Rust armorer found guilty

[T77911S]

pulling the trigger does not mean a conviction for "murder"
at the most he could get involuntary man slaughter but not for pulling the trigger.
perhaps as producer, perhaps for not following procedure in that HE had possession of the gun and the armorer did not get to check it. perhaps HE brought live ammo on site and he was shooting the gun.

if he got convicted as an ACTOR for just pulling the trigger do you think another actor would ever touch a gun on set. there is a reason for the armorer. always presume the person you handing a gun to is an idiot.

[Henry Schmidt]

Depraved indifference, man 2.

[sc_rufctr]

Originally Posted by Henry Schmidt

Depraved indifference, man 2.

"Ballballs" will never accept responsibility for what happened.

[Crowbob]

The question now arises (finally) as to why no one is investigating how live rounds got on set and ultimately into the gun, and how many, etc.

[sc_rufctr]

Originally Posted by Crowbob

The question now arises (finally) as to why no one is investigating how live rounds got on set and ultimately into the gun, and how many, etc.

Because that's the only question that really matters?

No one would have died if the gun was in fact "Cold" - Someone made it "Hot" & it certainly didn't get that way on its own.

[T77911S]

it took them this long to figure out that the gun could NOT be fired WITHOUT pulling the trigger when every gun owner already new that
it may take them decades to find out how ammo got in the gun

[sc_rufctr]

[javadog]

This guy really is a scumbag.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/alec-baldwin-says-trumps-comments-fatal-rust-shooting-taken-years-off-life/

[T77911S]

i understand he has been fired from like 6 jobs now.
no body wants the dirt bag.

i HATE that he was in hunt for red october.
when ever that movie is on i have to watch it. well i dont go out of my way but if i am flippin and its on....

also heard the armorer wants "her" story out.
she is claiming she did nothing wrong. not THAT will be an interesting story to hear

[911Ghia]

I have a question, was there only 1 round in the cylinder or 6? If 6 were the other 5 blanks or live rounds?


I know that’s 2 questions.

Rich

[T77911S]

good question
i wonder if we will ever know.

who had control of the gun immediately after
could they have tampered with the gun as far as whats loaded.

biden philosophy...dont talk about it and it will go away

[RNajarian]

Originally Posted by 911Ghia

I have a question, was there only 1 round in the cylinder or 6? If 6 were the other 5 blanks or live rounds?


I know that’s 2 questions.

Rich

Great Question! Here is a follow up question to your two questions. . .

Was the weapon clean when it was handed to Mr. Baldwin? Had it been cleaned after the prior day’s (film) shooting? (or after work “plinking”?)

Same question, asked twice.

[craigster59]

Originally Posted by RNajarian

Great Question! Here is a follow up question to your two questions. . .

Was the weapon clean when it was handed to Mr. Baldwin? Had it been cleaned after the prior day’s (film) shooting? (or after work “plinking”?)

Same question, asked twice.

The weapons are cleaned daily and safety checked after each film take. As far as number of rounds, I'm sure that since the gun was being pointed at or near camera where you could tell if it was loaded, there should have been 6 rounds in the cylinder.

Now what I'd like to know is out of those 6 rounds how many were "live". You would have to be ignorant to load 6 rounds into a revolver and not realize they were "live".

[RNajarian]

Originally Posted by craigster59

The weapons are supposed to be cleaned daily and safety checked after each film take. As far as number of rounds, I'm sure that since the gun was being pointed at or near camera where you could tell if it was loaded, there should have been 6 rounds in the cylinder.

Now what I'd like to know is out of those 6 rounds how many were "live". You would have to be ignorant to load 6 rounds into a revolver and not realize they were "live".

Note my addition in bold.

My point has to do with the chain of custody of the weapon. If the weapon had been used for “plinking” the previous night and had not been cleaned and inspected by the armorer prior to its use the next day then it is completely plausible the weapon still had live rounds in it from the recreational use.

Did the armorer clean and render the weapon safe, only to have someone to remove it, shot live rounds then replace it without cleaning an clearing it?

Hopefully the investigation has these answers.

[T77911S]

^^thats probably how most sets have gone in the past but apparently not this one.
just my assumption but if they were just rehearsing should there have EVEN been any dummy loads in it.i would say NO.
i am betting there were 6 "live" rounds in that gun. how many had been fired is another story. maybe that was the last of the live rounds, maybe it was the first of 6.

i really think they (AB) had been shooting that gun and it was never emptied after the last shots.

i would not be surprised if he was shooting the gun THAT day and probably kept it in HIS possession thinking since HE had it the gun was "safe" and never unloaded it. perhaps even thinking all 6 rounds had been fired
the armorer keeps saying she wants the "truth" out about what happened.

[id10t]

Originally Posted by RNajarian

Note my addition in bold.

My point has to do with the chain of custody of the weapon. If the weapon had been used for “plinking” the previous night and had not been cleaned and inspected by the armorer prior to its use the next day then it is completely plausible the weapon still had live rounds in it from the recreational use.

Did the armorer clean and render the weapon safe, only to have someone to remove it, shot live rounds then replace it without cleaning an clearing it?

Hopefully the investigation has these answers.

And if that is the case, there may be multiple CA firearms laws broken regarding the transfer of both a firearm and ammo...

[craigster59]

Originally Posted by RNajarian

Note my addition in bold.


Did the armorer clean and render the weapon safe, only to have someone to remove it, shot live rounds then replace it without cleaning an clearing it?

Hopefully the investigation has these answers.

The woman who calls herself an 'Armorer" should never have been hired as such due to her extreme lack of experience. AB as a producer directly or indirectly had a hand in her hiring and that is where his culpability is.

Cutting corners and saving money is nothing new in Hollywood but no matter the budget of your film there are positions where you can't try and save a buck. Armorer and Stunt Coordinator are 2 of those positions.

[craigster59]

Originally Posted by id10t

And if that is the case, there may be multiple CA firearms laws broken regarding the transfer of both a firearm and ammo...

My friend was originally supposed to be the Propmaster on the film. He declined due to lack of prep time and the fact that the producers wanted to get the weapons and ammo from a local Az or NM supplier as opposed to ISS who supplies the majority of weapons worldwide for film.

They also have their own manufacturing facility near Palmdale that makes blank ammo. When you rent a weapon from them you are required to only use their blank ammo.

[RNajarian]

Thanks for the invaluable insight from an industry insider Craigster.

[Jeff Higgins]

So... a multi-billion dollar per year industry. Spends an ungodly amount of money on sets, props, special affects, and pays its actors tens of millions of dollars.

Why, on God's green earth, have they not yet arrived upon a standardized process for rendering all guns used in filming non-functional? From an engineering/technical point of view, this is an exceedingly cheap and simple problem to solve.