Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins
We have kids as young as 12 years old in my club's Hunter Education classes. We have dummy rounds on hand to help teach them the nuances of gun safety while loading and unloading their firearms. It takes all of about three seconds to demonstrate to even the least interested 12 year old what the differences are between a "live" round and a "dummy" round. It really is that simple. I know some would love to portray this as some expert level only kind of a thing, but it really isn't.
Do the scenes being filmed with those weapons require that they be pointed directly at the camera? If so, we have already been told that camera will be remotely operated. Are they used in scenes wherein the shooter must point them directly at another actor? If so, we have already been told that there are camera angles and tricks that make it look like they are when they actually are not. I would hazard a guess that, additionally, most scenes involving our hero going "full auto" or something isolate upon that hero, and there is nothing down range that should not be fired upon.
And, well, at the end of the day "one size" does not "fit all". In this specific case, we are looking at a revolver that holds five rounds. A revolver that can be checked in seconds. No excuse not to do so.
|
I get that and have the same experience at my club but the question remains...do the actors get that instruction? Or, do they trust the armorer to do it for them?
I see this question as the central issue. I agree with the position that when I accept control of a weapon I accept the responsibility that goes with it. However, that does not appear to be a universal attitude.
So, again I say that the Director has
overall responsibility to ensure that training is effective, control measures are impeccable, and all others involved in handling the weapon are up to the task as measured against the strictest standards.
For example, in my former industry there exists a standard known as the Park Doctrine which basically states:
The Government can try to obtain conviction of a company official for violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) even if the corporate official was unaware of the violation– if the official was in a position of authority to
prevent or correct the violation and did not do so
As a laboratory director I was responsible for EVERYTHING going on in my lab. Sure I could fire those people who screwed up but I'd be out the door in handcuffs right behind them as they go scot free.