Alec Baldwin gun incident

[spackard]

I heard that John&Ken plinking thing also.
But, early on there was talk about how the crew's working 12 hr days, plus driving 50 miles to motel rooms because ones nearby cost too much.
So, 14 hr day, gots to eat and shower, 15 hr day. This happened on the 12th day of filming.
Where was the spare time for plinking?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Sort of. If I remember correctly, someone was trying to create blanks from real live ammo and pulled the bullets and powder from some live .44 mag rounds. What they didn't check for was to see if anything was in the barrel (there was) and the force of the primer going off was enough to propel whatever was in the barrel into Lee's torso.

Not exactly. For a particular scene, someone removed the gun powder from real rounds and then put the bullets back in the brass so the rounds looked real when looking at the front of the revolver (ie, you see the nose of the bullets in the cylinder). They left the primers in the brass - big mistake. Then someone accidentally fired one, and the primer was only powerful enough to push the bullet half way down the barrel. Nobody realized it, or checked the barrel. Then in a later scene, powerful blanks were loaded. When the blank went off it pushed the lodged bullet out and it killed Lee.

 

[c502cid]

It makes me wonder why Hollywood is using blanks at all? They don't have the technology to make a sound effect, or a muzzle flash? If they don't want the responsibility of gun safety protocols, then they need to take ALL of the chance of danger out of the equation.

 

[spasm3]

I think it will all boil down to, who walked live projectile rounds on to a set.

Was the gun used off set for shooting and returned with live ammo?

 

[fisher83]

I own many guns and enjoy having them but they should never ever be used as pIay toys or props. With the current technology available it's just not necessary to put lives at risk to film these scenes. I think blanks could provide a false sense of security. Especially if there are varying levels of gun knowledge and experience on set. The most dangerous gun is the one you don't think is loaded. This was a tragic and avoidable situation.

 

[el Nuke]

I’m reminded of something Dave Mustane (sp?) once said:

Hindsight is always 20/20
But looking back, it’s still a bit fuzzy
Speak of mutually assured destruction
Nice story, go tell it to Readers Digest

 

[billt460]

Thank you for making my point beautifully. The parachute comparison is perfect.

No it's not. Not at all. How are you going to "check" to see if a parachute is packed properly? The fact is you really can't without opening it. Then it has to be repacked, again. And unless you are a knowledgeable sky diver, you would have no idea either way, even if you watched the operation being performed. You are all but forced to trust that operation to someone else..... Or else don't make the jump.

With firearms it is totally different. You don't have to be an "expert" to check to see if a weapon is loaded. And if you can't, or don't know how, then you have zero business handling it in the first place. So playing the stupid card is automatically off the table.

Baldwin, (or anyone else for that matter), could have, (and SHOULD HAVE), opened the loading gate, and rotated the cylinder, and checked those rounds in well under a minute. There was no reason what so ever for him to take anyone's word for it. This regardless of how much of an "expert" they are, or claim to be.

Gun safety is the responsibility of the person who is handling the weapon. No one else. If you hand me a weapon, and tell me, "it's unloaded", "cold", "loaded with blanks", or whatever, the first thing I'm going to do is check it myself. Not because I don't think you know what you're doing. But rather because I do once I pick it up.

As far as I am concerned, Baldwin owns 100% of this.

FACT: Baldwin was the last person to pick up that weapon.

FACT: Baldwin himself failed to check the condition of said weapon.

FACT: Baldwin, and Baldwin alone allowed the muzzle to be pointed at the victim.

FACT: Baldwin, and Baldwin alone deliberately pulled the trigger, KILLING the victim, and wounding another.

FACT: Had Baldwin checked that weapon like he should have, none of the above would have happened.

Gun safety really is that simple. And it's a lot faster and easier, than looking for others to blame when you don't exercise it.

 

[GoldDot40]

Most movie sets using guns have some real guns that use blanks for certain scenes. Thats why there's an Armorer expert in charge.

Which is why more precautions should be followed ANY time a functional firearm is used...blanks or no blanks. This entire situation is saturated with fail. How do we know? Because somebody died.

 

[RDY4WAR]

In fact basic safety as you know it DOES go out the window of they can't make a decent film. I was in the Army and we fired blanks at each other using MILES stuff. At some point you have to use simulations assuming things are safe and live ammo doesn't get into the mix. There are scenes where a gun is pointed directly at the camera. It's not supposed to be a gun range if we are being fair here...

But the fact that here was live ammo here and things were not tightly controlled is egregious on this set,,,,

I was in the Army too. We also had plugs in the muzzles when we were doing that and were hypervigilant in ensuring we had nothing but blanks in the magazine.

 

[Astro14]

They aren't firearms, they're harmless movie props. It's the weapons master's job to make sure of that in a variety of ways so this kind of thing doesn't happen.

They are often real firearms. Astute movie goers can see the difference, so Hollywood often uses real.

 

[Astro14]

I only have wheelers and always will - pretty easy to see if rounds are in place + see both ends …
This was a western … six shooter I’d assume ?

Even then, there are prop rounds that appear real because astute movie goers will see the blanks in the revolver.

 

[4WD]

Even then, there are prop rounds that appear real because astute movie goers will see the blanks in the revolver.

Made from what ?

 

[wpod]

Obviously they are firearms.

I was in the Army too. We also had plugs in the muzzles when we were doing that and were hypervigilant in ensuring we had nothing but blanks in the magazine.

I have a blank adaptor some where .

 

[4WD]

I like these in a revolver … can even get red tips .22 WMR

 

[Propflux01]

The "harmless movie props" you're talking about were fully functional firearms which takes the "harmless" out of the equation. If the Pope handed me a revolver and told me it was unloaded, I'm still responsible to ensure that I don't injure anyone with it. Even when movie set guns are loaded with blanks, they're never supposed to be pointed directly at someone when fired. They always stage the angles so that they are pointed away from people.

EVERYONE in this situation was to blame. The actor was to blame for assuming he could point it anywhere he wanted and pull the trigger. The movie production people who hired an unqualified young female cinema studies graduate with no firearms expertise as the weapons prop master were to blame for putting affirmative action before common sense. That same young lady was to blame for bringing live ammo on the set so she could take the "harmless movie prop" guns out to the desert to impress her friends with.

The bolded…..This, this, and more this. It’s the end users responsibility, period. I fail to understand what’s so hard about that. Just like the pilot of an aircraft, who’s responsible in the end for ensuring the airworthiness of his craft, hence why we have a walk around in the checklist.
in this instance, mr “I hate guns“ needs to burn just like any one of us here would if we accidentally shot someone after being told “it’s unloaded”. Simple as that.

billt460 nailed it as well.

 

[Pablo]

The bolded…..This, this, and more this. It’s the end users responsibility, period. I fail to understand what’s so hard about that. Just like the pilot of an aircraft, who’s responsible in the end for ensuring the airworthiness of his craft, hence why we have a walk around in the checklist.
in this instance, mr “I hate guns“ needs to burn just like any one of us here would if we accidentally shot someone after being told “it’s unloaded”. Simple as that.

I just don't understand the whole "gun rules don't apply to movie sets" thing. Sounds more like a defense of Baldwin than anything.

The 4 gun rules absolutely apply EVERYWHERE.

Yes, REAL guns get pointed at REAL people on movie sets. The rules STILL apply. Why wouldn't they?

 

[I<3oil]

No it's not. Not at all. How are you going to "check" to see if a parachute is packed properly? The fact is you really can't without opening it. Then it has to be repacked, again. And unless you are a knowledgeable sky diver, you would have no idea either way, even if you watched the operation being performed. You are all but forced to trust that operation to someone else..... Or else don't make the jump.

With firearms it is totally different. You don't have to be an "expert" to check to see if a weapon is loaded. And if you can't, or don't know how, then you have zero business handling it in the first place. So playing the stupid card is automatically off the table.

Baldwin, (or anyone else for that matter), could have, (and SHOULD HAVE), opened the loading gate, and rotated the cylinder, and checked those rounds in well under a minute. There was no reason what so ever for him to take anyone's word for it. This regardless of how much of an "expert" they are, or claim to be.

Gun safety is the responsibility of the person who is handling the weapon. No one else. If you hand me a weapon, and tell me, "it's unloaded", "cold", "loaded with blanks", or whatever, the first thing I'm going to do is check it myself. Not because I don't think you know what you're doing. But rather because I do once I pick it up.

As far as I am concerned, Baldwin owns 100% of this.

FACT: Baldwin was the last person to pick up that weapon.

FACT: Baldwin himself failed to check the condition of said weapon.

FACT: Baldwin, and Baldwin alone allowed the muzzle to be pointed at the victim.

FACT: Baldwin, and Baldwin alone deliberately pulled the trigger, KILLING the victim, and wounding another.

FACT: Had Baldwin checked that weapon like he should have, none of the above would have happened.

Gun safety really is that simple. And it's a lot faster and easier, than looking for others to blame when you don't exercise it.

Yup.

 

[dishdude]

I just don't understand the whole "gun rules don't apply to movie sets" thing. Sounds more like a defense of Baldwin than anything.

The 4 gun rules absolutely apply EVERYWHERE.

Yes, REAL guns get pointed at REAL people on movie sets. The rules STILL apply. Why wouldn't they?

They're acting. They're pointing that gun at another actor and pulling the trigger.

This is a workplace, they shouldn't have been horsing around target practicing and using movie props outside of filming.

 

[billt460]

Yes, REAL guns get pointed at REAL people on movie sets. The rules STILL apply. Why wouldn't they?

One of the main rules of gun safety is, "Never point the muzzle at anything or anyone you do not wish to destroy". What Baldwin's lawyers may try to run with, is the fact that guns used in movies are most always pointed at other actors. It can't be helped, simply because they're all shooting at each other in several of the scenes.... Especially westerns.

But it would be foolish of them to try that approach, because it only makes the point even stronger, that Baldwin himself should have checked that weapon. And not relied solely on someone else. Regardless of how much they're qualified to do so. Or how much of an "expert" they are, or else claim to be. The fact is there is absolutely no excuse for Baldwin not checking that weapon, as soon as he put his hands on it.

Speaking only for myself, I would be extremely nervous pointing a weapon at anyone....... Even one that I personally checked. But I was raised to be safe with guns. Baldwin? You make the call.

 

[Pablo]

One of the main rules of gun safety is, "Never point the muzzle at anything or anyone you do not wish to destroy". What Baldwin's lawyers may try to run with, is the fact that guns used in movies are most always pointed at other actors. It can't be helped, simply because they're all shooting at each other in several of the scenes.... Especially westerns.

But it would be foolish of them to try that approach, because it only makes the point even stronger, that Baldwin himself should have checked that weapon. And not relied solely on someone else. Regardless of how much they're qualified to do so. Or how much of an "expert" they are, or else claim to be. The fact is there is absolutely no excuse for Baldwin not checking that weapon, as soon as he put his hands on it.

Speaking only for myself, I would be extremely nervous pointing a weapon at anyone....... Even one that I personally checked. But I was raised to be safe with guns. Baldwin? You make the call.

Bingo.

Of course I thought about this before I posted and even noted that fact in my post.

Yes, think about it, deeper - and there it is. If you violate them, no good will come of it. Maybe not always, maybe not instantly.

The 4 universal rules of gun safety are:

1. Treat all guns as if they are always loaded.
2. Never let the muzzle point at anything that you are not willing to destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target and you have made the decision to shoot.
4. Be sure of your target and what is behind it.

So you want to violate #2? See rule #1. And then quadruple check, or just use a different approach.