News Forum - Alec Baldwin could face criminal charges for shooting on set

[Thaiger]

In the tragic accident on the set of his new movie “Rust” where a prop gun fired killing the cinematographer and injuring the director, the local district attorney said criminal charges against Alec Baldwin are not out of the question. The Santa Fe district attorney said of the possibility of Baldwin facing charges, “all options are on the table; No one has been ruled out at this point.” The statement was unclear as to whether charges would be considered against Alec Baldwin as the actor who fired the prop gun that killed the cinematographer, or as the producer of the […]

The story Alec Baldwin could face criminal charges for shooting on set as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[Stonker]

Pure sensationalism.

Obviously no-one is "ruled out", and that's all that's been said officially so far.

[Marquito]

Just like many other news outlets Thaiger does not understand the difference between a firearm and a prop gun. A prop gun is used on stage or in movies and cannot fire real bullets as where a fire arm can fire bullets as well as blanks.

 

Alec Baldwin did not shoot a prop gun but a real revolver.

[Stonker]

6 minutes ago, Marquito said:

Just like many other news outlets Thaiger does not understand the difference between a firearm and a prop gun. A prop gun is used on stage or in movies and cannot fire real bullets as where a fire arm can fire bullets as well as blanks.

Alec Baldwin did not shoot a prop gun but a real revolver.

Sorry, but no.

All guns on a set for a movie are called "prop guns" as they come under the prop master.

That could be anything from a rubber gun to a "real" gun.

It's just the terminology, to differentiate between guns used as props and any other guns, maybe for security or personal use.

[Bob20]

It's an exceptional news report again.

He could.  

Or he could not.

Thanks for the clarification

[gummy]

6 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

It's an exceptional news report again.

He could.  

Or he could not.

Thanks for the clarification

well I think they meant perhaps maybe 

[Bob20]

1 minute ago, gummy said:

well I think they meant perhaps maybe 

Quite possibly. They're going to sleep on it. And tomorrow have another guess. Yes or no. Or, no or yes.

[longwood50]

1 hour ago, Marquito said:

ust like many other news outlets Thaiger does not understand the difference between a firearm and a prop gun. A prop gun is used on stage or in movies and cannot fire real bullets as where a fire arm can fire bullets as well as blanks.

Alec Baldwin did not shoot a prop gun but a real revolver.

Thank you, others on this site can not distinguish the difference between a prop gun and a real gun.  They also think that a "piece of a bullet" can lodge in the barrel and then be expelled by when a blank cartridge is then used. 

If the gun is to be used strictly for theatrics, it typically will have a chamber that will not allow a cartridge that has a "projectile" ' a bullet" to be seated.  The chamber is short and will allow only a cartridge that does not have the bullet seated on top of the cartridge. 

The same is true for a revolver, the cylinder is cut with to shorter length and if a full cartridge with a bullet is attempted to be loaded it will not allow the cartridge to go into the cylinder because it is too long. 

A starter pistol is a good example of this.  Note in the attached picture how short the cartridges are.  The cylinder is bored deep enough to only accept these short cartridges in a true starter pistol. 

With semi or full automatic weapons if blanks are used, they typically require some calibration in order for them to function.  The action operates with by the recoil force or the gas expended from the cartridge.  The force of a blank is not as great because it is not pushing a projectile out the barrel so some adjustment is needed to make them work. 

That is not true with a revolver like Mr Baldwin had.  With that said, I have no idea why any cartridges would be on the set that were either truly live ammo that is with a cartridge with a primer, gun powder and a bullet or even a cartridge with a live primer, no gunpowder and a bullet.  A primer is in the cartridge only if the intent is that the cartridge is to ignite gun powder. A primer alone when struck has enough explosive power to propel a bullet out the barrel although not with the same velocity as a cartridge loaded with gunpowder. 

If the intent was to show and film the bullet portion protruding inside the revolver chamber a cartridge with no powder, or even a primer should have been used.  Why live ammo was on the set was the true mistake.  With that said, there would be no legitimate reason other than "joking around" to point a gun even with what were reported to be dummy cartridges and pull the trigger.  And no, guns just don't go off for some unexplained reason.  Mr. Baldwin pulled the trigger and unless there is some mystery bullet that struck both victims, he must have pulled it twice. 

 

Edited October 28, 2021 by longwood50

[Disenfranchised]

First rule when handling a projectile weapon, don't point it at anyone unless you intend to hurt them. This applies equally to a brick or a gun.

[gummy]

57 minutes ago, Disenfranchised said:

First rule when handling a projectile weapon, don't point it at anyone unless you intend to hurt them. This applies equally to a brick or a gun.

Or in Thailand a pick-up truck

[Lowseasonlover]

3 minutes ago, gummy said:

Or in Thailand a pick-up truck

Or a Honda click

[Jason]

In these days of CGI, I wonder why there is any need for firearms? 

[Nobodysfriend]

" Investigators have impounded 500 rounds of ammunition from the set and believe that they are a mixture of blanks, dummies, and live rounds. "

Being an actor really becomes a risky job ...

But this was clearly the fault of armourer Hannah Gutierrez Reed, whose job on set is to supply weapons on set and keep them safe.

[BeerIsLife]

Enough blame to go around for sure. But, Rule Number One of handling firearms is to always treat them as if they were loaded.  Rule Number One A is to make sure they are unloaded by inspecting them personally. DON'T take anyone's word for it. Check yourself.  In this case, the gun was an old fashioned revolver, it is easy enough to check visually that it is either loaded or unloaded.

 

I guess Alec Baldwin is a typical Hollywood type. Chances are he doesn't own any firearms himself. He is probably rather anti-gun in his politics, which would make his starring in a movie that features guns somewhat hypocritical. So, he is used to leaving safety up to the hired people.   In this case with tragic consequences. But failing to at least do a cursory inspection before brandishing it is stupid, and negligent. 

[LoongFred]

5 hours ago, Transam said:

If he has never been trained in the handling of real firearms, then he won't know procedures.

In the film business, an actor relies on the crowd around him to take care of stuff, whether it's makeup, food or props, that's what these people are paid for.

If Alec was handed a gun with live rounds in it, the stage would have been cleared of staff, Alec would have been looked in the eye and TOLD he has a deadly weapon in his hand.

When I was taught how to use side arms it was a very serious business, from unzipping my gun bag to being "clear"....

New Mexico  has opened a criminal investigation.

[gummy]

3 minutes ago, Transam said:

And so it should, a life has been lost through, it seems, negligence...

I have no idea of what props are used. However I always thought that movies these days are so computerised that whilst he may appear to pull a trigger the end result is edited on a computer. I never realised that they they would use live ammo or actual working weapons on a film set. Just goes to show my naivety in that field. Terrible accident for sure and a life was lost due to what appears "hollywood" indifference to health and safety matters.

[Poolie]

 

Statistics on Daily Gun Violence in America

Daily Gun Violence Impacting People of All Ages in the U.S.

Every day, 316 people are shot in the United States. Among those:

• 106 people are shot and killed
• 210 survive gunshot injuries
• 95 are intentionally shot by someone else and survive
• 39 are murdered

Seems like he was in good company.

 

[Stonker]

19 hours ago, longwood50 said:

Thank you, others on this site can not distinguish the difference between a prop gun and a real gun.  They also think that a "piece of a bullet" can lodge in the barrel and then be expelled by when a blank cartridge is then used.

I've replied to this in another thread (#92046).

You're fully entitled to your opinion, but not only has no-one suggested what you say, but the police enquiry into Brandon Lee's death, the inquest, the District Attorney, and all the firearms experts called, on both sides and including by Brandon Lee's family, at the inquest and in the subsequent civil case, all disagree with you.

I've given several links to all of these on that thread, which you've evidently ignored.

19 hours ago, longwood50 said:

If the gun is to be used strictly for theatrics, it typically will have a chamber that will not allow a cartridge that has a "projectile" ' a bullet" to be seated.  The chamber is short and will allow only a cartridge that does not have the bullet seated on top of the cartridge.

That type of gun is used in the theatre - not for movies.

19 hours ago, longwood50 said:

With that said, there would be no legitimate reason other than "joking around" to point a gun even with what were reported to be dummy cartridges and pull the trigger. 

It happens in virtually every movie involving firearms, where the cameraman takes the place of the target to film the firer and gun "head on".

The most obvious example is at the start of James Bond 007 movies where Bond turns and points the gun directly at the camera / cameraman.

19 hours ago, longwood50 said:

Mr. Baldwin pulled the trigger and unless there is some mystery bullet that struck both victims, he must have pulled it twice. 

It's been widely reported and witnessed. The bullet hit cinematographer Halyna Hutchins in the chest, went through her, then hit the director Joel Souza in the shoulder as he was standing immediately behind her.

It's known as a "Quigley" in the military, after the Tom Selleck movie "Quigley Down Under":

"There was a British patrol in the village of Gorup-e Shesh Kalay and under the rules of engagement, the walkie-talkie the Taliban pair were carrying was designated a hostile act.

'As they drove off, Osmond fired warning shots with his pistol and then picked up his L96, the same weapon – serial number 0166 – he had used in Iraq and on the butt of which he had written, "I love u 0166".

'Taking deliberate aim, he fired a single shot. The bike tumbled and both men fell onto the road and lay there motionless.

'When the British patrol returned, they checked the men and confirmed they were both dead, with large holes through their heads.

'The 7.62 mm bullet Osmond had fired had passed through the heads of both men. He had achieved the rare feat of "one shot, two kills" known in the sniping business as "a Quigley".'"

I've tried to avoid being argumentative or condescending, or to belittle your opinion, but you're evidently trying to be as offensive and argumentative as you can be.  What you're saying is simply uninformed and completely wrong.  If you disagree, as you evidently do, then "you should contact the North Carolina District Attorney's Office as I suggested before and I'm sure they'll give your opinion that they and all the firearms experts who gave evidence under oath were wrong all the respect you deserve."  Google has not been your friend.

 

 

[Stonker]

8 hours ago, Jason said:

In these days of CGI, I wonder why there is any need for firearms? 

 

1 hour ago, gummy said:

However I always thought that movies these days are so computerised that whilst he may appear to pull a trigger the end result is edited on a computer. I never realised that they they would use live ammo or actual working weapons on a film set.

You'd think that would make sense as the "flash" and "bang" can easily be added later, but as I explained in the other thread on this the problems the lack of recoil:

 

On 10/25/2021 at 2:03 PM, Stonker said:

that sounds as if it should be the case as the muzzle flash and the bang can easily be digitally enhanced and added later but the problem is that unless you use blanks rather than just caps then there's no recoil and it looks completely unrealistic.

With automatic / blowback operated guns you need blanks and a BFA (see my post above) to operate the re-loading system - although it can be spring operated with replicas, it looks unrealistic without the recoil. 

That doesn't apply in this movie as it's a 19th century Western so re-loading's manual, but those weapons all have a lot of recoil due to the design and the old propellant (powder), whether they're revolvers or rifles.

The problem's the recoil, or lack of it, not the sound or muzzle flash.

This, and firearms generally, are very much one of the few things I know something about so please ask away if there's anything that doesn't make sense and I'll try to give an informed and informative answer.

[Agudbuk]

40 minutes ago, Poolie said:

Statistics on Daily Gun Violence in America

Daily Gun Violence Impacting People of All Ages in the U.S.

Every day, 316 people are shot in the United States. Among those:

• 106 people are shot and killed
• 210 survive gunshot injuries
• 95 are intentionally shot by someone else and survive
• 39 are murdered

Seems like he was in good company.

Thailand newspapers and TV report a lot of gun use here in Thailand as well. 

[Stonker]

6 hours ago, Transam said:

If Alec was handed a gun with live rounds in it, the stage would have been cleared of staff, Alec would have been looked in the eye and TOLD he has a deadly weapon in his hand.

He was handed the gun by the assistant director, Dave Halls, who was clearly heard to loudly say "cold gun", which in movie parlance means no live or blank rounds.

I've given a summary of known background and the many safety issues in the other thread (#90901).

[Stonker]

5 minutes ago, Agudbuk said:

Thailand newspapers and TV report a lot of gun use here in Thailand as well. 

Thailand has one of the highest rates of gun-related deaths in the world - more than Iraq, South Africa or Columbia and double that of the US.

[Poolie]

16 minutes ago, Agudbuk said:

Thailand newspapers and TV report a lot of gun use here in Thailand as well. 

Not at the same rate though. Nowhere near.

[Agudbuk]

11 minutes ago, Agudbuk said:

Thailand newspapers and TV report a lot of gun use here in Thailand as well. 

I had not seen the figures for Thailand shootings.  US population is about 10 times that of Thailand so that has to be taken into consideration.

i googled the subject and got this.

In 2016 Thailand's rate of violent gun-related deaths stood at 4.45 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants. In comparison, that of the Philippines was 7.42; the US, 3.85; Cambodia, 0.96; Myanmar, 0.56; Malaysia, 0.46; Indonesia, 0.10; and Singapore, 0.03.

 

[Agudbuk]

16 minutes ago, Poolie said:

Not at the same rate though. Nowhere near.

 

 

Let me repeat the figures I got when i googled the subject 

In 2016 Thailand's rate of violent gun-related deaths stood at 4.45 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants. In comparison, that of the Philippines was 7.42; the US, 3.85; Cambodia, 0.96; Myanmar, 0.56; Malaysia, 0.46; Indonesia, 0.10; and Singapore, 0.03.