Alec Baldwin 'discharged' prop gun that left cinematographer dead and director hospitalized on 'Rust' movie set

[FloatingFatMan]

On 26/10/2021 at 21:09, xrobwx71 said:

Which is.....Alec Baldwin

From a corporate standpoint sure, but ultimately, the core responsibility lies with whoever put live rounds into that gun.

[DocM]

On 26/10/2021 at 23:04, FloatingFatMan said:

From a corporate standpoint sure, but ultimately, the core responsibility lies with whoever put live rounds into that gun.

 

Not just the inexperienced armorer but those who had control over the safety culture after the primaries walked out over safety issues; the Executive Producer and Director.

 

This case reminds me of the 2014 film Midnight Rider: The Gregg Allman Story, filmed in Wayne County, Georgia.

 

Cinematographers were ordered to film from a narrow train trestle over the Altamaha River. Mid-shot a train appears and they had <60 seconds to clear the tracks. One  woman died, and several others were injured - one seriously. Film production was cancelled.

 

Producer Jody Savin & Producer/Director Randall Miller didn't have permission to film on the trestle and were convicted of involuntary manslaughter.  

 

In short, they created an unsafe environment by explicit action. Baldwin as EP and his (injured) Director did it by negligence. Both explicit actions and negligence resulting in injuries or death  can be, and often are, charged as criminal acts. 

 

Ex:  drunk drivers who cause an accident can be charged, but also the bartenders who over-serve them under "Dram Shop" laws.

 

https://www.alcohol.org/laws/over-serving/

Edited October 27, 2021 by DocM

[tmorris1]

On 26/10/2021 at 13:42, warwagon said:

And how many hands held the gun before Alex? None of them checked either.

They probably have some responsibility, but they didn't point it and pull the trigger.  If I hand my friend a gun at the range and he shoots the guy next to us, it isn't my fault.

[Dick Montage]

On 26/10/2021 at 22:48, DocM said:

He's the Executive Producer. 

They may also be a name attached for marketing purposes and perform none of the above functions.

[tmorris1]

On 26/10/2021 at 15:55, primortal said:

A live round should have never been loaded into a gun in the first place if actual filming wasn't taking place.  The question is how many actors that use guns in movies actually "check" the gun beforehand.

You are right, A live round should never have been anywhere near that set much less a gun capable of firing a bullet.

 

As for the second question, I'm sure they all do... They must do everything right since they always feel the need to tell everyone else how to live there lives and how to think.  Do you think Late Night TV will joke about this like they did weh Dick Cheney accidently shot someone?

[xrobwx71]

On 26/10/2021 at 22:04, FloatingFatMan said:

From a corporate standpoint sure, but ultimately, the core responsibility lies with whoever put live rounds into that gun.

The core responsibility is who has a gun in their hand. Regardless of who did what or who said what. As a gun owner, builder, and practice range user, the buck stops with the posseser of the gun.

 

Gun rules are very simple, no matter where you are, a movie set, back alley, gun range. You never point a firearm, loaded, unloaded, live rounds, blanks, at anything unless your intent is to destroy said thing. 

 

When you have a gun in your hand, you never assume, you follow the rules, no one gets hurt.

[FloatingFatMan]

On 27/10/2021 at 12:37, xrobwx71 said:

The core responsibility is who has a gun in their hand. Regardless of who did what or who said what. As a gun owner, builder, and practice range user, the buck stops with the posseser of the gun.

 

Gun rules are very simple, no matter where you are, a movie set, back alley, gun range. You never point a firearm, loaded, unloaded, live rounds, blanks, at anything unless your intent is to destroy said thing. 

 

When you have a gun in your hand, you never assume, you follow the rules, no one gets hurt.

As I understand it, Baldwin is anti-gun, yes?  Whilst it doesn't excuse him in the slightest, I feel I should ask, does he KNOW those rules if he doesn't handle guns?  Perhaps he relied on the armourer who manages the guns on set to tell him what to do etc...?

 

[+primortal Subscriber²]

On 26/10/2021 at 17:48, DocM said:

He's the Executive Producer. 

 

Def: In films, executive producers may finance the film, participate in the creative effort, or work on set. Their responsibilities vary from funding or attracting investors into the movie project to legal, scripting, marketing, advisory and supervising capacities.

Not per IMDB, https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11001074/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_cl_sm and a whole slew of other articles I read that's he's just a producer like this one, https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2021-10-26/rust-alec-baldwin-producer-explained

[xrobwx71]

On 27/10/2021 at 07:06, FloatingFatMan said:

As I understand it, Baldwin is anti-gun, yes?  Whilst it doesn't excuse him in the slightest, I feel I should ask, does he KNOW those rules if he doesn't handle guns?  Perhaps he relied on the armourer who manages the guns on set to tell him what to do etc...?

 

You can spin this anyway you want. My statement will not change. Even small children know not to point a gun of any kind at anyone or thing. Nobodies buying the doe in the woods routine. 

 

I have no clue what movie set "rules" are but I do know gun rules intimatley. 

 

[DocM]

On 27/10/2021 at 09:18, primortal said:

Not per IMDB, https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11001074/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_cl_sm and a whole slew of other articles I read that's he's just a producer like this one, https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2021-10-26/rust-alec-baldwin-producer-explained

 

See how Baldwin is listed first? The lead production company is El Dorado Pictures.

 

https://variety.com/exec/alec-baldwin/

 

https://deadline.com/2020/05/alec-baldwin-rust-western-joel-souza-directing-1202946603/

 

Quote

 

Alec Baldwin To Produce & Star In ‘Rust’ Western With ‘Crown Vic’s Joel Souza Directing

>

 

 

Edited October 27, 2021 by DocM

[+primortal Subscriber²]

On 27/10/2021 at 11:56, DocM said:

See how Baldwin is listed first? The lead production company is El Dorado Pictures.

 

https://variety.com/exec/alec-baldwin/

 

 It lists him as an executive producer for the company.  Doesn't mean it's the same for the picture.

 

I'll stick with IMDB as "book of record" with this stuff

 

On 27/10/2021 at 11:56, DocM said:

https://deadline.com/2020/05/alec-baldwin-rust-western-joel-souza-directing-1202946603/

Quote

 

Alec Baldwin To Produce & Star In ‘Rust’ Western With ‘Crown Vic’s Joel Souza Directing

>

 

 

Nothing in the link states he's an executive producer just a producer.

 

Nevertheless, producer or executive producer I still doubt he has any dealings with the day-to-day minutia.

 

This all lays down on the person prepping the gun in the first place.  If there were clear policy that everyone that "touches" the guy must inspect it and verify that its "hot" or "cold" then I'm all for charging him and everyone else that touched the gun and didn't call out that it was "hot".

[DocM]

TV news conference

 

Santa Fe Sheriff;

Projectile & casing recovered: a live round. FBI analyzing. Other live rounds found. 500 rounds (blanks, live, dummy) on the set. Not commenting on how the live rounds  got there.

----------

DA:

Still investigating. If facts & law align, charges will be filed.

WRT Baldwin, "all options on the table"

----------

It'll be interesting to see if the bullet casing has fingerprints.

[FloatingFatMan]

On 27/10/2021 at 14:23, xrobwx71 said:

You can spin this anyway you want. My statement will not change. Even small children know not to point a gun of any kind at anyone or thing. Nobodies buying the doe in the woods routine. 

 

I have no clue what movie set "rules" are but I do know gun rules intimatley. 

 

I'm not spinning anything in any direction, I was asking a question.

[dead.cell]

On 27/10/2021 at 07:06, FloatingFatMan said:

As I understand it, Baldwin is anti-gun, yes?  Whilst it doesn't excuse him in the slightest, I feel I should ask, does he KNOW those rules if he doesn't handle guns?  Perhaps he relied on the armourer who manages the guns on set to tell him what to do etc...?

 

He shouldn't be messing with guns if he doesn't. At his age, there's absolutely no excuse for ignorance, which is why I mentioned my own personal experience learning gun safety with BB guns alone. I've got a few friends that are gun nuts, and even though they practice proper safety, I still don't like being around them, which is why my assumption would be if you're anti-gun, you're going to be extra cautious around guns.

 

It is a bit weird given the messaging by anti-gun folks is that they're weapons, not toys... yet to treat one as a toy at the same time. Just doesn't add up for me.

[FloatingFatMan]

On 27/10/2021 at 17:58, dead.cell said:

He shouldn't be messing with guns if he doesn't.

Absolutely.

 

On 27/10/2021 at 17:58, dead.cell said:

At his age, there's absolutely no excuse for ignorance, which is why I mentioned my own personal experience learning gun safety with BB guns alone.

Age has nothing to do with it.  If he's anti-gun and has no gun experience, why would he be expected to know proper gun protocol without guidance?

 

 

On 27/10/2021 at 17:58, dead.cell said:

I've got a few friends that are gun nuts, and even though they practice proper safety, I still don't like being around them, which is why my assumption would be if you're anti-gun, you're going to be extra cautious around guns.

I've seen plenty of people do stupid things with weapons because they just don't know how to handle them safely.  I'm not giving Baldwin a free pass here, I'm just pointing out it's possible he was ignorant of proper procedures and deferred to an expert who told him it was safe.

 

In the eyes of the law ignorance is not an excuse, so he'll get whatever the law demands, but that still doesn't mean he knew any better.

[techbeck]

On 27/10/2021 at 06:23, xrobwx71 said:

You can spin this anyway you want. My statement will not change. Even small children know not to point a gun of any kind at anyone or thing. 

 

I've seen grown adults point guns at people.  And kids are not knowledgeable about guns unless they grow up in hose hold with guns.  Regardless of what Baldwin may or may not know, there are people of all ages who are gun ignorant.   And there have been a lot of stories over the years about kids shooting other kids and adults shooting adults on accident. 

 

I grew up in a no-gun household. I was taught nothing of how to properly handle a gun until I got older and was legally allowed to get my own gun. Then I took a class. And I know a lot of people who grew up the same way.

Edited October 27, 2021 by techbeck

[tmorris1]

You can be anti-gun but how can you be anti-gun safety.  Even if you don't like guns everyone should know gun safety and how to properly handle one without getting hurt or hurting someone else.  You never know when you may come across one.  If this was taught to everyone there might be less accidents.

 

Baldwin is anti-gun unless he is using one to make money in his movies.  Then it is OK.  Regardless of what you think of the guy, the whole thing was preventable.  The more you hear about the situation it was one big set of mistakes from everyone involved.

[hagjohn]

There was no need to have bullets on the set. Nobody was going to shoot anything with real bullets, so why were they there? It all can be done in editing. I'm betting there will be more and more questions by actors and crew as to weapons being on set.

 

Wouldn't surprise me if it comes out that this was a set up targeted at Baldwin.

[xrobwx71]

On 27/10/2021 at 11:35, FloatingFatMan said:

I'm not spinning anything in any direction, I was asking a question.

Fair enough. Was my answer sufficient?

[xrobwx71]

On 27/10/2021 at 12:17, techbeck said:

I've seen grown adults point guns at people.  And kids are not knowledgeable about guns unless they grow up in hose hold with guns.  Regardless of what Baldwin may or may not know, there are people of all ages who are gun ignorant.   And there have been a lot of stories over the years about kids shooting other kids and adults shooting adults on accident. 

 

I grew up in a no-gun household. I was taught nothing of how to properly handle a gun until I got older and was legally allowed to get my own gun. Then I took a class. And I know a lot of people who grew up the same way.

So, you're telling me you, before you took the class, you didn't instinctually know not to point a gun at someone becasue your parents didn't teach it to you? Your first day in gun class, did you point a gun at someone and say Yuck yuck, I didn't know better?  

 

I have also seen adults that know better point guns at people. That's called a mistake/stupid/etc. Had the gun fired and killed someone, they would be at fault.  That doesn't negate the point. 

 

You don't have to be a trained to instictually know not to point a gun at someone.  

 

 

 

 

 

[DocM]

On 27/10/2021 at 13:16, FloatingFatMan said:

Absolutely.

 

Age has nothing to do with it.  If he's anti-gun and has no gun experience, why would he be expected to know proper gun protocol without guidance?

 

Because as an actor in action films where production was done correctly he'd have had firearm safety training in pre-production. There are companies in the US and CA that do this service for film and theater. No competent armorer & prop supervisor would stand for less. 

 

Also see Kirsty Alley's tweet below...

 

On 27/10/2021 at 13:16, FloatingFatMan said:

 

[...]I'm just pointing out it's possible he was ignorant of proper procedures 

 

 

Edited October 27, 2021 by DocM

[techbeck]

On 27/10/2021 at 12:48, xrobwx71 said:

So, you're telling me you, before you took the class, you didn't instinctually know not to point a gun at someone becasue your parents didn't teach it to you? Your first day in gun class, did you point a gun at someone and say Yuck yuck, I didn't know better?  

 

I have also seen adults that know better point guns at people. That's called a mistake/stupid/etc. Had the gun fired and killed someone, they would be at fault.  That doesn't negate the point. 

 

You don't have to be a trained to instictually know not to point a gun at someone. 

I was not allowed to hold/touch a gun growing up.  So thoughts about guns didnt really enter my mind much until I got older.    When I took my safety class, I remember thinking, well duh, when they talk about holding a gun.   But again, a thought I really never had so cannot say one way or another during that time.

 

Not everyone knows proper gun safety.  And yes, pointing a gun at someone and it goes off is their fault mistake or not.  But again, that was not what I was commenting on.   Believe it or not, there are people out there who think it is no big deal to point a gun at someone  if it is not loaded.   And not every kid is taught how to properly handle a weapon.   If so, there would be no accidents, kids killing other kids. and the defense of "I didn't know it was loaded" would be non existent.  Not everyone has common sense and should be handling a gun.  There are some truly ignorant people out there who should not be owning any kind of weapon.   I have also seen videos or people doing dumb with guns which does nothing to help the general IQ of the population unless the dumbass is taken out of it.

 

Anyway, a person firing the weapon is generally at fault.    And in a lot of cases where a kid gets a hold of a gun and someone dies, the owner of the gun...generally the parents...are held at fault.   Whether or not charges are filed is up to the state.

[Dick Montage]

On 27/10/2021 at 11:27, tmorris1 said:

Do you think Late Night TV will joke about this like they did weh Dick Cheney accidently shot someone?

Well the right-wing pundits have already started making jokes about it - so swings and roundabouts really!

[+mram Subscriber²]

On 27/10/2021 at 04:37, xrobwx71 said:

The core responsibility is who has a gun in their hand. Regardless of who did what or who said what. As a gun owner, builder, and practice range user, the buck stops with the posseser of the gun.

 

Gun rules are very simple, no matter where you are, a movie set, back alley, gun range. You never point a firearm, loaded, unloaded, live rounds, blanks, at anything unless your intent is to destroy said thing. 

 

When you have a gun in your hand, you never assume, you follow the rules, no one gets hurt.

Again, I beg to differ.  And every single action movie to date agrees with me.

Actors do not fall into the category of "responsible gun owners".  They are actors, fulfilling a role.   Gun rules you mentioned DO NOT APPLY on set, because John Smith, the actor does not really intend to kill Bob Jones, the bad guy, but they'll point the gun at them and go through the motions.  Because it's in the script.  So they automatically have broken one of those "rules".

 

Having said that, I hope that safety protocols increase as a result of this.

 

If I were to think this through, I'm definitely anti-guns.  I would rather there be stricter rules on-set rather than adopt the simple "don't point at whatever you don't want killed" ideal here, and have things be solved by clever camera angles and people not really firing at each other.  Because essentially the "dont point at what you dont want killed" idea actually and ironically lessens the care that we need to have around gun management.  If it truly were the responsibility of ACTORS to not aim at anything they don't want killed, then what's the point of blanks at all?  That's my rationale.  I would rather there be more oversight and more regulation than the idea that actors are somehow 100% responsible for anything handed to them.  Guns should always be treated as deadly, yes... but this is a slippery slope.

 

There is no reason for any live ammunition anywhere near a gun on an acting environment.  Zero.

 

I honestly think the real answer here is for some entrepeneur to make a fake-gun company that makes this impossible to happen and looks and acts almost like the real thing.  Who needs CGI.  Gets rid of guns entirely.

[+Warwagon MVC]

On 27/10/2021 at 18:22, Dick Montage said:

Well the right-wing pundits have already started making jokes about it - so swings and roundabouts really!

You mean like this?