Alec Baldwin May Have INTENTIONALLY Killed That Woman

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

You're right when he was told the gun was cold as far as I understood not even blanks were supposed to be in it. they were supposed to e dummy rounds so when looking at the revolver from the front they looked like it was loaded. Dummy rounds look like the real thing except the primer is missing. Dummy rounds are often used when they want you to think it's real bullets such as the ones on the cowboy's belt. I don't blame him not knowing enough to tell the difference many wouldn't. Film sets buy ones that look real basically a bullet made without gun powder.

So if he was told it was cold and he had experience seeing dummy rounds loaded he wouldn't have caught it. I dout he had the training to notice the primer is fake

a reply to: dragonridr

That's where I have the problem with the Armorer not being allowed on the set. She is your expert.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Good. That is my only point.

I have admitted many many times on here that I do not like Alec Baldwin. He is a pompous jerk who would delight in making it all but impossible for me to protect myself from critters out here, both 4-legged and 2-legged. If I ever met him, I'm not sure I could resist slapping his jaw out of its socket. But none of that matters when it comes to legalities. I don't care who it is that is irresponsible with a gun; they are irresponsible with a gun.

There are a lot of people that I know well, close friends of the family (and a couple members of the family!) that I will not allow to hunt here, nor will I entertain the idea of doing anything with them that concerns firearms. Why? because they are irresponsible with a gun. I would stand by and watch them go down for involuntary manslaughter should they be in the same situation as Baldwin.

The ignorance about the weapons is a big, big problem IMO. Alec Baldwin should have known how to clear the gun, or he should have turned down the role. Period. The armorer should never have been placed in that position, especially after some of her previous antics trying to play armorer. The AD was irresponsible himself, and should have been fired on the spot for not checking the gun before handing it to Baldwin. As I said to another poster above, this was a comedy of errors that should never be allowed to happen again.

Like you, I do not believe it was an intentional shooting. I know this thread is predicated on that, but there were just so many people who had to have conspired in order for this tragedy to happen, it simply seems beyond the realm of reality to me. If I am proven wrong later, so be it; for now, I agree there was no malice or intent. That's why I keep mentioning involuntary manslaughter; no malice or intent is required.


TheRedneck

a reply to: JIMC5499

She wasn't much of an expert. Her only qualification that I have found is being the daughter of a legendary armorer. Apparently, this apple not only fell far from the tree, it rolled a few miles farther once it did. Uphill. Against a headwind.

But yeah, it does appear that it is somewhat accurate to say Halyna Hutchins died from the Chinese virus without ever contracting it.

TheRedneck

a reply to: machineintelligence

NORMALLY,... i would totally agree with you,... BUT...
this is a movie, its FAKE, they are actors, PRETENDING ...
the firearms are supposed to be PROPS / non-firing replicas..
they have ones special even that fire ONLY BLANKS.
whoever brought the REAL gun on premisis is CULPRIT.
the actor is EXPECTED to point the gun at someone and
PRETEND TO SHOOT,....BLANKS
think he really would have done it if he knew it was a REAL gun ?

Yer, Alec Baldwin signed up to do a movie only to shoot the director deliberately.... I mean really? Why would you even think he did it deliberate? In front of more then a dozen witnesses and of course cameras? Yer right. Sorry. I don't buy he did it deliberatly one little bit.

a reply to: cappie

the actor is EXPECTED to point the gun at someone and
PRETEND TO SHOOT

Yes, he is. But the gun is supposed to be real as well. A fake gun ("prop gun") cannot shoot period, even blanks! This particular gun was not even supposed to have blanks. It was supposed to have dummy rounds (for the umpteenth time).

You said it yourself: it's a movie. It's fake. There's not supposed to ever be anyone pointing a gun directly at another person. There are camera tricks to make it look like that's what's happening. But even if there was no other way to get the shot and he had to, in this one case, point the gun at someone, the fact that his job entails pointing a real gun at someone and pulling the trigger means he has extra responsibility to ensure the gun is not loaded, not less responsibility.

The average car weighs a little over a ton. A loaded semi weighs 40 tons. If I am driving a semi, which can do more damage than a car, I have more responsibility to drive it safely, not less. The more dangerous the activity, the more important safety becomes.

There are now 4 threads on this incident. It's not hard to read some of them and realize what was actually going on.

TheRedneck

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Yes I said that, but, in context, without a death murder is a non-sequitur.

Asserting that you know Whittington' reason for saying it was an accident is a stretch. The distinction between the two events, imo, is Whittington stepped in front of Cheney as he fired - baldwin aimed at the woman.

I agree there is a chance the baldwin event was a complete accident. However, the conspiracy theorist in me sees a plausible series of events that could have been planned. When I think about how many mistakes had to happen to make this an accident it gets harder to believe.

# baldwin - I couldn't agree more.

Interesting discussion. Well done.

I agree there is a chance the baldwin event was a complete accident. However, the conspiracy theorist in me sees a plausible series of events that could have been planned. When I think about how many mistakes had to happen to make this an accident it gets harder to believe.

a reply to: Vroomfondel


I agree , there were way to many careless mistakes made on this movie set for it to be a complete accident .

And who would make a better patsy than Alec Baldwin ?

It ponders credulity to say the least , I wonder did Alec Baldwin bite the hand of his Liberal handler and this shooting was his punishment . Or was the real goal of this whole thing just to kill that woman no matter how they went about it.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Interesting. From what I've heard, she wasn't allowed to do her job. Everything negative about her that I've heard comes from a Union mouthpiece.

a reply to: JIMC5499

NIcolas Cage is a union mouthpiece?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

He's not exactly an expert either.

There's not supposed to ever be anyone pointing a gun directly at another person. There are camera tricks to make it look like that's what's happening.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Typically they will film through a sheet of Lexan however it appears they didnt want to spend the money.

But even if there was no other way to get the shot and he had to, in this one case, point the gun at someone, the fact that his job entails pointing a real gun at someone and pulling the trigger means he has extra responsibility to ensure the gun is not loaded, not less responsibility.

Well, it's the armorer's job to teach the actors how to properly use the props. So in movies the actor isn't responsible however he is a producer there job is to hire the right people and maintain safety. He obviously failed miserably at maintaining a safe work environment. So as an actor he's good and nothing would happen as a producer he's liable for safety on the film. This is why films buy insurance because this will be a huge payout.

a reply to: dragonridr

Did he have training to never point the gun at a person, ever?

Hot cold whatever, why is he pointing it at anyone? Especially not during a shoot and not an actor/the actor he's in scene with. Enquiring minds want to know

Say you’re a bus driver…

it’s the job of the garage to provide you with a safe, serviced vehicle.

You’re job is to get to work on time, get in that bus and drive it’s route safely.

If the garage didn’t do their job and the brakes malfunction along the route is that the driver’s fault? Should all driver’s be qualified mechanicals who spend a pen hour or so giving the bus a full once over at the start of every shift?

People have jobs to do and if one of those folk can’t do their job sufficiently you can’t blame everyone else for that.

I imagine Baldwin’s in bits about having pulled that trigger and unless there’s evidence he did so knowing it would harm, then saying so is pretty low.

originally posted by: Kaiju666
Hot cold whatever, why is he pointing it at anyone? Especially not during a shoot and not an actor/the actor he's in scene with. Enquiring minds want to know

Have you never seen a shot in a movie where the you the audience are seeing from the general perspective of one of the characters, in this case the character Baldwin is shooting at?

Well obviously this is how they get that shot - pointing the gun towards the camera and firing.

It’s very common device in cinema and tv.

This discussion is beyond surreal!

a reply to: JIMC5499

An expert on firearms... I don't know.

An expert on movie set safety? I'd expect so, considering how many big-budget films he has made.

He also has direct experience with Hannah Gutierrez-Reed as well. This is from the Insider:

Stu Brumbaugh, who worked as a key grip on the set of "The Old Way," told The Wrap that Hannah Gutierrez-Reed's behavior caused the film's star Nicolas Cage to scream at her and storm off set.

Brumbaugh said Cage snapped when Gutierrez-Reed fired a gun near the cast and crew for the second time in three days without warning.

"Make an announcement, you just blew my #ing eardrums out," Cage yelled before walking off the set, Brumbaugh told the publication.

I'd call that unsafe conduct by an armorer. I don't care if it was related by a union guy, a non-union hack, or some little green man from Mars. If she did what she is said to have done on the set of "The Old Way," she is absolutely not qualified to even look at a picture of a gun.

And, based on the number of articles I found (11 pages worth on a quick Google search) talking about this incident and no denial from either her or Cage, I think it can be taken as fact at this point that she literally fired a live weapon on a movie set where she was working as an armorer, without any warning to others and in the immediate vicinity of others, close enough to cause ear pain from the percussive blast.

Do you consider that "firearm safety"?

I also think she is going to be charged, possibly to let Baldwin off the hook (I sincerely hope not, but it looks that way). I was actually trying to look up Rock Garotti, Nicolas Cage's personal armorer and a guy who, I have been told by those in the business, is one of the best in the business. The fact that Cage uses a personal armorer who is so well-known for being strict and safe tells me he is more than a rookie when it comes to firearm safety. I couldn't find a single link to anything about him, though, just page after page of links about Hannah Gutierrez-Reed and her actions on "The Old Way."

If true, that means that Alec Baldwin will have, in order to save under a minute of his oh-so-vauable-time by not personally checking his firearm, killed one woman and destroyed the life of another. That's some damn valuable hide he is carrying on his ass.

TheRedneck

a reply to: dragonridr

Typically they will film through a sheet of Lexan however it appears they didnt want to spend the money.

As I understand it, the Lexan wasn't used because they weren't actually filming. They were lining up the shot manually. The gun was supposed to be loaded with dummy rounds, so there should have been nothing to fire.

To be honest, I am starting to wonder why there was even ammunition at all in the gun. In the shot, ammo would be needed for realism, but just to line it up?

Well, it's the armorer's job to teach the actors how to properly use the props.

That is true from my understanding.

So in movies the actor isn't responsible

Are people allowed to get shot and die during movies?

This is not fantasy... it is the production of a fantasy using real life. He who holds the gun accepts the responsibility. Period. End of paragraph. End of final chapter. Send it to the presses. Anything less is a travesty of justice.

If Alec Baldwin is not charged, no one should ever be charged again for killing someone with a firearm. Heck, we can all just have a real-life purge... as long as one claims to not know about a firearm, they can just kill whoever they want.

TheRedneck

a reply to: McGinty

If the garage didn’t do their job and the brakes malfunction along the route is that the driver’s fault? Should all driver’s be qualified mechanicals who spend a pen hour or so giving the bus a full once over at the start of every shift?

Actually, the answer to your question is "yes."

A driver of any commercial vehicle is required to inspect said vehicle before starting work for the day. If that bus driver fails to check the brakes and then kills someone due to faulty brakes, it is considered his liability.

In order for the mechanic to be at fault, either malicious actions or gross negligence must be proven, as in, he either intentionally damaged the brakes or didn't replace brakes he knew were faulty. And even that will not absolve the driver.

I know; I drove a truck OTR for 8 years, racking up over a million miles. If something goes wrong, it is the driver who is in control of the vehicle, and the driver is responsible. The mechanic and the company may be, but the driver already is.

HE WHO HOLDS THE GUN ACCEPTS THE RESPONSIBILITY!

TheRedneck