YouTube stunt goes very wrong

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Meee32
No but there is a pretty good risk there, okay another example, is the person that locked houdini in the box guilty of manslaughter?

Why would they? Houdini died from a ruptured appendix he suffered when a fan punched him.

Oh, ha... I was sure he died doing a stunt... Okay well I stand corrected there but I'm sure you get my point anyway! People do stupid things and it is ultimately their own choice, you can't blame the people around them that helped. The guy could have done this on his own with a piece of string.

What does the ability to perform the stunt without a helper have to do with the fact that he used a helper who was too ignorant to it pull the trigger?

originally posted by: Meee32
Okay well I stand corrected there but I'm sure you get my point anyway!

No, actually, I don't.

The person in the Original Post pointed a gun at someone, this wasn't an illusion, a la your Houdini reference, this was an actual gun firing real bullets.

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: Meee32

If she is guilty of manslaughter then so is anyone that sets up or has involvement with any dangerous sport/activity!

She was no doubt pressured into doing it and was convinced it would be okay. HE convinced her! Hell, if he wanted to do it, I would have pulled the trigger too!

Then you'd be guilty of involuntary manslaughter, or even negligent homicide.

Pointing a gun at someone and pulling the trigger is an act of either:
1 - Malice
2 - Inconceivable Ignorance

Your logic absolves so many people of their actions, flying in the face of the entire idea of personal responsibility. Anyone who can be convinced that the stunt was a good idea, belongs separated from society, and any children they may have.

How does it "fly in the face of personal responsibilty"? This is all about personal responsibilty! HIS personal responsibilty... Was this guy mentally challenged? As far as I am aware he was not! He made his choice!

Just as in the rally example the spectator chooses to be there and houdini chose to do the stunt! Steve Irwin chose to swim with stingrays... Yada yada...

Because she could have #in said no.

Your argument that he convinced her to do it is bull#. Those people Charlie Manson convinced to kill people still #in killed people.

No this is not the same thing at all! Convincing someone to kill someone (I'm guessing the person being killed was not willing right?) is nothing like this case! The aim was not to kill him and he tried to prove that he would not die, there was some precaution taken. But to be fair, I think if he wanted to be shot in the head that's okay with me too!

I am the ultimate advocate for personal responsibility.

She could have said no but that would not have necessarily stopped him from doing it anyway.

But come on, where is the personal responsibilty from him in your eyes? Are we forgetting that the guy had a choice too?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Meee32
Okay well I stand corrected there but I'm sure you get my point anyway!

No, actually, I don't.

The person in the Original Post pointed a gun at someone, this wasn't an illusion, a la your Houdini reference, this was an actual gun firing real bullets.

Sigh... Okay so you are telling me that you are not aware that people die while performing stunts? Stunts where for example real cars are driven at people or people jump from real helicopters etc...

You're really going to be that stubborn? I conceded I was wrong about houdini but my point was that people die performing stunts and they pretty much ALL had people helping.

originally posted by: Meee32
Sigh... Okay so you are telling me that you are not aware that people die while performing stunts? Stunts where for example real cars are driven at people or people jump from real helicopters etc...

You're really going to be that stubborn? I conceded I was wrong about houdini but my point was that people die performing stunts and they pretty much ALL had people helping.

You do know there are specific laws about discharging firearms, right? Especially when said firearm is pointed at another person, right?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Meee32
Sigh... Okay so you are telling me that you are not aware that people die while performing stunts? Stunts where for example real cars are driven at people or people jump from real helicopters etc...

You're really going to be that stubborn? I conceded I was wrong about houdini but my point was that people die performing stunts and they pretty much ALL had people helping.

You do know there are specific laws about discharging firearms, right? Especially when said firearm is pointed at another person, right?

No I wasn't to be fair and I bet those laws differ from state to state but it's still not the point... I'm sure it's also against the law to drive at someone intentionally but if you agree to it and sign a waiver it is okay! The kind of laws you are talking about are not designed for this kind of scenario. It was a stunt attempt that went wrong. It happens all the time!

He made his choice, it's very sad and I'm sure the poor girl is distraught, she will suffer from this the rest of her life, I see no need to lock her in a cage.

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Meee32
See I don't think it is if everyone involved are willingly being idiots together! There are many examples of this... Look at rallies, you get idiots flying round in cars and idiots standing on the side of the road! If one of the idiots on the side of the road gets killed is the rally driver guilty of manslaughter?

No, unless they intentionally hit someone. Kind of like if an idiot points a gun at someone and pulls the trigger.

Your comparison is apples to rutabagas.

No but there is a pretty good risk there, okay another example, is the person that locked houdini in the box guilty of manslaughter?

Or in the rally example maybe the event organiser is guilty because it is stupid to intentionally allow people on the track.

People take risks like this all the time! It was HIS choice. If he had pulled it off he would be a hero and the video probably would have gotten a lot of attention and they potentially could have made a lot of money! There are many self made millionaires on youtube.

Unfortunately this time it didn't pay off. It's very sad in my opinion but no crime.

There's no way I'd be calling him a hero if he pulled this off. In fact even if he had I would've liked him to have had all his weapons taken off of him.

originally posted by: Meee32
No I wasn't to be fair and I bet those laws differ from state to state but it's still not the point...

Sure it is, and they will all be negligent discharge of a firearm, or some such.

I'm sure it's also against the law to drive at someone intentionally but if you agree to it and sign a waiver it is okay! The kind of laws you are talking about are not designed for this kind of scenario. It was a stunt attempt that went wrong. It happens all the time!

I'm sure if the person just stands there expecting say, a guardrail, to stop the vehicle, the driver will also be charged.

Just because the woman is too stupid to realize a 300 grain bullet travelling at 1,500fps cannot be stopped by a book does not excuse her from negligent behavior.

originally posted by: Woody510

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Meee32
See I don't think it is if everyone involved are willingly being idiots together! There are many examples of this... Look at rallies, you get idiots flying round in cars and idiots standing on the side of the road! If one of the idiots on the side of the road gets killed is the rally driver guilty of manslaughter?

No, unless they intentionally hit someone. Kind of like if an idiot points a gun at someone and pulls the trigger.

Your comparison is apples to rutabagas.

No but there is a pretty good risk there, okay another example, is the person that locked houdini in the box guilty of manslaughter?

Or in the rally example maybe the event organiser is guilty because it is stupid to intentionally allow people on the track.

People take risks like this all the time! It was HIS choice. If he had pulled it off he would be a hero and the video probably would have gotten a lot of attention and they potentially could have made a lot of money! There are many self made millionaires on youtube.

Unfortunately this time it didn't pay off. It's very sad in my opinion but no crime.

There's no way I'd be calling him a hero if he pulled this off. In fact even if he had I would've liked him to have had all his weapons taken off of him.

Lol Sure yeah but lots of people would view him as such and if he did stuff like this repeatedly he could have become a millionaire over night! Wouldn't matter if you thought him an idiot or not. I mean I think he was an idiot too! Don't get me wrong! But I am just standing up for peoples right to be an idiot if they wish!

Now if say the bullet had missed and hit someone in the street not involved, that is manslaughter in my opinion.

a reply to: Meee32

You seem to allege that this was "HIS" responsibility and his alone, but this is hardly the case. First of all, you base this statement on statements made to the police by Perez, not Ruiz. Ruiz couldn't make a statement to police...because he's DEAD. Second, Perez (the girl) claims to have been 'unwillingly' forced into performing the stunt, BUT she was the same one who made posts on FailBook BEFORE it happened about how their "most dangerous stunt ever" would be forthcoming. She welcomed the attention and notoriety. To me, this shows intent and at a minimum complicity.

The bottom line is; no matter what, she DID pull the trigger! The pistol was in HER hand, and she DID pull the trigger. She could have chosen personal responsibility in that moment, but she didn't. She pulled the trigger, knowing full well she had a deadly weapon in her hand and a human life at the other end of that pistol...but hey, they could be famous, right?

She absolutely should be charged, and given the facts presented so far she should be convicted and sentenced to the maximum allowable term under the law. Further, she and her now dead boyfriend and their families should be barred from any civil proceedings (i.e. legal action, lawsuits, etc) as a result of this case. Period.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Meee32
No I wasn't to be fair and I bet those laws differ from state to state but it's still not the point...

Sure it is, and they will all be negligent discharge of a firearm, or some such.

I'm sure it's also against the law to drive at someone intentionally but if you agree to it and sign a waiver it is okay! The kind of laws you are talking about are not designed for this kind of scenario. It was a stunt attempt that went wrong. It happens all the time!

I'm sure if the person just stands there expecting say, a guardrail, to stop the vehicle, the driver will also be charged.

Just because the woman is too stupid to realize a 300 grain bullet travelling at 1,500fps cannot be stopped by a book does not excuse her from negligent behavior.

Well it happens all the time on movie sets and the stunt men wave their rights to be able to do it! And if everyone was like you and others on here we would not have some of the amazing films we have today!

What part of it was his choice to do this do people not get? Lol...

Anyway, we are going round in circles... I agree their are laws about pointing guns but I don't think they apply here and if they do I don't think they should. My final words, on the rest we'll have to agree to disagree.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Ruiz couldn't make a statement to police...because he's DEAD.

Why should that minor detail stop them? Get a goddamn Ouija board.

originally posted by: Meee32
Well it happens all the time on movie sets and the stunt men wave their rights to be able to do it! And if everyone was like you and others on here we would not have some of the amazing films we have today!

Considering most of the films out I would actually like to see the cast get killed.

So using your logic they have a film permit, waive from harm releases and all the ancillary requirements needed to produce a motion picture, correct?

ETA: And I would really like to know what motion picture utilizes live ammunition fired directly at the talent. You do know they have firearms hostlers on set, right? People actually paid to handle firearms safety so no one, wait for it, GETS KILLED.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Meee32

You seem to allege that this was "HIS" responsibility and his alone, but this is hardly the case. First of all, you base this statement on statements made to the police by Perez, not Ruiz. Ruiz couldn't make a statement to police...because he's DEAD. Second, Perez (the girl) claims to have been 'unwillingly' forced into performing the stunt, BUT she was the same one who made posts on FailBook BEFORE it happened about how their "most dangerous stunt ever" would be forthcoming. She welcomed the attention and notoriety. To me, this shows intent and at a minimum complicity.

The bottom line is; no matter what, she DID pull the trigger! The pistol was in HER hand, and she DID pull the trigger. She could have chosen personal responsibility in that moment, but she didn't. She pulled the trigger, knowing full well she had a deadly weapon in her hand and a human life at the other end of that pistol...but hey, they could be famous, right?

She absolutely should be charged, and given the facts presented so far she should be convicted and sentenced to the maximum allowable term under the law. Further, she and her now dead boyfriend and their families should be barred from any civil proceedings (i.e. legal action, lawsuits, etc) as a result of this case. Period.

Then you also agree that there should be no stuntmen allowed in society?

I"m not going to argue about this all day, I have stated my points.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Meee32
Well it happens all the time on movie sets and the stunt men wave their rights to be able to do it! And if everyone was like you and others on here we would not have some of the amazing films we have today!

Considering most of the films out I would actually like to see the cast get killed.

So using your logic they have a film permit, waive from harm releases and all the ancillary requirements needed to produce a motion picture, correct?

Film permit? What the hell is one of those? You need permission to make a film in the US? Wow, so everyone with a cellphone camera is breaking the law huh...

I believe she stated that he had written a note, that's good enough for me. I mean come on there is video too, he clearly wanted to do it! (Assuming that he did and he wasn't gagged with a book strapped to his chest in the video! XD)

If it's going to get down to some paperwork though you already lost the argument.

EDIT: The crow... lol But no that was murder and just a joke... It's not just guns that are dangerous mate stop it please I already proved you wrong.

originally posted by: Meee32
Film permit? What the hell is one of those? You need permission to make a film in the US? Wow, so everyone with a cellphone camera is breaking the law huh...

Yeah, you do. Most municipalities require anyone producing a film to file for a permit.

I believe she stated that he had written a note, that's good enough for me. I mean come on there is video too, he clearly wanted to do it! (Assuming that he did and he wasn't gagged with a book strapped to his chest in the video! XD)

If it's going to get down to some paperwork though you already lost the argument.

That's nice. Who cares if she had a written note? A hand written letter saying it's okay for someone else to break the law by negligently discharging a weapon does not alleviate them from prosecution.

I mean using your logic I could just have someone write me a note saying it's okay to knock off the local bank.

"He said it was cool, now put the money in the damn bag!"

EDIT: The crow... lol But no that was murder and just a joke... It's not just guns that are dangerous mate stop it please I already proved you wrong.

That firearm was loaded with what were supposed to be dummy bullets but the morons on set did not use dummy bullets and removed the poweder but not the primer.

Guess what? They got sued for negligence.

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Meee32

You seem to allege that this was "HIS" responsibility and his alone, but this is hardly the case. First of all, you base this statement on statements made to the police by Perez, not Ruiz. Ruiz couldn't make a statement to police...because he's DEAD. Second, Perez (the girl) claims to have been 'unwillingly' forced into performing the stunt, BUT she was the same one who made posts on FailBook BEFORE it happened about how their "most dangerous stunt ever" would be forthcoming. She welcomed the attention and notoriety. To me, this shows intent and at a minimum complicity.

The bottom line is; no matter what, she DID pull the trigger! The pistol was in HER hand, and she DID pull the trigger. She could have chosen personal responsibility in that moment, but she didn't. She pulled the trigger, knowing full well she had a deadly weapon in her hand and a human life at the other end of that pistol...but hey, they could be famous, right?

She absolutely should be charged, and given the facts presented so far she should be convicted and sentenced to the maximum allowable term under the law. Further, she and her now dead boyfriend and their families should be barred from any civil proceedings (i.e. legal action, lawsuits, etc) as a result of this case. Period.

Then you also agree that there should be no stuntmen allowed in society?

I"m not going to argue about this all day, I have stated my points.

Professional stuntmen do things in a controlled environment with minimum risk. This was done in a back garden in public big difference

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Meee32
Film permit? What the hell is one of those? You need permission to make a film in the US? Wow, so everyone with a cellphone camera is breaking the law huh...

Yeah, you do. Most municipalities require anyone producing a film to file for a permit.

I believe she stated that he had written a note, that's good enough for me. I mean come on there is video too, he clearly wanted to do it! (Assuming that he did and he wasn't gagged with a book strapped to his chest in the video! XD)

If it's going to get down to some paperwork though you already lost the argument.

That's nice. How cares if she had a written note? A hand written letter saying it's okay for someone else to break the law by negligently discharging a weapon does not alleviate them from prosecution.

I mean using your logic I could just have someone write me a note saying it's okay to knock off the local bank.

"He said it was cool, now put the money in the damn bag!"

No, no you do not... If what you say is true then everyone on youtube would ve breaking the law! Get a grip jeez! You'll need permits to film in certain places no doubt yes, but not some blanket permit to film!

There was video too... It would be very clear that he wanted to do this... Lets just assume that he did, as I am... Then she did nothing wrong! If he didn't want to it's not manslaughter it's MURDER!

So it's one or the other, murder or a stunt gone wrong.

EDIT: Dear lord you people are stuck up beyond belief! Lol... Did I not state that the crow bit was a joke? But you still wanted to go right ahead and beat that horse anyway! Lol

originally posted by: Meee32
No, no you do not... If what you say is true then everyone on youtube would ve breaking the law! Get a grip jeez! You'll need permits to film in certain places no doubt yes, but not some blanket permit to film!

People walking around with cell phones are not filming a motion picture and all the ancillary activities that come with making a film. Try to follow along.

So it's one or the other, murder or a stunt gone wrong.

It's not homicide, it's manslaughter. Learn the difference.

originally posted by: Woody510

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Meee32

You seem to allege that this was "HIS" responsibility and his alone, but this is hardly the case. First of all, you base this statement on statements made to the police by Perez, not Ruiz. Ruiz couldn't make a statement to police...because he's DEAD. Second, Perez (the girl) claims to have been 'unwillingly' forced into performing the stunt, BUT she was the same one who made posts on FailBook BEFORE it happened about how their "most dangerous stunt ever" would be forthcoming. She welcomed the attention and notoriety. To me, this shows intent and at a minimum complicity.

The bottom line is; no matter what, she DID pull the trigger! The pistol was in HER hand, and she DID pull the trigger. She could have chosen personal responsibility in that moment, but she didn't. She pulled the trigger, knowing full well she had a deadly weapon in her hand and a human life at the other end of that pistol...but hey, they could be famous, right?

She absolutely should be charged, and given the facts presented so far she should be convicted and sentenced to the maximum allowable term under the law. Further, she and her now dead boyfriend and their families should be barred from any civil proceedings (i.e. legal action, lawsuits, etc) as a result of this case. Period.

Then you also agree that there should be no stuntmen allowed in society?

I"m not going to argue about this all day, I have stated my points.

Professional stuntmen do things in a controlled environment with minimum risk. This was done in a back garden in public big difference

Yeah they do but guess what, they still die and in my opinion they are still idiots! And no sometimes they also do it in public and die in public!

Anyway, I'm out of this thread... If it's gotten down to some paperwork or skill level then I consider that a win... It's not a crime, it's a couple of idiots that did something stupid like lots of other people do!