting is a cop out. Baldwin fired the gun, that is undisputed. That carries responsibility only applicable to him.
If the scene calls for him pointing the gun at a camera or another person, how is Baldwin at fault? I don't get it.
 
If the scene calls for him pointing the gun at a camera or another person, how is Baldwin at fault? I don't get it.
‘Fault” is a squishy word here. NRA safety rules say never point a weapon and pull the trigger at at something you don’t want to shoot—even if you believe the gun to be empty. If the director said otherwise, then changes need to be addressed. There should have been no problem with using a non-shooting replica that would discharge smoke.
 
Agreed, that's why I said there were other people who were responsible that would be able to tell the difference.

Good grief, I'd hope so. It's not that hard and there's an obvious difference. If he can't. then everyone should take anything he says with a grain of salt.

And in his own words they showed him how to check to see if the pistol was safe when they initially had him pick one out for the movie.

Who is the "bimbette Britney" in this scenario - Baldwin, Souza the assistant director, or the woman who was the armorer?
Some blanks look like the photo you linked where the brass cartridge is crimped to almost a point. Other blanks are just a brass cartridge that's barely crimped, flat faced with cork, cotton, rubber or some other material to keep the powder in.

mvc-016s.jpg_thumbnail0229.jpg


20210328063426-4523.jpg
GE50-9MM_1024x1024.jpg

I wonder if a newbie armorer who had reservations about being ready to take that step would know the difference between those types of blank rounds and say wadcutter rounds, which look fairly similar?

wadcutter.jpg
 
I was wondering about that with regards to the labor issues prior to my team also taking a 54-7 beatdown. After the ass whipping, I'm still left wondering if it wasn't intentional to prove some sort of point about "scab" labor with the expected result being non-fatal.
Remember the big hotel fire in Puerto Rico that killed almost 100?

It was set by Teamsters as they left the hotel after voting to strike.

Emotional people make poor reactive decisions.
 
‘Fault” is a squishy word here. NRA safety rules say never point a weapon and pull the trigger at at something you don’t want to shoot—even if you believe the gun to be empty. If the director said otherwise, then changes need to be addressed. There should have been no problem with using a non-shooting replica that would discharge smoke.
Well, your last point is what I've been questioning from the beginning: why is Hollywood using guns that can shoot deadly projectiles at all? In the past I know they've used rubber or wooden ones.

But the actors are not the experts on this subject. It sounds like a job for the armorer as to what can and can't be used and the safety protocols surrounding it. Other than political animus, I don't get why people want to blame Baldwin right now. Of course, if this was some second-rate actor, we wouldn't even be talking about this.
 
Remember the big hotel fire in Puerto Rico that killed almost 100?

It was set by Teamsters as they left the hotel after voting to strike.

Emotional people make poor reactive decisions.
Both Hoffa's kids went to law school. I didn't realize Jr is the head of the Teamsters. He went to Michigan Law. His daughter was a judge in Saint Louis for years.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT