It's a good thing Alex didn't copy his own footage onto another computer...

That would have been a $250k fine and 5 years in jail. FBI thing.

Like the saying goes:
Actually killing Micheal Jackson is considered less-worse than listening to his music.

The thing about Alec. At a time like this we get to see what he's really about - Zero substance or integrity.

He should have stood up like a man and taken responsibility.

Not taken the blame alone but accepted/acknowledge his part in all of this.
- Instead he's done nothing but blame other people!

the prop master will be the first to go down.

AB has always been a piece of crap but this has really let the brown turd in him shine.
dont forget his phone call to his daughter where he is belittling her.

of course living in the fantasy world of Hollywood he thinks a simple "interview" will make everyone believe he did nothing wrong

I still don't get how a live round found its way into the revolver. Why would there be live ammo anywhere near a movie prop kit?

Gun control advocates like Alec Baldwin know the least about firearm safety. That's how.

That's been the problem from the start. There are people here (who work in the industry) that have said "live rounds are never allowed anywhere near a movie set". But it has been reported that this gun was used after hours for "plinking" by the crew. So somehow it got loaded with a live round on set or there were lives rounds left in it. Either way someone stuffed up in the worst possible way.

Except "the worst possible way" was pointing the gun at a persons face and then pulling the trigger. No one does that regardless of their thought of if it's loaded, unloaded, a prop gun... whatever. At a minimum this was gross negligence.

how many movies have you seen where a gun is pointed directly at a person.

the gun should have been locked up when it was not being used for the movie and it should be illegal for live ammo to be on set other than for what ever gun the prop master may carry IF they carry one.

as i said, the prop master will go down for not controlling the weapon at the least

Except that it is of course commonplace in the industry being discussed.

In a "Two shot" (shooter and victim) you can film with the camera at an angle where the shooter is not actually pointing the gun at the victim, but just off to the side.

In a "POV" where the camera is staring right down the gun barrel you would use a plexi shield and operate the camera remotely.

Unfortunately this was a low budget film and I'm sure there was no camera remote.

The Osha review of the incident put the blame on the 'Rust' production company for not following the rules etc....Baldwin claims this exonerates him as does the armorer.

My question to Baldwin would be.... 'you have been doing this for decades, often with firearms, why did you participate and not practice safety when you could see the rules being ignored?'

I have the osha report in PDF form but no idea how to attach.



https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rust-shooting-alec-baldwin-halyna-hutchins-fined-death/?msclkid=cf8198e7c28f11eca1f2fb3c2bc6156e

You'll try and argue anything..
Someone somewhere said "That's all Canadian's do is argue." Perhaps it's the boredom of the long winters...

Actually it is not commonplace. As the Craigster pointed out, more typical would be all precautions possible.

I did not say they do it without precautions. I just said it is not uncommon to come upon scenes that can only be adequately shot by pointing a gun at someone and pulling the trigger.

With all precautions of course, and only as the final option, but I seriously doubt it is "uncommon" given the amount of gun play in modern cinema.

So all the americans posting here, they aren't "arguing"? I know you guys like an echo chamber, but are you really looking for threads with no dissention of opinion? Sounds sort of boring to me, but good luck to you.

The point here is this was no scene being shot..... isn't that the case...they were between scenes and Baldwin was screwing around because he didn't want another take...so he pointed the 'prop' gun at those folks and fired as a joke to underwrite his position at the time.... ha ha.

An FYI only... Under Australian law the only people who can handle any gun on a movie set must have a licence. Prop gun, rubber gun, real gun it doesn't matter. They must pass a safety and competency test before being allowed to handle or use a gun on set. I only know this because my son was an extra on a Russell Crowe movie a few years ago. (The Water Diviner, 2014)

The point is an unprofessional idiot dicked around with a gun around what appears to be a group of unprofessional people and killed one due to extreme negligence by more than a few it sounds.

Which means this aberrant event has little to nothing to do with how the film industry as a whole handles firearms. Also means it has no relevance really to the not uncommon requirement for professionals to sometimes be required to point a weapon at someone and pull the trigger, after every precaution is taken. Those professionals are not irresponsible or idiots for pointing a weapon at someone and pulling the trigger, which is why accidental shootings on sets are all but unheard-of.

True. This was very much an “isolated incident” and none of the parties are in the clear. There are civil suits still to go and criminal negligence charges that still have to wind their way through the courts.

If AB thinks he’s been exonerated and in the clear he is sorely mistaken.

Internet rumor (unconfirmed...of course) was that he pointed it directly at the director next to the camera out of rage over something, swore at her, and fired two shots. Maybe he was trying to make a point or something. That action does not jibe with a seasoned actor, with years of safety protocol, if true.



Sadly...there is no footage available. On a movie set.

It does jibe with his anger control issues, which he has publicly exhibited before.

His net worth is about 60 million. Her family deserves 1/2 of it.