Did he point a weapon at a person?
Was that person harmed?
If you answered Yes, to both question, he can ONLY be guilty.
Question from someone who doesn't know a lot about guns.
Why can they make firearms with barrels a slightly smaller caliber for movies so live rounds don't fit?
Cause you might still want to cycle the gun with blanks, get authentic recoil and a muzzle flash? Just stabbing here(!).Question from someone who doesn't know a lot about guns.
Why can they make firearms with barrels a slightly smaller caliber for movies so live rounds don't fit?
What I mean is, nobody is making .21cal (or equivalent) barrels for a thousand different firearms and blanks because armorers can't figure out how to keep .22's off-set. You're asking for an entire manufacturing base to be built for one industry, AND an entire regulation infrastructure to ensure a) it's required to be used and b) nobody else makes use of it for live rounds. It's an overbuilt solution for a very, very specific problem. It would probably be easier to just regulate that film can't have any functional weapons on-set, force them all to use plastic, and do all 'firing' in post-production.So this lady's life and Brandon Lee's life are not worth the cost of making live rounds NOT fit? You only have to fix the guns that get "fired" at people on set.
That's a lame argument.
Oh no! Trebek shot someone?!?!18 months.
New Mexico judge sentences “Rust” movie armorer to 18 months in prison for fatal on-set shooting by Alec Baldwin
New Mexico judge sentences “Rust” movie armorer to 18 months in prison for fatal on-set shooting by Alec Baldwinabcnews.go.com
Yer Up Alex!
You are kind of ignoring one basic, but huge fact, or should I say facts:Did he point a weapon at a person?
Was that person harmed?
If you answered Yes, to both question, he can ONLY be guilty.
The problem with this though, is if you are close enough (usually point blank range) a blank can still be lethal.Cause you might still want to cycle the gun with blanks, get authentic recoil and a muzzle flash? Just stabbing here(!).
Sure, so it makes sense to have someone in charge of safety…The problem with this though, is if you are close enough (usually point blank range) a blank can still be lethal.
A blank is usually shorter than its live version, a small welding spot(or glue or whatever..) at the right spot would make the gun unable to load a live round but fit a blank just fine.So this lady's life and Brandon Lee's life are not worth the cost of making live rounds NOT fit? You only have to fix the guns that get "fired" at people on set.
That's a lame argument.
But a blank in a revolver looks like a blank not a bullet as you can see the heads of the rounds in a revolver. For the revolvers they tend to use dummies (rounds with a bullet but no powder) for the visible chambers.A blank is usually shorter than its live version, a small welding spot(or glue or whatever..) at the right spot would make the gun unable to load a live round but fit a blank just fine.
- I have to imagine these things we talk about is already done in the wild?
Heh… was thinking that id still rather have the gun blow up rather than actually fire a bullet…. But that would hurt the expensive actor and not some likely stunt double..But a blank in a revolver looks like a blank not a bullet as you can see the heads of the rounds in a revolver. For the revolvers they tend to use dummies (rounds with a bullet but no powder) for the visible chambers.
Fix it with CGI? Or, considering how many other unrealistic props are used in movies, maybe we can live with seeing a gun that's not 100% perfectly authentic.But a blank in a revolver looks like a blank not a bullet as you can see the heads of the rounds in a revolver. For the revolvers they tend to use dummies (rounds with a bullet but no powder) for the visible chambers.
I could live with not seeing guns in movies at all.Fix it with CGI? Or, considering how many other unrealistic props are used in movies, maybe we can live with seeing a gun that's not 100% perfectly authentic.
I don't think you see movies at all.I could live with not seeing guns in movies at all.
I could live with not seeing guns in movies at all.
Brandon Lee wasn't killed by a live round. He was killed by a blank that propelled a squib stuck in the barrel from a previous firing of a badly made dummy round.So this lady's life and Brandon Lee's life are not worth the cost of making live rounds NOT fit? You only have to fix the guns that get "fired" at people on set.
That's a lame argument.
I don’t agree he was negligent for not checking. You don’t want an actor messing with a gun that the armorer has safed. If a second check is required (and I hope it is) an assistant armorer should be checking the weapon before handing it to the actor.My opinion and only an opinion is the armorer was guilty of gross negligence because it was her job to ensure the gun was loaded with blanks. She clearly was not fit to do the job and this was likely obvious prior to the incident but I'm not a lawyer and can't say if the studio (or production team) was negligence for not replacing her from a legal perspective.
Baldwin was sloppy and negligence for not checking the gun but legally i suspect he was not guilty because that was not his job. Also if the gun discharged without his pulling the trigger or intending to pull the trigger that would likely be the armorer responsibility (faulty weapon); but again i can't say if that would legally be the case.
So in my non lawyerly opinion i would say Baldwin is likely innocent though he should feel miserable about the matter.
Yeah this is why I said he won't be found guilty as an actor for not checking the gun. If anything he will be found liable as a producer who was aware of the highly unsafe conditions on set.I don’t agree he was negligent for not checking. You don’t want an actor messing with a gun that the armorer has safed. If a second check is required (and I hope it is) an assistant armorer should be checking the weapon before handing it to the actor.