Quote:
Originally Posted by Sooner or later
Safety procedures on set appear to have been lax, at best. Dangerous at worst.
What makes you think that the policy you propose would be 100% effective on the Rust set? They failed to follow other safety procedures that would have prevented the shooting. Why follow the new one on set?
The flaw in your logic is that your method, due to human error, is also not 100% effective.
|
Of course the very best, most robust safety protocols, if not followed, will fail. That's a given. We all know that. It is for that reason that basic gun safety protocols are "layered". If one fails, or if one failed to be heeded, there are several more between there and disaster.
I've been a member of the same gun club for going on 40 years. Its establishment predates my membership by at least that. Over the years, tens of thousands of members have come and gone. It's the biggest outdoor shooting facility in all of Western Washington. We currently have several thousand active members who enjoy two outdoor rifle ranges, one outdoor pistol, trap, skeet, five stand, traditional archery, walk through archery, and indoor rimfire ranges. It would be fair to say that several million rounds have been expended there. Hell, maybe even every year.
We have an absolutely perfect safety record. No one has ever been hurt, much less killed. We have had accidental (more appropriately called "negligent" in my book) discharges. Yet, because of this "layered safety", no one has ever been hurt.
Our record speaks for itself, as well as for traditional gun safety protocols.