Because that is not a priority for that industry
Maybe, but that would not matter at all, because, California laws do not apply in New Mexico.

:rolleyes:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1661290458.jpg

There are times hard rubber guns are used (stunts) and Airsoft guns (wide shots) and electric guns (that produce a muzzle flash). Sometimes actors prefer a blank firing weapon for reality or "method acting" reasons.

Using blank firing guns are safe when you have a competent Armorer on set whenever firearms are used and follow the hard and steadfast rule that LIVE AMMUNITION SHOULD NEVER BE BROUGHT ONTO A STUDIO LOT OR LOCATION.

Most prop weapons are unable to fire live ammo. Unfortunately in the "Rust" case they chose to use a real weapon as a prop. That was their first mistake.

I guess it would be well neigh impossible to enforce any sort of standards or rules across this industry regarding what sorts of prop or real guns are used for which purposes.

I believe you folks are beholden to OSHA regulations regarding workplace safety, correct? It was always amazing to me just how detailed and finitely they are written. Maybe amending them, adding something about the film industry's use of prop guns, could be something to consider.

We all know how enthusiastically many celebrities in this industry lobby for "gun safety" out in the real world, but I guess it's not all that surprising that they have never considered their own industry. But, then again, how enforceable would any such regulations be, with egos like Mr. Baldwin's so ubiquitous across this industry. Rules are for everyone else. Like the live ammo rule you mention.

It was only a matter of time before something became Trump's fault!!

Perhaps they could manufacture prop guns that used a new, bespoke type of ammunition that is not compatible with any actual guns. Then, if they only made blanks for those prop guns, we wouldn’t have this problem.

No doubt but The Donald lives in Baldballs Head (both? :D) full time & rent free so that was always going to happen.

The one thing I really like about all of this: The world finally gets to see what a POS AB truly is.

Exactly. What earthly reason is there for a multi-billion dollar per year industry to have not done precisely this?

These prop guns would not even have to be fully manufactured from the ground up as such. Existing firearms could have just a few components swapped for slightly altered parts that would render them non-functional.

For example, no more than the barrel would need to be substituted in most pistols, rifles, and carbines. The "movie" barrel would have a chamber just slightly too short, so it could not accept the "real" version of whatever caliber it mimics. The bore would be far too small to allow a bullet of the caliber represented to pass through it, being rebated at the muzzle to look real from the front. Revolvers would require barrel and cylinder replacement.

Ammunition could even be manufactured for the most part on existing equipment. It's easy enough to produce dies for existing equipment that produces shorter ammunition. "Bullets" could be any of a myriad of materials, all meant to just powder upon detonation of the powder charge, yet look very "real" on camera.

None of this would be difficult. None of this would be "expensive" in movie industry terms. Yet I bet none of this ever happens, nor anything at all like it. And I bet that, someday, this happens again.

In which case, scratch the state laws and Federal laws kick in regarding the transfer of a pistol to an out-of-state resident (no legal way to do it)

That sure seems like a good idea.

[please correct any which are wrong]

My understanding is that Hollywood is the largest collective owner of real functional weapons in the USA outside the military.
(including Title2 full auto)

'Blanks' are cartridges without bullets and most gunpowder. Primer usually.

Automatic-actions still need back pressure to cycle them.
Do they use barrel plugs or restricted barrels?

Hollywood has an excellent track record considering it's history.
Are there standardized laws and specifications governing the hundreds of thousands+ of prop guns out there?
Can prop guns be designed in different ways piecemeal?

prop guns that are blank firing only are not subject to federal law.

First thing, you have 3 deaths in over one hundred years of filmmaking and hundreds of thousands of rounds fired. Not a bad percentage compared to other industries.

Also, these things are already and have been happening for years. I posted a video awhile back in this thread covering some of the modifications done to film guns.

When filming in confined or indoor spaces with semi auto guns you don’t want to use full blank loads. You use quarter loads but then you come across the problem of not enough pressure to cycle the firearm. That’s where you have duplicate guns made specifically to cycle different loads.

These are all available to any legitimate
Production company that is willing to spend the money and practice safety first. Unfortunately Rust wasn’t such a company. My friend said when he interviewed for Rust he could tell they were low budget. When he mentioned renting the guns from Hollywood they showed him a locked closet filled with dusty and dirty guns and said “This is what you have here, make it work”.

That’s when he passed on the show and he’s mighty glad he did.

Thanks guys. I rather suspected that there just had to be dedicated prop guns like you describe available. I would imagine (hope?) that as popular as Westerns are, that the typical guns used in them would be available in these modified prop gun configurations.

Which, of course, further begs the question - why on Earth would there ever be a real, functioning firearm on any set for any reason? That is, by the way, a rhetorical question. You guys have done a great job of answering it already.

Pretty sure California is the only state where you can't let someone use a gun you own.


Absolutely sure it does not violate any Federal laws.

Washington is now right there with you, Toby. We passed an Initiative several years ago, I-1639, that makes any transfer of a firearm illegal unless it goes through an FFL. It is worded in such a way as to prohibit my sharing of one of my firearms with you if we go to the range together for some shooting fun. Under this new law, that is technically a "transfer", and must be made through an FFL. Insanity. Absolutely unenforced by anyone, but still on the books, which simply means if you piss 'em off badly enough, they can whip it out on you.

Well, while blanks do have a bullet, there is still a Whad that hurts like hell if you are shot with one at relatively close range, and yes, it will leave a mark...

https://www.thesun.ie/news/2172622/extraordinary-story-of-jon-erik-hexum-the-actor-who-died-playing-russian-roulette-on-his-own-tv-show-and-whose-donated-heart-saved-a-las-vegas-pimps-life/

Rich

If the transfer of the pistol took place in a state that not all parties were residents of, then fed violation. Only way to legally get pistol for out-of-state is via FFL transfer in their home state. Long guns you can do, if transfer is legal in both state of transfer and resident state of buyer, but again it has to be via FFL. And California is one of the two states that you can't be a resident of and buy in a different state.

Point being... even without the death and a N degree murder/homicide/manslaughter there is a serious felony lurking in the wings.

involuntary manslaughter at the best.
i was thinking they will cover it up because of his fame but it seems like Hollywood is dropping him like a bad hooker

Only out of self-preservation, though.

Were Hollywood to embrace Baldwin as a victim of lax compliance to firearm safety protocols, they would have to also embrace gun violence as being due to lack of compliance with already existing gun laws. Such an eventuality would further expose Hollywood’s gun hypocrisy that is increasingly being outed as it’s ‘climate change’ hypocrisy is.

I think Hollywood will go mute on political discourse, as it should. With the explosion of indy film making, streaming and video content in general, Hollywood may be sensing a serious decline in control over the industry.

He's not much of a box office draw anymore. His usefulness to the left was playing Trump on Saturday Night Live.

Now he's just old, gray, and washed up. So Hollywood doesn't care.

Again, there are no federal restrictions on letting another person shoot a fire arm you own. If there are, perhaps 1d10t can share with us what they are

There are no federal restrictions on loaning or renting a firearm. The problem that arose in California and Hollywood was that say you were the Propmaster on a show, call it a legal drama. Out of 22 episodes you maybe had firearms working in 4 of those episodes. So when the need arises, you would rent the pistols and long guns from your favorite prophouse.

Well, in the old days you would give your Teamster driver a run slip and he would drive to the various prophouses and do your pickups.

Enter California's new firearms laws and now you have to have one of your crew with an FFL go with the Teamster driver to pickup the weapons and now you've lost one of your coveted crew members to doing "milk runs" and production doesn't want to hire another Propman to help cover the set.

That may have been the reason for Rust using the weapons in their posession, they didn't want to incur the extra charges of having an IATSE member with an FFL joyride with a Teamster from Hollywood to Albuquerque.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11250785/Alec-Baldwin-facing-charges-Rust-shooting-Santa-Fe-DA-says-actor-possible-defendant.html

"New Mexico prosecutors have indicated they may charge Alec Baldwin over the fatal shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the set of his movie Rust last year, after the actor handed over his cellphone to be considered as evidence.

In a letter to the state's financial board, asking for funding to prosecute the high profile case, Santa Fe District Attorney District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies said she was 'ready' to file charges against four people.

She stopped short of confirming the charges she planned to bring, but said was 'certainly looking all the homicide statutes and any gun statutes under New Mexico criminal code'. ..."


Lee

I'm thinking:

Alec Baldwin

David Halls - 1st A.D.

Hannah Gutierrez Reed - Armorer

Sarah Zachry - Prop Master

or the 4th is not the prop master but another Producer

so the FBI "raids" the my pillow guy to get his phone and not giving him a chance to alter it, but yet they kindly ask for ABs phone which he does not give to them right away.
sounds about right

if i decide to go on a crime spree im going to put on (willl have to make one as there are none out there) a BBB hat and shirt. i doubt they would even stop me then

Oh...and let us not forget:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1664210216.jpg

What's interesting is the need for 600k to prosecute.

Out spend the county and the charges will leave the system in ruin.

Earlier in the thread there was dissatisfaction that he might get off due to wealth and privilege. Now, when it appears he will be charged, there is still dissatisfaction in another direction.

Why can't we just be satisfied for a change and be happy that prosecution might actually take place.

Charging and prosecuting are simply processes. The dissatisfaction comes from the very high probability that he won’t be punished. He killed somebody. Which it appears at this point to be waaaay less than trespassing. He’s walking free making babies unlike being in solitary w/o benefit of counsel.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11251195/Alec-Baldwin-selling-29million-Hamptons-home-shield-assets-looming-legal-battles.html

" ... Meanwhile, the Hutchins family is pursuing a wrongful death lawsuit against the actor. And earlier this month, a judge ruled he was primarily responsible for firing the shot that killed Hutchins during the filming of Rust in New Mexico last October.

It was in the midst of all these developments that Baldwin last week placed his largest asset – his $29million estate on Long Island – on the market. ...

Whatever Baldwin plans, his recent moves, including his July sale of a house on Oneida Lake in upstate New York for $530,000 and purchase of a $1.75 million farm in Vermont, have caught the eye of various plaintiffs who are going after him for tens of millions of dollars. ..."


Lee

Is that what you think is going on?

i wonder what properties are in his name.

..."a judge ruled he was primarily responsible for firing the shot ..."

Well no sheet Sherlock.

i will believe it when he is charged, convicted and JAILED.

this maybe another jussie smollette (or what the heck his name is)

What does $530k get you in upstate NY these days? Based on what that would buy in central Ohio, it seems like it would have to be some kind of mobile home.

It's probably a rather remote cabin where he practices target shooting.

Seems like he would run out of employees pretty quickly if he did that much practicing :rolleyes::rolleyes:

my post should have been green