General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGun That Killed DP ... ALLEGEDLY USED FOR OFF-SET TARGET PRACTICE
The smoking gun that claimed the life of Halyna Hutchins might've been more than just an on-set prop -- it was also being fired recreationally, even when cameras weren't rolling.
Multiple sources directly connected to the 'Rust' production tell TMZ ... the same gun Alec Baldwin accidentally fired -- hitting the DP and director -- was being used by crews members off set as well, for what we're told amounted to target practice.
e're told this off-the-clock shooting -- which was allegedly happening away from the movie lot -- was being done with real bullets ... which is how some who worked on the film believe a live round found its way in one of the chambers that day.
https://www.tmz.com/2021/10/23/alec-baldwin-rust-gun-accident-used-off-set-target-practice/
NullTuples
(6,017 posts)Zeitghost
(3,892 posts)The union problems were with the camera crew I believe. I don't think the armorer was involved in that.
If reports are ture and she was allowing props to be used recreationally to fire real rounds, it is extremely negligent.
monkeyman1
(5,109 posts)LisaL
(44,980 posts)This was her second movie as a lead armorer.
I don't think she had any formal training, other than from her father.
Seems like no certification or formal training is required for the job.
ananda
(28,891 posts)nt
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)on sets. I'm willing to bet this all goes back to him. If that is the case then he must in some way be criminally negligible.
Kablooie
(18,645 posts)The AD (1st Assistant Director) is supposed to make sure the armorer is doing their job correctly.
The producer is supposed to make sure competent people are hired for all safety related positions.
The union crew walked off because of unsafe conditions so many or most of the crew were scabs which might not have the same professional standards as the trained union crew.
Alec Baldwin will be held responsible not because he shot the gun but because he is one of the producers who allowed these unsafe conditions to arise to conserve costs.
Cattledog
(5,920 posts)monkeyman1
(5,109 posts)Kablooie
(18,645 posts)Also the armorer is supposed to keep control of all guns at all times.
No one is supposed to touch them unless they handed to them for a shot. Immediatly after the shot everyone is supposed to stand still until the armorer takes back the gun and call clear.
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)or rarity and that's why some gun enthusiast decided to take it out for target practice?
LisaL
(44,980 posts)Guns used were "historical revolvers" of that time period. Nobody should be taking prop guns for target shooting, regardless.
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)Straw Man
(6,626 posts)or rarity and that's why some gun enthusiast decided to take it out for target practice?
Wild West replica guns -- both rifles and pistols -- are a dime a dozen. Most are manufactured in Italy by Uberti, Pedersoli, and several other firms. This is usually attributed to the "spaghetti Western" phenomenon of the '60s and '70s.
If they were taking these guns out into the field for target practice, it would have been attributable more to boredom and lack of discipline than any sort of fascination, unless these were people who were unfamiliar with firearms in general, in which case it is doubly reprehensible.
One factor that has been mostly ignored in all the speculation about what happened is the possibility -- depending on the period depicted in the film -- that the gun in question was not a cartridge-loading revolver at all, but a cap-and-ball revolver. That would mean that the loading process would have been considerably more complex, involving loading each of the six chambers in the cylinder with black powder, a ball (bullet), and a cap (primer) separately. Safety checks with such a firearm would be correspondingly more complex as well. If the film's setting is pre-1870s, it's quite possible that that's what was involved.
Demovictory9
(32,488 posts)calimary
(81,559 posts)Roisin Ni Fiachra
(2,574 posts)a firearm capable of firing live ammunition.
A firearm that is capable of firing live ammunition should never be left in a place where people who are not thoroughly trained in gun safety have access to it.
Sounds like a bunch of yahoos who were untrained in gun safety were playing with firearms as if they were toys, off the set.
The most famous of all famous last words are:
"I didn't know it was loaded".
yardwork
(61,741 posts)doc03
(35,425 posts)I am confused by so much misinformation put out by the news media that are totally ignorant about guns. I heard a report that who ever gave the gun to Baldwin said it was hot? What did that mean, it had a blank cartridge a metal bullet? They surly didn't mean it had an actual metal bullet in it? I haven't heard enough information about this to blame anyone for the accident. I have read comments from numerous DU movie production experts and firearms experts. Myself I am going to wait and see if anyone is convicted of some crime.
LisaL
(44,980 posts)Which means the gun should have been empty (no blank).
doc03
(35,425 posts)a metal bullet. If the arms person hands him a gun and says it is cold it is not Baldwin's fault.
Dial H For Hero
(2,971 posts)Still, he should have checked it himself.
LisaL
(44,980 posts)We don't know for sure what it actually was.
Dial H For Hero
(2,971 posts)While I'll grant that all the details aren't available yet, it seems far more plausible that a real bullet was fired, especially given that one person was killed and another injured by a single shot. I have trouble imagining how a blank could do that.
Zeitghost
(3,892 posts)A blank can be dangerous close up, but it is not capable of pushing the wadding holding the powder in through a person and into another. I believe this has been confirmed by the initial reports coming out.
LisaL
(44,980 posts)We heard it was a "live round" but in a movie business that could mean blank.
I agree that it sure appears it was a real bullet, but that hasn't been confirmed.
Zeitghost
(3,892 posts)Confirms it was a live round. Movie sets might have their own lingo, a live round to a police officer is a real round with a bullet, powder and casing. Not a blank.
NT
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)Alec Baldwin was handed what was described as a safe "cold gun" on the set of his movie "Rust", but the prop gun contained live rounds when it was fired, according to details of the police investigation into the fatal shooting released on Friday.
(Snip)
The assistant director who handed Baldwin the prop gun did not know it contained live rounds, the affidavit by Santa Fe Sheriff's Department Detective Joel Cano said.
LisaL
(44,980 posts)loaded with either a blank or a bullet.
As this was for the search warrant, how would the police even know if the bullet was real at the time of asking for search warrant?
I am assuming that the bullet is stuck in the shoulder of the director. It has to be removed and examined.
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)and the emergency room most certainly knows what a bullet looks like.
doc03
(35,425 posts)an actual bullet?
ProfessorGAC
(65,325 posts)Not hot.
It does clearly call to question how carefully it was examined for it to be declared cold, but have a live round in it.
And, the physics suggest live round, because the same round went through the woman it killed & hit the director behind her. A hard was in a blank wouldn't have the mass or ballistics to pass completely through a human being. Could kill the person hit, but not hit 2 people.
I agree the information came out in partials, so got confusing. But, it sure seems a live round was involved.
Patton French
(789 posts)LisaL
(44,980 posts)to movie production.
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)As much as I feel like I need a shower after reading their site, Harvey is a lawyer and knows better than to print this if it is unsubstantiated. I believe it.
Shanti Shanti Shanti
(12,047 posts)Paladin
(28,281 posts)ananda
(28,891 posts)nt
Response to RandySF (Original post)
sl8 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Zeitghost
(3,892 posts)California law wouldn't apply.
Response to Zeitghost (Reply #31)
sl8 This message was self-deleted by its author.
MenloParque
(512 posts)If the same firearm had multiple malfunctions as been reported, wouldnt a Producer on the set he aware of this firearm issue? Why would this same problem firearm be considered SAFE? Why was the gun pointed at a Cinematographer and why was the trigger even pulled? Did this discharge happen during a live action take? If not, and the film wasnt rolling, why would a problematic firearm be pointed at someone and the trigger pulled. So many questions at this time!
LisaL
(44,980 posts)The firearm was supposed to have been checked by multiple people before being given to Baldwin.
Baldwin was told the firearm was "cold" meaning it should have been empty. There were multiple firearms used in making of this movie.
MenloParque
(512 posts)Is it within protocol to point a verified cold firearm at a person behind camera and display incorrect trigger discipline and pull trigger when not IN ACTION ON THE SET? So many questions.
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)or rehearsal?
Whoa slow down there Jack! Show me where I said that I believe that Alec Baldwin should be charged.
Irish_Dem
(47,656 posts)They can use various camera angles to make it look like the actor is pointing a gun at another actor.
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)Irish_Dem
(47,656 posts)Doesn't make sense.
If they gun was supposed to look like it was pointed at the camera, there are ways to protect the camera people.
SYFROYH
(34,185 posts)Ive heard and read so many conflicting details.
But someone is dead and another injured and its a preventable tragedy anyway you look at it.
marie999
(3,334 posts)Not one of them checked the weapon.
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)who checks the weapon and is supposed to be in custody of it at all times. For whatever reason it was handed to Alec Baldwin by the assistant director. I don't know if the armorer left with the rest of the crew in the labor dispute or what. The AD had a history of lax security on sets.
You seem invested on "Elec" being charged with something. What law did he break by not checking a cold gun on the set of a movie?
marie999
(3,334 posts)He/she should check the weapon for their own peace of mind.
LisaL
(44,980 posts)Thus they rely on prop people to make sure everything is done right with the gun.
In this case that clearly didn't happen.
marie999
(3,334 posts)LisaL
(44,980 posts)NT
marie999
(3,334 posts)obamanut2012
(26,179 posts)Gross.
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)marie999
(3,334 posts)how about criminally negligent homicide.
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)How was he being criminally negligent?
marie999
(3,334 posts)Just because he is an actor doesn't excuse the fact that he killed someone. If a friend handed you a weapon and said it wasn't loaded would you take his word for it?
gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)I'm pretty sure negligent homicide refers to a death that occurs during the commission of a crime. Baldwin wasn't committing a crime. The district attorney seems to agree.
Crepuscular
(1,057 posts)If the stories that have described what happened are accurate, Baldwin was potentially negligent in several ways.
First and foremost, on a movie set, you don't ever, ever, point a gun, whether it's loaded or not loaded, real or what you think is only a prop, in the direction of another person. Reportedly in this case he pointed the gun at three people. Doesn't matter if he thought the gun was not loaded, you never, ever point any kind of a firearm at another person. If the gun has to be pointed directly at the camera, the set can be cleared and the camera operated by remote. Clearly, Baldwin pointed the gun at other people.
Secondly, on set, unless you are actually doing the take, you don't put your finger on the trigger and pull it. Again, doesn't matter if you think it's not loaded, the finger stays off the trigger until the moment the scene is being shot. In this case, Baldwin was supposedly practicing a cross draw and pointing the gun towards the camera, where there were three people. His finger should never have been on the trigger and it should never have been pulled.
Thirdly, given the historical period being portrayed, it's almost certain that the firearm being used was a single action revolver. This means that you can't just pull the trigger to make it fire. Instead, you have to cock the hammer each time you want to shoot the gun. Again, you never point a gun at another person and you don't cock the hammer until you are ready to shoot the scene. Cocking and decocking the hammer is an act that increases the potential for accidental discharges to occur, sometimes due to sweaty hands, etc, which cause the hammer to slip from the thumb and then fall on a loaded chamber, causing the firearm to discharge. Because of that potential, it should be hammered home (excuse the pun) to any talent handling the firearm that you don't cock and decock the hammer repeatedly. If it's cocked for the scene and you don't end up pulling the trigger, hand it to the armorer for decocking. In this case, Baldwin was allegedly practicing a cross draw but also had to have both drawn the gun, cocked the hammer, pointed it at the other people by the camera and pulled the trigger.
Those are three distinct acts, any of which could be considered negligent and cumulatively result in a major part of the blame falling on Baldwins shoulders, for this tragic event.
Response to Crepuscular (Reply #81)
gldstwmn This message was self-deleted by its author.
USALiberal
(10,877 posts)gldstwmn
(4,575 posts)He seems pretty distraught to me.
obamanut2012
(26,179 posts)This race to blame Baldwin for SOMETHING is really gross.
RandySF
(59,587 posts)Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)Steelrolled
(2,022 posts)but I think Baldwin is the least responsible, and will be given a pass.
I'm not an actor, but I can't imagine pointing a gun at someone and pulling the trigger without checking it personally.
USALiberal
(10,877 posts)doc03
(35,425 posts)someone placed a loaded round in a prop gun.
Steelrolled
(2,022 posts)I guess we'll see this one play out in real life.
MustLoveBeagles
(11,672 posts)S9 E30 The Case of the Final Fade-Out: Barry Conrad has become a major star with an oversized ego. At the last moment, he tells his producer, Jackson Sidemark, that he won't be signing a new contract. Conrad, then Sidemark, are killed giving Perry two clients back-to-back. (In this episode guns are a last minute replacement for knives)
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0673265/?ref_=tt_mv_close
Perry Mason: The Case of the Shooting Star (1986): An actor rigs a fake on-air shooting with the connivance of his friend, the show's host, but the practical joke goes horribly wrong when the gun, which he'd loaded with blanks, turns out to contain a live round.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091750/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_28
The movie is fresh in my mind as I watched it on YouTube a few weeks ago.
Happy Hoosier
(7,454 posts)monkeyman1
(5,109 posts)Happy Hoosier
(7,454 posts)Dirty Socialist
(3,252 posts)nm
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,778 posts)ecstatic
(32,770 posts)The same gun should not have been used as both a prop and real gun. A real gun with live rounds should have been covered with bright red warning decals, holstered, and nowhere near the actual set.
If people were aware of that discrepancy they should have been raising hell to make sure that there was some sort of additional safety process in place.
Was alcohol involved? This story makes no sense.