hollywood filled with a bunch of amoral incompetents


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1635376448.jpg
irony with the image noted...

I believe Baldwin is the producer.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

He is clearly one of them. I think there's others- don't know. I'm sure they have insurance. Hopefully enough.

Steve,

Jeff says Hollywood has a different set of rules regarding the handling of firearms. You respectfully dispute that but go on to describe the rules on a Hollywood set as being different than the typical rules for the handling of firearms.

Am I missing something? Right or wrong, reasonable or not, it appears there are two sets of rules.

I think we have bashed this point to death. We know what the rules should be. I agree with Jeff on every point. Unfortunately it seems that the rules are different on the set. Hopefully this horrible tragedy will bring about change.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

And with equal respect, Steve, this is what i mean by "in addition to" rather than "instead of". They very much make their own firearms rules and apply them "instead of", and that approach is fatally flawed (no pun intended).

It is absolutely imperative that anyone who handles real firearms be familiar with them. Imperative. No exceptions. The fact that Hollywood allows anyone to handle real firearms without the required training is borderline criminal. There is simply no excuse.

Firearms are incredibly simple devices. While there is a good deal of model to model variation, they all operate on the same principles, in much the same manner. Safe handling practices do not change with firearm type - these practices are universal, regardless of individual design features found on various firearms. And these safe handling practices are just so bloody simple, they can be taught to any reasonably intelligent five year old. I'm not exaggerating - I've done this countless times myself.

The notion that guns are too complicated, and that Hollywood actors are too temperamental and fragile to be taught their safe handling is absurd. Literally half an hour of general familiarization regarding firearms in general, and maybe an additional five minutes per specific gun type. And that is to cover the competent operation of the mechanisms of the various guns they will handle. No one can convince me that there is "no time" for this. No one can convince me that actors are incapable of learning any of this.

Maybe uninterested, but that's a different matter. It appears Hollywood has made it a practice to accommodate this attitude, so they don't suffer the wrath of their fragile prima donnas. That simply has to stop. Basic firearms training needs to be made a prerequisite for anyone hoping to land a role that requires them to handle firearms. This kind of training can be accomplished, and is accomplished, in literally a few hours. I know - I've done it. I've been an NRA certified instructor for a couple of decades. I can take an absolute novice, never touched a gun before in their lives student and have them safely handling any firearm in maybe an hour. In light of this, there is simply no valid reason not to require this level of basic training. None.

Basic safety is even simpler. The safe handling of any gun, regardless of specific features, has been distilled down to four simple rules that anyone, even a Hollywood actor, can remember:

Col. Jeff Cooper advocated four basic rules of gun safety:

All guns are always loaded. Even if they are not, treat them as if they are.

Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. ...

Keep your finger off the trigger till your sights are on the target. ...

Identify your target, and what is behind it.

Alec Baldwin violated the first two. Had he followed either one of them, he would not have killed someone. Beyond that, had he checked the gun himself to determine whether it was loaded, this would have been avoided. Anyone familiar with that gun could have taught him how to do that in five minutes or less. Seriously. It's not that hard.

In the end, all I see at play in Hollywood is some bullschiitt "kids' gloves" handling of their overly sensitive, overly self important prima donnas. Years and years of accommodating these fragile creatures has led them to substitute their own fatally flawed gun handling protocols for the proven, widely accepted - and demanded - safe gun handling protocols of the whole of the firearms world. There is simply no excuse for that.

If the ASPCA can have monitors on set to look after the horses why can’t there be an NRA range officer looking after the guns?

Absolutely unreservedly agree 100%

History proves that nepotism anywhere is moronic especially if it matters to more than those commiting that self-serving, self-aggrandizing, arrogant BS.

I have to agree with Jeff. Anyone touching a weapon on a movie set should be trained in proper handling of the weapon.

Latest Tweet from Baldwin appears to throw the Assistant Director under the bus.

Who in their right mind would give this girl a responsible job on a movie set. Let alone give her the job of armourer.

Handing out sandwiches maybe. Even then I still wouldn't eat it. I'm all tied up at the moment :(

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1635394238.jpg

Not what you know. Who you know.

Feels like they had a list of jobs and a list of friends they need to fill the positions with....

This low budget flick is going to be one of the most expensive movies ever (not) made in the history of film.

And Higgins, you would make a great armorer in the film industry. I’m completely serious…you know guns, you know gun safety and you probably even know the difference between a bullet and a blank. The pay is about to go up for this job and there is plenty of down time…perfect for a semi-retired guy. :)

Ya just can't find good help anymore.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Like I said earlier, looks, gender etc. don't matter if you are good. There are a lot of kids that have very important positions in the military at that age or even in tech companies ... where they may often look just like this.

Maybe the issue is that how safety is run on a film set and what education and training is needed to be armorer are not clearly defined? This certainly is not the case in other safety positions. Try to become the radiation safety officer in a nuclear facility by just having been shown the ropes by your parent for a couple years ... ;)

G

Also, who will show up as the lowest bidder. That's probably the root cause here, trying to do this production on the cheap.

Yup. Baldwin isn't going to learn anything. He's not going to accept any responsibility, gain any humility, learn not to condemn others, or learn not to rush to judgement. He's also not going to lose any work. He's going to lean into the "narrative" that, if anything, he's a victim in all of this.

If the DA doesn't pursue any charges against him for negligence I at least hope he gets his butt sued as the producer.

What a total s*** show that movie set was.

Exactly. Spot on.

This was to be an "independent film" which Baldwin wanted to show around at the indie festivals. Probably would have eventually sold it to a streamer to get his money back plus a pay day. It is a movie about someone who accidentally shoots someone. This fits with Baldwin's anti-gun sensibilities.

Look at the entire production. Every position filled was done to save money. I read an article from the LA Times about another prop master that declined to work on the film. He was told the whole budget was $8M and that he would have to use local labor and combine functions (asst Prop combined with armorer).

If you look at the entirety of the film, everyone, including the poor woman killed, were not top notch people. They were "up and coming", or had problems, or totally inexperienced. Why? To meet the budget.

Crew walked off the set that morning due to pay/work time/safety issues. One issue was the per diem for personal expenses which would not covers the cost of using Sante Fe Hotels. They had to commute from Albuquerque.

The Assistant Director decided to "keep going" without all of the people available. The extremely inexperienced armorer was not on set when the accident occurred, so the AD was "doing her job". No one checked the firearm before it was given to Baldwin, including Baldwin. And Baldwin was "practicing" his fast cross-draw before shooting the scene.

The entire production was destined to hurt someone, because corners were cut to meet the budget. This is why there are "rules". And this is why you can't shoot a film like this for cheap.