NPR

Line6 HXFX wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:56 pm Some disgruntled (there were many on set apparently) trying to fuck up baldwins life, or trying to fuck up the movie, by getting a live round through?

I am not usually the one to go straight to the conspiracy theory, but America is fucking nuts now.

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 6:04 pm

Line6 HXFX wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:56 pm Some disgruntled (there were many on set apparently) trying to fuck up baldwins life, or trying to fuck up the movie, by getting a live round through?

I am not usually the one to go straight to the conspiracy theory, but America is fucking nuts now.

A situation where actor and producer are one and the same is perfect for such a disgruntled employee, particularly one who doesn't like Baldwin's opposition to the NRA and.notices that he doesn't check firearms that he is given.

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:34 pm

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:32 pm

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 2:28 pm There should have been no lives rounds period. If filming loading, the dummies would do.

Are you not aware of how different they look?

Did you read the claimed explanation?

Calculon wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 2:43 pm

Ymx wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:55 pm Well, I’d say legally the buck stops with the person with the weapon.

So if it is a child actor doing the scene they are legally responsible for ensuring the prop gun is safe? I'm guessing you're not an actual lawyer right?

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:32 pm

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 2:28 pm

ScarfaceClaw wrote: ↑Sat Oct 23, 2021 7:14 pm

I still don’t get this. Anyone hands me a gun and the first thing I’ve done is check that it is safe. Blanks don’t have a bullet. They’re just wadding. Shells with a bullet don’t have a primer. I just can’t get my head around someone who would take on faith that a gun you’re about to point at someone is safe.

There should have been no lives rounds period. If filming loading, the dummies would do.

Are you not aware of how different they look?

Openside wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:33 pm

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:32 pm

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 2:28 pm
There should have been no lives rounds period. If filming loading, the dummies would do.

Are you not aware of how different they look?

They don’t look any different in the breach…

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 6:30 pm

Calculon wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 2:43 pm

Ymx wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:55 pm Well, I’d say legally the buck stops with the person with the weapon.

So if it is a child actor doing the scene they are legally responsible for ensuring the prop gun is safe? I'm guessing you're not an actual lawyer right?

It wasn't a child actor.

However, I know a large number of people under 18 who know that the first thing to do on receipt of a firearm is to check it.

There is no reason for anyone handling a real firearm not to have the (very basic) safety training required to ensure negligent discharges cannot happen. Nor for actors not to perform simple checks for themselves, over and above what the armourer or equivalent does. There is no reason at all to abdicate responsibility here.

Alec Baldwin risks being prosecuted for involuntary manslaughter over the accidental shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, legal experts have warned. 

The Hollywood star could face the charges because of his role as the executive producer of the film, rather than for pulling the trigger, suggested US attorney Joseph Costa. 

The comments came after news emerged of a crew walk-out in protest over working conditions and safety concerns shortly before the shooting.

Ms Hutchins, a 42-year-old mother of one, died on a film set near Santa Fe, New Mexico on Thursday afternoon after Baldwin fired a prop gun which he thought was loaded with blanks.

“As an executive producer, you are in a position of control and you can get prosecuted criminally,” Mr Costa, an attorney with Costa Law in Los Angeles, told the New York Post.

“It’s the equivalent of drinking and driving, meaning someone may not have intended to cause great harm but they do.”

The distraught actor, who described how his heart was broken by the tragedy, was pictured at the weekend hugging Ms Hutchins’ husband, Matthew and his young son.

Mr Hutchins said the 63-year-old actor had been “very supportive”.

The father of the late cinematographer meanwhile absolved Baldwin from blame, telling the Sun on Sunday that responsibility rested with the film’s armoury team.

The showbusiness website TMZ reported that the gun was used recreationally off the film set, while anonymous crew members told the New York Times there had been two other accidental weapon discharges on the set of Rust.

The incident is being investigated by the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s office.

Rebecca Roiphe, of the New York Law School, said Baldwin could be charged with involuntary manslaughter if he failed to exercise the appropriate degree of care.

“But even if a prosecutor determines that he was in some way at fault, these sorts of accidents are not regularly charged criminally," she said. 

"A prosecutor would likely look at a number of factors to determine whether it would be appropriate to do so here."

Prosecutors would look at how personally culpable Baldwin was, or whether mistakes were made by a number of people, she said.

“If he was seriously cutting corners, prosecutors may look at it differently,” she added.

Ymx wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:12 pm The gun was used recreationally off the set !!!!

Ymx wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:12 pm The gun was used recreationally off the set !!!!

Calculon wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:08 pm

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 6:30 pm

Calculon wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 2:43 pm

So if it is a child actor doing the scene they are legally responsible for ensuring the prop gun is safe? I'm guessing you're not an actual lawyer right?

It wasn't a child actor.

However, I know a large number of people under 18 who know that the first thing to do on receipt of a firearm is to check it.

There is no reason for anyone handling a real firearm not to have the (very basic) safety training required to ensure negligent discharges cannot happen. Nor for actors not to perform simple checks for themselves, over and above what the armourer or equivalent does. There is no reason at all to abdicate responsibility here.

I'd be surprised if the actor in this instance has not had very basic safety training. He's still not legally responsible (in his role of actor) for what happened.

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:24 pm

Ymx wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:12 pm The gun was used recreationally off the set !!!!

Most firearms are. It didn't say "during filming".

The smoking gun that claimed the life of Halyna Hutchins might've been more than just an on-set prop -- it was also being fired recreationally, even when cameras weren't rolling.

Multiple sources directly connected to the 'Rust' production tell TMZ ... the same gun Alec Baldwin accidentally fired -- hitting the DP and director -- was being used by crews members off set as well, for what we're told amounted to target practice.

We're told this off-the-clock shooting -- which was allegedly happening away from the movie lot -- was being done with real bullets ... which is how some who worked on the film believe a live round found its way in one of the chambers that day.

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 6:10 pm

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:34 pm

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:32 pm

Are you not aware of how different they look?

Did you read the claimed explanation?

Yes. And I do have some.knowledge in the area.

bok_viking wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 9:36 am Just seems like there were very little safety protocols or nobody cared to follow them.

From my recollection during my student days when i did some work on sets. Guns used in filming was never allowed to leave the the storage area when it was not used during filming, there were very strict rules related to getting the gun from the set to storage and vice versa. It was not supposed to be handled by anyone not responsible for it during those times either. Live ammo and blanks are not even supposed to be stored in the same area to reduce the chance of one being mistaken for the other. They used to lock live rounds away in a safe between the shots, and only a minimal amount was kept around for the use on set, and afterwards they would be counted, returned, signed for and locked away, there were loads more rules related to the handling of guns and ammo. So it seems the recreative shooting between filming was a massive breach as well as several other things that happened and whoever allowed that should be held responsible as well if it is someone else than the Executive producer. But I do think the executive producer should be held responsible together with whatever person allowed guns and ammo to be played with when not on set. There was absolutely no care and control on those sets it seems. So Bladwin the actor might not be responsible, but Baldwin the Executive Producer should definitely be,

Woddy wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:26 pm Totally agree with FF: if, as here, there is a full safety system put in place with a paid, professional armourer / wrangler who is responsible for ensuring weapons are safe, an actor is entitled to rely on that system.

On the other hand, the producer (and others) might be in trouble for not ensuring that that system is actually safe.

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 8:43 am

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 6:10 pm

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:34 pm


Did you read the claimed explanation?

Yes. And I do have some.knowledge in the area.

But you didn't comprehend the claimed explanation so I'll try in words of limited syllables in case you are struggling.
1) Blanks and live look entirely different (although many would not know the absence of the bullet itself). Dummies are exactly the same as live in appearance: just empty cartridge.
2) One explanation was that a live round was chambered because the loading was part of the filming and it was exactly because gun geeks/snobs would say " I do have some.knowledge in the area. That's wrong." that is was done for realism.
But someone forgot to switch.
3) Hence my point that a dummy not only would have sufficed but that live should not be permitted on set ever.

bok_viking wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 9:36 am Just seems like there were very little safety protocols or nobody cared to follow them.

From my recollection during my student days when i did some work on sets. Guns used in filming was never allowed to leave the the storage area when it was not used during filming, there were very strict rules related to getting the gun from the set to storage and vice versa. It was not supposed to be handled by anyone not responsible for it during those times either. Live ammo and blanks are not even supposed to be stored in the same area to reduce the chance of one being mistaken for the other. They used to lock live rounds away in a safe between the shots, and only a minimal amount was kept around for the use on set, and afterwards they would be counted, returned, signed for and locked away, there were loads more rules related to the handling of guns and ammo. So it seems the recreative shooting between filming was a massive breach as well as several other things that happened and whoever allowed that should be held responsible as well if it is someone else than the Executive producer. But I do think the executive producer should be held responsible together with whatever person allowed guns and ammo to be played with when not on set. There was absolutely no care and control on those sets it seems. So Bladwin the actor might not be responsible, but Baldwin the Executive Producer should definitely be,

charltom wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:05 am

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 8:43 am

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 6:10 pm
Yes. And I do have some.knowledge in the area.

But you didn't comprehend the claimed explanation so I'll try in words of limited syllables in case you are struggling.
1) Blanks and live look entirely different (although many would not know the absence of the bullet itself). Dummies are exactly the same as live in appearance: just empty cartridge.
2) One explanation was that a live round was chambered because the loading was part of the filming and it was exactly because gun geeks/snobs would say " I do have some.knowledge in the area. That's wrong." that is was done for realism.
But someone forgot to switch.
3) Hence my point that a dummy not only would have sufficed but that live should not be permitted on set ever.

Torq you are right with point 2 (your "realism" is my "verisimilitude" above).

However, you are wrong with 1, and thus with 3. Dummy rounds have no primer, so they are not "the same as live in appearance". The primer is the bit that causes ignition when struck by the firing pin, and it is an externally visible part of a round.

I applaud your attempt so far to understand this issue and hope that this helps in the process.

charltom wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:05 am

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 8:43 am

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 6:10 pm
Yes. And I do have some.knowledge in the area.

But you didn't comprehend the claimed explanation so I'll try in words of limited syllables in case you are struggling.
1) Blanks and live look entirely different (although many would not know the absence of the bullet itself). Dummies are exactly the same as live in appearance: just empty cartridge.
2) One explanation was that a live round was chambered because the loading was part of the filming and it was exactly because gun geeks/snobs would say " I do have some.knowledge in the area. That's wrong." that is was done for realism.
But someone forgot to switch.
3) Hence my point that a dummy not only would have sufficed but that live should not be permitted on set ever.

Torq you are right with point 2 (your "realism" is my "verisimilitude" above).

However, you are wrong with 1, and thus with 3. Dummy rounds have no primer, so they are not "the same as live in appearance". The primer is the bit that causes ignition when struck by the firing pin, and it is an externally visible part of a round.

I applaud your attempt so far to understand this issue and hope that this helps in the process.

Openside wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:33 pm

charltom wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:32 pm

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 2:28 pm
There should have been no lives rounds period. If filming loading, the dummies would do.

Are you not aware of how different they look?

They don’t look any different in the breach…

Ymx wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:57 pm

We're told this off-the-clock shooting -- which was allegedly happening away from the movie lot -- was being done with real bullets ... which is how some who worked on the film believe a live round found its way in one of the chambers that day.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.tmz.co ... -practice/

Ymx wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:57 pm

We're told this off-the-clock shooting -- which was allegedly happening away from the movie lot -- was being done with real bullets ... which is how some who worked on the film believe a live round found its way in one of the chambers that day.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.tmz.co ... -practice/

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 11:26 am

charltom wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:05 am

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 8:43 am
But you didn't comprehend the claimed explanation so I'll try in words of limited syllables in case you are struggling.
1) Blanks and live look entirely different (although many would not know the absence of the bullet itself). Dummies are exactly the same as live in appearance: just empty cartridge.
2) One explanation was that a live round was chambered because the loading was part of the filming and it was exactly because gun geeks/snobs would say " I do have some.knowledge in the area. That's wrong." that is was done for realism.
But someone forgot to switch.
3) Hence my point that a dummy not only would have sufficed but that live should not be permitted on set ever.

Torq you are right with point 2 (your "realism" is my "verisimilitude" above).

However, you are wrong with 1, and thus with 3. Dummy rounds have no primer, so they are not "the same as live in appearance". The primer is the bit that causes ignition when struck by the firing pin, and it is an externally visible part of a round.

I applaud your attempt so far to understand this issue and hope that this helps in the process.

You'd never see the inverted nipple in a film shot whereas the absence of bullet on a blank clearly would be. And even if you did see it, next to no-one would know the difference whereas a "bullet" is simply not a "bullet" without the errrrr........ bullet?

Perhaps the cartridge, which can also be a prop, was not modified accordingly. When we shoot scenes like that in Germany, the cartridge is opened, and the powder taken out. The primer, which starts the burn when I pull the trigger, is also modified for the shoot. That gives me something that looks like a cartridge, but it can't do any harm. It's possible that a prop was switched somewhere, perhaps in storage, but something like that can also happen for time or supervisory reasons. And of course, it's possible that someone smuggled real ammunition into the gun. The question is, didn't someone have an eye on the weapon throughout?

Rinkals wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:18 pm probably the product of an over-familiar gun culture where firearms are routinely carried when out shopping.

Search warrant reveals grim details of ‘Rust’ shooting and Halyna Hutchins’ final minutes

charltom wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:28 pm

Rinkals wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:18 pm probably the product of an over-familiar gun culture where firearms are routinely carried when out shopping.

That's a bit of a leap. I would expect anyone entitled to "concealed carry" (very much the minority) to be acutely safety conscious.

Film crew who call a real firearm a "prop gun" though, not so much...

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:53 pm https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-a ... ch-warrant

Search warrant reveals grim details of ‘Rust’ shooting and Halyna Hutchins’ final minutes

Ymx wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:03 pm

Ms Hutchins, a 42-year-old mother of one, died on a film set near Santa Fe, New Mexico on Thursday afternoon after Baldwin fired a prop gun which he thought was loaded with blanks.

Grandpa wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:58 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:53 pm https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-a ... ch-warrant

Search warrant reveals grim details of ‘Rust’ shooting and Halyna Hutchins’ final minutes

The way they describe it, he didn't actually mean to shoot the gun?

Chilli wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:03 pm

Ymx wrote: ↑Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:03 pm

Ms Hutchins, a 42-year-old mother of one, died on a film set near Santa Fe, New Mexico on Thursday afternoon after Baldwin fired a prop gun which he thought was loaded with blanks.

Hang about.
Was it a real gun firing a real bullet?
A real gun firing a blank?
A prop firing a real bullet?
A prop firing a blank?

If a bullet came out the barrel then it was a real gun firing a bullet. The armourer must be to blame.

FalseBayFC wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:57 pm

charltom wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:28 pm

Rinkals wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:18 pm probably the product of an over-familiar gun culture where firearms are routinely carried when out shopping.

That's a bit of a leap. I would expect anyone entitled to "concealed carry" (very much the minority) to be acutely safety conscious.

Film crew who call a real firearm a "prop gun" though, not so much...

Yeah nah! The US has a very high unintentional firearm fatality rate. About 430 deaths per year. I suspect that there is no correlation between lax gun laws and responsibility of use. Its like using a table saw, ironically most injuries occur amongst experienced woodworkers. Over familiarity results in a lowering of caution.

FalseBayFC wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:04 pm

Grandpa wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:58 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:53 pm https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-a ... ch-warrant

The way they describe it, he didn't actually mean to shoot the gun?

It sounds like an accidental discharge to me. There is no way, even if it was loaded with blanks, that any crew should have been in in the line of fire. In this case two people were.