... no, accidents do in fact happen. It's not as common in the modern age, but there are plenty of sufficiently random events that can occur with firearms, even while using blanks, that can result in injury or death, that aren't necessarily someone's fault. Brandon Lee's is a good example. No reasonable person is going to replace or disassemble a firearm after every blank fired.With guns, there are no accidents. Only negligence.
Because he has made fun of Trump multiple times on SNL and his supporters are the biggest snowflakes on the planet.That's why the entire production team needs to be charged. Not just Alec. How come only Alec's name gets dragged into the mud whereas the other culpable members of the production team are roaming scot free? What about the idiot AD who shouted COLD gun? What about the A-holes who were using real guns and real ammo for shooting practice in off-duty hours around the ranch? Why haven't they been identified? The investigation has been stupid.
Should every actor who's pointed a gun at someone go to jail? That's illegal, I'd go to jail if I pointed a gun at you and you weren't a threat.With guns, there are no accidents. Only negligence.
One could be firing at a range and have a squib load result in a catastrophic disassembly, the shrapnel from which could injure someone, so may as well make that illegal too.Should every actor who's pointed a gun at someone go to jail? That's illegal, I'd go to jail if I pointed a gun at you and you weren't a threat.
If any one was hurt, yes.Should every actor who's pointed a gun at someone go to jail? That's illegal, I'd go to jail if I pointed a gun at you and you weren't a threat.
That would be negligence on someone, maybe the range, maybe the gun makerOne could be firing at a range and have a squib load result in a catastrophic disassembly, the shrapnel from which could injure someone, so may as well make that illegal too.
Maybe it was negligence on whoever got injured for getting in the way of an object at speed?If any one was hurt, yes.
That would be negligence on someone, maybe the range, maybe the gun maker
Why does someone have to be hurt? Pointing a gun at someone is a crime right?If any one was hurt, yes.
That would be negligence on someone, maybe the range, maybe the gun maker
Sadly that sounds like the logic an Israeli soldier would useMaybe it was negligence on whoever got injured for getting in the way of an object at speed?
I thought we were in a 'make up stupid shit' competition, figured I'd go for broke.Sadly that sounds like the logic an Israeli soldier would use
This has all been hashed out a bunch of times in this thread. A movie set is not your average workplace. The armorer checks and clears the gun before calling cold gun. If the actor then checks the gun in any way, the armorer is supposed to stop production, and clear the gun again. Following common gun safety like check it yourself is likely actually against safety protocols on set. Just stick to producer and stop adding to the nonsense.
The armorer’s entire job is basically to ensure that the firearms on the set are safe.
I definitely agree that Baldwin as a producer should be liable in a civil sense but I’m sorry, that woman’s conduct was egregious.
Baldwin should be held civilly accountable, yes, but this is very clearly a criminal case that should never have been brought and one I expect him to win easily barring some unforeseen development. It's not a close thing.She's liable too, and was found guilty. She's not the only one at fault tho. Widespread failure and negligence across this shit show of a production. Everyone involved needs to be held accountable for the dead woman.
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?
Curious no, that he quickly got out in front in an interview and lied about the gun firing on it's own (bullshit, disproven) and his finger not being on the trigger (it's on film)?Baldwin should be held civilly accountable, yes, but this is very clearly a criminal case that should never have been brought and one I expect him to win easily barring some unforeseen development. It's not a close thing.
This hasn't been disproven, actually, and is going to be a very large problem for the prosecution. In examining the gun the FBI destroyed it so there's no way for any adversarial entity to examine it and/or the evidence.Curious no, that he quickly got out in front in an interview and lied about the gun firing on it's own (bullshit, disproven) and his finger not being on the trigger (it's on film)?
If it's only the armor's job, why not tell the truth instead of easily falsifiable lies on national television?
Baldwin didn't get away with avoiding civil responsibility for her death.Consciousness of guilt was talking there.
I don't particularly care if he's punished criminally or civilly, just that he can get away using wealth and fame to avoid responsibility for killing someone.
lol you think actors messing with weapons that trained armorers have safed will somehow prevent more deaths than they’ll cause.It's not. Baldwins protectors want it to be, want to continue to argue for stupid and error prone safety procedures, and the result will be more avoidable deaths like this.
Playing pretend doesn't give you special rights to be foolish, negligent and endanger others needlessly.
That's actually surprising. Way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
HGR appeal in 3…2…