Alec Baldwin SHOOTING

If A. Baldwin hadn't of been involved on this union set, this accident would have never been mentioned. On Non union indy sets people are killed all the time. Hollywood is just a small part of the industry and usually a semi safe environment to work in with experienced professionals...this film was the exception due to production hiring people that were "green" and had no business in such an important position. I have worked 48 hrs straight on an Italian film shot here in Tamalewood and almost trampled in a cattle stampede scene. Animals and cars are the danger on set. Firearms are "usually" followed by a very strict protocol.

a reply to: olaru12

If A. Baldwin hadn't of been involved on this union set, this accident would have never been mentioned. On Non union indy sets people are killed all the time.

Are you serious?

That has GOT to change! People should not get dead making a damn movie!

How deep does this rabbit hole of danger go?

TheRedneck

It wasn’t a “prop gun.” It was an actual gun that was being used as a prop. TMZ reported on the development that sources close to the filming of “Rust” indicate that the gun used in the incident was also used off-set for “target practice.”

I hope he gets prison time.

Baldwin is a world class #.

Karma.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: olaru12

If A. Baldwin hadn't of been involved on this union set, this accident would have never been mentioned. On Non union indy sets people are killed all the time.

Are you serious?

That has GOT to change! People should not get dead making a damn movie!

How deep does this rabbit hole of danger go?

TheRedneck

Very serious!!

The rabbit hole is very deep...and it extends down to commercials, TV pilots, vanity and foreign film projects.
Usually all non union, underfinanced, with inexperienced crews starry eyed actors, etc. Some feature length projects I work on is bare bones with just a cameraman, audio guy and one grip to do lights; Screenwriter as both producer, director, etc. No permits, guerilla style, cash only.
Example....I had to stop a scene where an actress was supposed to fly in on the most janky aerial rig you have ever seen.
People are desperate to get hired on dangerous projects just to get experience on set, both cast and crew.
Many content providers are basically criminals. The demand is high for video of all types. I have worked on projects that the video wound up on gas pumps at the 7/11. I tell all people wanting to break into the biz...be aware of what you're getting yourself into with all productions, be they big budget or indy. In a few hours I will be working on the set of a commercial as the AD, for a MMA/boxing/fitness gym. Someone will bleed....

originally posted by: TheRedneck

I believe (and this incident has solidified that belief) that the real reason we have these child-adults in the first place is a lack of education. It is patently obvious to me that the people handling the firearms on this set were completely clueless about firearm safety, whereas it was drilled into my head from before I was big enough to hold a gun.

Couldn't agree more. Also though, isn't it mostly always the case? Barring the occassional whack job who goes around killing people for fun, a lack of requisite training always seems to be at issue.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
He finally got to the PPK. He gripped it, and suddenly I heard someone say "Bobby, STOP!" Too late. The gun went off, with him holding too far up the handle. The slide came back and neatly sheared a nice little gash between his thumb and fingers.

We got the bleeding stopped and got him to a hospital for stitches; he was OK except for the pain. But the shooting fun was over, and he never wanted to come back for more.

If his parents had let someone teach him about firearms, that would not have happened; it was such a rookie mistake no one thought to check if he knew how to hold the gun. He never had the chance to learn, and that eventually caused him an injury (thankfully a minor one) and that injury probably caused him to be as scared of guns as his parents. His children likely never knew how to handle a firearm either. And the cycle continues...

TheRedneck

Wow.....that could have turned out so much worse than it did, glad it didnt though,

a reply to: olaru12
Hmm, it's pretty regimented here in Hollywood North, but ya, I can envision what you are saying in some places, hell, even here, a stuntwoman was killed filming Deadpool II,motorcycle crash though.

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: olaru12
Hmm, it's pretty regimented here in Hollywood North, but ya, I can envision what you are saying in some places, hell, even here, a stuntwoman was killed filming Deadpool II,motorcycle crash though.

Yes, 2 stunt women live in my village. Both retired and busted up pretty good. Now above the line as UPM and ADs/stunt coordinators. They should have been on "Rust" and this thread would have been unnecessary.

a reply to: olaru12

Dammit, man!

What can be done? I know you're in that industry; is there any way to fix this?

TheRedneck

a reply to: alphabetaone

isn't it mostly always the case? Barring the occassional whack job who goes around killing people for fun, a lack of requisite training always seems to be at issue.

Yes, yes it is. And it wasn't that long ago that basic firearm training was practically automatic. Back in high school, the parking lot was always packed with pickups, most with gun racks in the back window, most of them filled with loaded firearms. A pistol under the seat was nowhere near unusual, especially for kids from well-to-do families. And there were no school shootings!

I took JROTC one year. We made regular trips to the local Nation Guard armory, under the watchful eye of Sgt. Smith. I have fired a live M-16 (locked on semi-auto of course), and have seen an M-60 machine gun being fired at close range (Sgt. Smith fired it for us to watch). All this was on school time, a regular class. And there were no school shootings.

Today, everyone it seems is terrified of guns, they are banned in many locations (especially schools) and there are shootings everywhere.

You'd think someone would figure out that we're going the wrong direction.

Wow.....that could have turned out so much worse than it did, glad it didnt though,

Yes, it could have! He was bleeding really bad at first, but thankfully we got it stopped.

Poor guy... some of us occasionally still joke about how inept he was. But it's really not totally his fault. He was just one of the first in this area to be indoctrinated to fear guns.

I will say Alabama did something a while back that I thought was really smart. Hunting is a big thing around here, and hunting is not an enumerated right. So while Alabama gives out CCW permits with no problem as long as the background check doesn't fail, to get a hunting license one has to attend and pass a state-sponsored gun safety course. That's the kind of thing I can get behind. It's Constitutional, not terribly difficult to comply with, doesn't interfere with personal protection, and addresses the problem at its source.

TheRedneck

a reply to: olaru12

I would assume the injury rate is higher for stuntmen... they usually know before they go into that business that it is rough and dangerous... but this was a producer and cameraman!

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I would say we have a twofold problem:

The first is lack of education and the second would be a lack of respect for life and others in general.

a reply to: ketsuko

Can't argue with that.

TheRedneck

a reply to: olaru12

"Usually"??

I'm going to guess that that means that safety is sometimes not the first thing on peoples minds?

The stupidity of that is obvious.

Generally speaking I'm not a fan of unions...generally. But in cases like this, and the ones you've mentioned, if that's what it takes to make a workplace safe then Union it is.

That is the reasons, historically, that unions gained the traction they did.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: randomtangentsrme

Alec Baldwin and anyone else is assumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, by the law. He can thank his lucky stars for that. He will get his day in court, and I believe he should. But... when someone is as vociferous as he has been about removing the rights of others, then demonstrates a complete lack of the same safety protocols that he claims others do not follow, my sympathies are stretched to their breaking point.

Do you realize that in essence they were playing Russian Roulette? Baldwin drew twice; the first shot did not fire, as it was likely a dummy round. The next one was a live round, and now someone is dead because of it.

I know you want to protect your industry, and I can sympathize with that. But charging everyone involved with manslaughter and making them defend their (indefensible to my eyes) actions is how you do that. Some changes have to be made. No one who holds a gun should do so without personally verifying that it is not loaded.

Baldwin may have that going for him. If it can't be shown that he knew about the off-site target practice with set equipment, and had no involvement whatsoever with the bringing of rounds onto the set, then a jury might let him off. Might. But at least he will finally know that he did wrong, and maybe, just maybe, he will correct his ways. If he gets off without so much as having to defend himself, this will happen again. And again. And again.

TheRedneck

My industry is live performance not film or TV.
To be perfectly honest, I want to see Alec get charged and convicted.
But I try to Respond on this site as neutral as possible (for topics that are within my wheelhouse of knowledge) and further the conversation, rather than spin my own beliefs into it.

a reply to: randomtangentsrme

It is quite common for people to hold a compassionate view of their own industry. I am a bit sensitive to the comments about "idiot engineers," even though I have to admit there are far too many of those today. So I naturally assumed you held a similarly compassionate view toward the film industry.

In any case, I am a bit relieved to hear you would like to see charges as well. I do not wish Alec Baldwin, or any actor, ill over this or anything else. I simply want to see some common sense safety precautions taken. By all reports thus far (which I will admit could still be wrong) the industry has some serious problems and this is just the first obvious sign of more to come.

I have found it is ultimately futile to keep personal beliefs out of one's response. So rather than try to remove those personal beliefs, I incorporate them openly and identify them as appropriate. As long as one understands that their opinion is being colored by personal feelings, those personal feelings are not a problem. I would much rather debate someone who is open about why they believe as they do than someone who is constantly trying to justify a hidden belief system even when evidence points to the contrary.

As an example, I hold deeply personal beliefs on gun control. Where I live, a gun is a greatly needed tool, necessary for continued survival. So gun control is a direct attack on me and my way of life, and that means someone like Baldwin, who has been quite adamant about gun control, will naturally get little sympathy from me when he violates common sense gun rules.

I will not give in to hatred, however. Justice, yes, hatred, no.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck


In any case, I am a bit relieved to hear you would like to see charges as well. I do not wish Alec Baldwin, or any actor, ill over this or anything else. I simply want to see some common sense safety precautions taken.

Im not a huge baldwin fan either, but here's the problem i see with charging Baldwin for this.

You bring your truck into a repair shop for new brakes. The brakes fail due to the work being subpar and you kill someone. Who is liable? The shop is so long as there is actual cause and proximate cause.

In the case of Baldwin, there was an outside firm responsible for the safety of the equipment and Baldwin was only an operator...whether or not he was properly trained in firearms safety and handling should never come into play as he had no desire to handle a projectile discharging firearm....but an illusion of one. We can argue whether or not its a great idea to use a "real" firearm as an illusion, but thats another debate.

Actual cause in Baldwins case would mean if not for the negligence of the outside firm would Mrs. Hutchins have been shot down? If the answer is no, actual cause has been established. Proximate cause in this case would be were there any unforseeable or intervening events that would relieve the outside firm of liability? If the answer is no, you have proximate cause.

Instead the outside firm should be held liable and any forthcoming charges should fall sqaurely on them.

a reply to: alphabetaone

What you're missing here is that Alec Baldwin is the outside firm. He was not just an actor in the movie, but also the producer. So either way, he bears responsibility.

In any case, this gets back to the issue of who is responsible. It literally takes seconds to check the firearm oneself. Whether or not he had intentions of handling a loaded weapon is immaterial; he had intentions of handling a weapon capable of being loaded. It is therefore his responsibility, as well as the responsibility of the AD who handed it to him and declared it a "cold gun," to verify that there was no live round in it.

In your metaphor, if I picked up my car and realized the brakes were not acting right but continued to drive it anyway, I would bear some of the responsibility along with the shop. The same is true here. He who holds the gun bears the responsibility. That's the very basis of firearm safety.

I can understand the reasoning behind movie sets using real weapons, and I have no problem with that. However, that does not absolve them of being just as responsible as anyone else for actions taken. If other people, who are not intending on actually pointing their weapon at others, are required to undertake reasonable firearm safety, how much more should someone who is going to be pointing the gun at others in the course of their use of it also be required to understand basic firearm safety?

I am not saying Alec Baldwin should be the only one charged; on the contrary, everyone who contributed to this incident should be charged, including him. that also includes the AD, whoever was in charge of the ammo storage, anyone who contributed to or knew of the off-site target practice, anyone who brought live rounds onto the set and anyone who knew live rounds were on the set. Not all with manslaughter, but at least with gross negligence.

If Baldwin gets off without being charged, it sends a message to everyone else in the industry: be as unsafe as you want; there will be no consequences if things go wrong. That is the wrong message. if, however, people are charged with serious crimes commensurate with their involvement, the message will be: you are responsible for your actions; be safe.

Personally, I think we need a new law that every person in the entertainment industry who handles or oversees a firearm (prop weapons excluded) must pass a firearm safety program. Alabama requires that for hunters, and it is not a terrible hindrance to those who wish to hunt. How would it be a hindrance to an actor who either makes or stands to make millions a year?

TheRedneck

The more I learn about this, the more it becomes obvious this was criminal. A lot of people need to face criminal charges. No murder took place, but there was enough criminal negligence that led to a woman's death.

As for Baldwin, I don't care what the circumstances or the setting are, you don't point a gun at someone and fire it because someone else told you it was safe. You double and triple check it yourself before you fire it, and if you don't know how to do that, you don't do it. And if a shot like this is required for a film, no one should be standing in the line of fire anyway.

Would any of these actors try to operate a car, or a chainsaw, or any other dangerous machine without proper training? But their liberal dementia against guns makes them think they're immune to having to learn about firearms. They know they're bad, no real knowledge required, and that willful ignorance led to this tragedy.

Throw the #ing book at them.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

Personally, I think we need a new law that every person in the entertainment industry who handles or oversees a firearm (prop weapons excluded) must pass a firearm safety program. Alabama requires that for hunters, and it is not a terrible hindrance to those who wish to hunt. How would it be a hindrance to an actor who either makes or stands to make millions a year?

TheRedneck

Right. Ultimately this. If it's a real firearm, then get real safety training. Actor/Actress or otherwise.

Does anybody know what caliber round was involved with Baldwin's gun accident with the prop gun?

I'm assuming it was a 45 Colt round, maybe???