Alec Baldwin shooting

[flathead#2]

Was he not the Director also?

 

[mtwarden]

Director and producer. I’m pretty sure that’s why they are going after him.

If he was nothing but an actor, they just might pass.

When you look at their safety protocols and see how they blatantly ignored many of them, you can see some culpability on whoever was in charge- Mr Baldwin.

 

[TheGDog]

Long Story Shorter, Mr Baldwin needs to be convicted of something as well... and here is why... For everybody else in the US... if a bullet... left a gun... that our trigger-fingers released... WE... would be legally responsible for any and all damage it causes because ultimately it was OUR decision to release that trigger.

In what Universe is it NOT the same for him?

Indeed the armorer should be charged with something as well, sure, since she should be responsible for educating Mr Baldwin on how to identify that the ammo the firearm is currently loaded with is indeed the "fake" stuff and thus LESS dangerous, and thus HE can make the decision that it is safe to proceed or not, since he, Mr finger-on-the-trigger-guy is ultimately whom the courts would throw the book at, if something failed along the way in terms of checking and re-checking to ensure what they wanted to do/perform was safe to do.

 

[IDVortex]

How is being ignorance of a firearms now a thing that's allowed?

I still believe he should be charged as-well. Ignorance isn't a excuse.

 

[huntineveryday]

I think this was the right outcome. She was directly responsible for the safety of all the actors on set. An actor is playing pretend with guns. Would Stallone be responsible if one of the 10k rounds fired in a Rambo movie killed someone? Actors shouldn't be responsible to check if the rounds are real or fake. Most wouldn't know the difference. As much as I hate Baldwin, I don't think he was responsible.

I strongly disagree with this. As the person handling the gun, he was directly responsible for anything caused by the discharge of that firearm. Treat every gun as if it were loaded, do not point the muzzle of a gun at anything you are not willing to shoot...these are some of the most basic principles of gun safety that anyone handling a firearm needs to be held accountable for them. They are the standard practice of gun handling, the standards that any reasonable person handling a gun would be following. There are no accidental shootings, there are only negligent discharges of firearms.

You would have a hard time trying to convince me that there is any reason an actor would need to point a real gun with a live round of any type directly at someone in order to make a movie these days. The consequences for the decision to do that falls on the director and producers of the film. If the director/producers made the decision to use actual guns and live rounds (blanks or otherwise) with an armorer to provide for safety, then the armorer is responsible as well, but not only.

 

[Yoder]

I strongly disagree with this. As the person handling the gun, he was directly responsible for anything caused by the discharge of that firearm. Treat every gun as if it were loaded, do not point the muzzle of a gun at anything you are not willing to shoot...these are some of the most basic principles of gun safety that anyone handling a firearm needs to be held accountable for them. They are the standard practice of gun handling, the standards that any reasonable person handling a gun would be following. There are no accidental shootings, there are only negligent discharges of firearms.

You would have a hard time trying to convince me that there is any reason an actor would need to point a real gun with a live round of any type directly at someone in order to make a movie these days. The consequences for the decision to do that falls on the director and producers of the film. If the director/producers made the decision to use actual guns and live rounds (blanks or otherwise) with an armorer to provide for safety, then the armorer is responsible as well, but not only.

I have no idea why they still use real firearms, but I hear it's very common. They really should make it illegal. There have been several senseless deaths from guns on movie sets over the years. I could see holding Baldwin accountable being the producer. As an actor, no. It's not supposed to be real. The normal gun handling rules should not apply here. Like the Rambo example, how could you possibly be safe firing machine guns with 20-30 people on set? You couldn't possibly expect them to inspect every round or be competent with a firearm to not point it at anyone when your job is to fake shoot them. I used to shoot in pistol competitions and have missed targets at point blank range. It's so easy to point a handgun somewhere you shouldn't. There's no way an actor would be skilled enough to pull off all the shooting scenes in a movie safely. They would have to hire people from SEAL team 6.

 

[TheGDog]

We, and the law, don't care about what level of skill they have or do not have. That has no bearing here. That is on them for being negligent in that regard. The point I was making is, the law doesn't waiver on this... if you allow a round to be discharged, you're liable for any and all damage it does along it's entire path of flight.

Therefore, since this liability is just supposed to be universal for everyone... and his was the finger on the trigger when it discharged... it would seem logically there is no way he would NOT have any kind of charge against him. There may be additional charges perhaps brought against the armorer as an additional, that I could see perhaps.

But I fail to see any scenario in which the shooter himself gets absolved of liability. In this non-defensive shooting.

 

[Stalker69]

He is against the 2nd amendment, and if he is using real guns to film fake shows, that alone is crazy. Plus you would think he would be all over being safe and responsible. Shooting live rounds between sets, is a set up for exactly what happened.

 

[Kilboars]

He is against the 2nd amendment, and if he is using real guns to film fake shows, that alone is crazy. Plus you would think he would be all over being safe and responsible. Shooting live rounds between sets, is a set up for exactly what happened.

Agree.

Hollywood hates guns but they are the greatest advertisement for them.

I’d love to see Baldwin hang but these people live in their make believe world I’m sure he was as much dumbfounded when he actually shot her as he is dumb.

 

[Houseminer]

Director and producer. I’m pretty sure that’s why they are going after him.

If he was nothing but an actor, they just might pass.

When you look at their safety protocols and see how they blatantly ignored many of them, you can see some culpability on whoever was in charge- Mr Baldwin.

Imagine being an actor in a Alec Baldwin directed and produced movie an get shot during the making of the movie, When next you feel sad and bad just remember someone went through that. SMH

 

[flathead#2]

I bet the price goes up for actors in Alec Baldwin Westerns.

 

[sndmn11]

For me, it's the same as when a Law Enforcement Officer mistakes their pistol for their taser.

https://www.npr.org/2021/12/23/1066012247/kim-potter-trial-daunte-wright

I think it is more than reasonable to expect any competent person to not shoot another. If an acting situation requires a trigger press, theres no reasonable explanation why that person isn't responsible for that result OR if they aren't accepting of that responsibility, they don't perform with anything other than a facsimile. "Let's act! But use real functioning firearms..." Is stupid.