Rust armorer found guilty

[Jeff Higgins]

I would expect anyone (any actor or actress in the case under discussion), to be adequately trained in the operation and use of any firearm of which they assume possession. If they are unwilling to undergo the training necessary to do so, then find someone else who is willing to take that training.

Firearms are not rocket science. As stated many times earlier in this discussion, I can train anyone in the use of any firearm with pretty minimal effort. They are simple devices. If they can manipulate their smart phone, they can learn to safely handle any gun. These people have a lot of downtime, free time in which if their next shoot 'em up role was dependent upon doing so, they could very easily seek out and complete the necessary training. It would take less than a day of their time.

And no, no one here has "accepted the realities of movie/tv set gun handling until now." What a terribly inane statement. It assumes we were even aware of Hollywood movie set practices, which I'm quite sure most of us were not even aware of (I sure wasn't) until this incident brought them to light. I don't know any competent shooters, anyone even remotely familiar with firearms that would have "accepted the realities of movie/tv set gun handling until now". What sheer and utter nonsense.

Bottom line is, Mr. Baldwin was not responsible for the fact that he was handed a loaded gun while being told it was unloaded. Not his fault in the least. It was, however, entirely Mr. Baldwin's fault that that firearm remained loaded while he (with three very deliberate actions), first cocked the hammer, then pointed it at a living human being, then pulled the trigger. It would have taken literally two seconds to verify it was unloaded or, in this case, determine that it was loaded. And very, very minimal training to understand how to do that.

So, yes, we're back to page one. And back to our two camps arguing the same points - those who understand basic gun safety and those who do not. Those who do not will continue to make excuses for others who do not, for others that have "accidents" that kill people. Those who do will have none of it. Carry on...

[T77911S]

Originally Posted by craigster59

This right here. I know we've been over firearms safety but on a film set protocols are different than "real life".

There is never, under ANY circumstances, a situation where live ammo is brought onto a film set much less a studio lot. Never.

As far as "plinking" after hours, the weapons are always in the armorers possession, locked in a gun safe when not being used on set. No handling by other crew members except the property department and the actors assigned to the weapon only while filming.

As the saying goes, "You had one job". When an armorer is hired that's all they are there for. Make sure the weapons are operable, cleared and back in the armorers possession when not filming, and either loaded with the proper blanks if needed or empty when rehearsing or filming scenes with no gunfire.

The culpability that falls on AB is that he was a producer and in order to cut costs, had the armorer multi task to the point that she could not focus on always being on set with the guns at all times. Otherwise all fault falls on the armorer.

thats what i have said from day one.
first person going to jail is armorer. and being a small fish in big pond (her unknown and baldwin popular) she will be the fall "girl" and i am surprised baldwin has not thrown her under the bus. which leads me to believe AB had more to with the gun than being a dumb actor.
AB as producer should be held responsible for what goes on on set and making sure the armorer does her job

[Tobra]

Originally Posted by berettafan

You've accepted the realities of movie/tv set gun handling until now. How is that an honest way to assess the problem here?

I don't think I understand what you mean by this

[berettafan]

Tobra i'm saying if these rules are so inviolable then where has the uproar been over all the gun play in movies to date. Multiple rules broken non stop since the beginning of the industry. And we've been told right in this thread by guys who work directly with the industry that this simply isn't how it works.

The rules being insisted on here simply do not work in a film setting and we all know they don't work. And until now we've been fine with that.

[Arizona_928]

So when did a SOP trump a law?

[berettafan]

What law has been trumped?

[Arizona_928]

Originally Posted by berettafan

What law has been trumped?

3rd degree murder.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by berettafan

Tobra i'm saying if these rules are so inviolable then where has the uproar been over all the gun play in movies to date. Multiple rules broken non stop since the beginning of the industry. And we've been told right in this thread by guys who work directly with the industry that this simply isn't how it works.

Again, none of us had any reason to be aware of how guns are handled in this industry. This is the incident that brought it to light for many (most? all?) of us.

Myself, I always assumed that each and every firearm seen in a movie was a non-functional prop gun, or had been otherwise disabled prior to use in a movie. I would have never guessed that they use real, fully functional firearms. Now, having been made aware that they actually do (by this incident), I would have assumed that they follow all accepted gun safety protocols when they do.

I was obviously wrong on both counts. Now that I have been made aware of these two facts - that they do use fully functional firearms, and that they do not follow accepted gun safety protocols, you are seeing my "uproar". As much of one as I can generate on a car forum, anyway. And I think you are seeing others chiming in with me, others who had no idea either. All of us who actually handle firearms as a regular part of our lives are somewhat shocked to have learned these two truths, and we have loudly expressed both our shock, and our disapproval.

Originally Posted by berettafan

The rules being insisted on here simply do not work in a film setting and we all know they don't work. And until now we've been fine with that.

It's obvious their rules didn't work. And, now that we know what those rules are, no one is "fine with that". We have been quite vocal about the obvious need to drop their own contrived, ineffective rules and adopt those rules that have been generally accepted in the shooting sports. Because, yes, it's equally obvious, to those of us who have spent a good deal of time around firearms, that our rules work.

To Hughs'e point, I believe there is a profound difference between performing a simple safety check and "fiddling" with a gun. They are simply not the same thing. The former could save a life (would have in this case), the latter could cost a life. The former is expected at my gun club, the latter is very much frowned upon. And, well, if we are dealing with folks who do not understand the difference between competent, safe gun handling and fiddling around with a gun, perhaps we should not be handing them firearms. At least not real ones.

Sorry, guys, that I'm being such an unyielding hard ass about all of this. You have all known me long enough to know that the shooting sports are a large part of my life. It pains me to see this sort of thing, with innocent people getting hurt or killed, in my view, quite needlessly. "Our" rules are in place for a reason, they work, and would almost certainly have prevented this incident. All Mr. Baldwin had to do was check the gun. That is all he had to do...

[Tobra]

I was unaware of the protocol on movie sets with respect to firearms, until I learned of it here. I always just figured they did not use real guns in movies, ones that would only fire blanks, camera angles and tricks. I did that when I was a kid making super 8 home movies. It really never occurred to me they were pointing real guns at each other.

I think if you go back and look, it was apparent I was about as fine with it as Mr Higgins is, not at all.

[Hugh R]

Jeff

Think about it you have extras and actors opening a breech, racking a slide, dropping a mag,etc. who is to say what they actually did? Strict control is supposed to be followed in that the armorer show the revolver to the actor demonstrates it has blanks or dummies for a close up shot of the front of the revolver. The actor is told exactly what to do, if there are deviations the armorer yells “cut”.

Lexan shields, remote cameras, pointing the barrel to the side have all been discussed earlier. ABs fault is as a producer if it was just a title. He may well have not been involved in budgets or staffing. Don’t misunderstand me I don’t like him at all he’s arrogant, rude and a general schmuck.

[craigster59]

Originally Posted by Hugh R

ABs fault is as a producer if it was just a title. He may well have not been involved in budgets or staffing. Don’t misunderstand me I don’t like him at all he’s arrogant, rude and a general schmuck.

Now I've seen in the interview he claims he was just a "Creative Producer", which is Hollywood speak for "We'll just divert some of my income as a 'double dip' where I get residuals through SAG and the Producer's Guild".

His claim will be that his only duties as Producer were establishing the "look and artistic tone" of the film and script approval. No responsibility in business and funding or day to day logistical planning for the production.

He's looking hard for an "out".

[T77911S]

Originally Posted by Tobra

I was unaware of the protocol on movie sets with respect to firearms, until I learned of it here. I always just figured they did not use real guns in movies, ones that would only fire blanks, camera angles and tricks. I did that when I was a kid making super 8 home movies. It really never occurred to me they were pointing real guns at each other.

I think if you go back and look, it was apparent I was about as fine with it as Mr Higgins is, not at all.

brandon lee was killed on set from a live round.
that was a very long time ago.
not sure who else has died on set from a gun shot.


involuntary man (woman) slaughter is about all you can hope AB is charged with.
as a producer he may be charged with more, definitely civil lawsuits
he is too famous, nothing will come of it, not to mention he is part of the correct party (gee that sounds so much like nazi germany)

[Tobra]

I think the story on Brandon Lee was a blank round pushed something jammed in the barrel hard enough to kill him. I don't recall that it was a live round.

That was when I learned a blank gun can kill you.

[T77911S]

just did a quick search, headlines said "bullet"

[T77911S]

idd another quick check.

brandon and one other actor are the only ones ever killed on set from a prop gun. the other one put a 44mag to his and pulled the trigger. it did have a dumby round init but i guess that close your just a dumb A$$.

the industry has been pretty safe as far as guns

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by Hugh R

Jeff

Think about it you have extras and actors opening a breech, racking a slide, dropping a mag,etc. who is to say what they actually did?

Hmm... I'm trying to sort this out... Are you saying that even extras are given real, live, operable firearms? I am well and truly dumbfounded by that, assuming I'm not misunderstanding part of this. Does this really happen? Is it a common practice? I can see (barely) some justification for giving one to the main subject(s) of the scene being shot, under very limited circumstances, but to the extras?

Originally Posted by Hugh R

Strict control is supposed to be followed in that the armorer show the revolver to the actor demonstrates it has blanks or dummies for a close up shot of the front of the revolver. The actor is told exactly what to do, if there are deviations the armorer yells “cut”.

I'm absolutely fine with this, if I understand you correctly. We do this at the range at times, when handing guns over to one another so a buddy can try out one of ours. It's very common that we both look while one opens the action, swings the cylinder out, drops the mag and checks the chamber, or whatever. That way both are satisfied that the gun is "safe", so it doesn't change possession without that verification.

It sounds as though that did not happen in this case. Someone handed Mr. Baldwin a gun and declared it a "cold gun", not bothering to even check for himself when doing so. First missed opportunity. When conducting the transfer of possession, these two guys did not check it together, verifying to one another it was indeed "cold". Second missed opportunity. In such a situation at my range (or any other for that matter), it becomes imperative that the individual receiving the gun check it for himself, regardless of what the other guy said. Third missed opportunity...

Originally Posted by Hugh R

Lexan shields, remote cameras, pointing the barrel to the side have all been discussed earlier. ABs fault is as a producer if it was just a title. He may well have not been involved in budgets or staffing. Don’t misunderstand me I don’t like him at all he’s arrogant, rude and a general schmuck.

As I've stated earlier, I really don't care what titles Mr. Baldwin may have held on this set. The only thing I care about is the gun that he held. He could have been the water boy - the instant he comes into possession of a firearm, he becomes responsible for anything that happens with it until he relinquishes possession. That is the "Golden Rule" of firearms responsibility. The only persons exempt are small children. I know some are saying "and Hollywood actors", but, obviously, I disagree.

[Tobra]

Originally Posted by T77911S

the industry has been pretty safe as far as guns

As far as we know.

We also know they are not going to be forthcoming or honest about it

[craigster59]

Originally Posted by T77911S

brandon lee was killed on set from a live round.
that was a very long time ago.
not sure who else has died on set from a gun shot.

Jon-Erik Hexum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon-Erik_Hexum

Those two and Halyana Hutchins in over one hundred years of film making and hundreds of thousands of rounds fired.

[berettafan]

QED right there.

Or as they say in sports...’scoreboard’

[sc_rufctr]

We all know what happened: Mr Baldwin is guilty of, at the very least pulling the trigger regardless of his claims to the contrary.

IMO in "our world" he wont be held responsible for any wrong doing by law enforcement but it will cost him money.
- Morally he's on his own.