Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They have plenty of time to visually check each bullet when loading and handing over guns that are about to be pointed at people. If that's the issue, then do that. Unload it and load it again and again at each take, or each transfer of the gun, whatever make sense.
Firing them unnecessarily is not only a bad idea, but in the case of blanks that do have live primers in them that will go "boom"... you now have ruined that round and will need to load another one.
The answer is for the people handling the weapons, and making the rules, to know what they're doing. People who don't know what they're doing aren't going to make good rules about it.
The person doing the checking in that instance isn't the person holding the gun. That's my problem with it.
No matter what, if the gun is in your hands, at the end of the day, you are responsible.
Perhaps we merge our ideas here? the person holding the gun MUST go through training, must know what they're doing, must know the difference between a live and dummy round, and when the gun is handed to them, they must, with the armorer standing there, reverify everything for themselves? And.. This must happen anytime a gun changes hands?
Seems a bit roundabout, but.. If you have to come up with a way to 100%, or as close to it as possible verify..
Someone will say.. "hey, there's times that an 8 year old is shown handling a gun in film.. Should they be responsible?".. and I say.. Yes, absolutely. They should have to go through a firearm safety course like anyone else. Now.. Whether they'd be CRIMINALLY responsible.. Well.. Pretty much goes that an 8 year old can't be held criminally responsible, but.. Never too young to be taught safety. Whether it's firearm or any other kind of safety.
The person doing the checking in that instance isn't the person holding the gun. That's my problem with it.
No matter what, if the gun is in your hands, at the end of the day, you are responsible.
Perhaps we merge our ideas here? the person holding the gun MUST go through training, must know what they're doing, must know the difference between a live and dummy round, and when the gun is handed to them, they must, with the armorer standing there, reverify everything for themselves? And.. This must happen anytime a gun changes hands?
Seems a bit roundabout, but.. If you have to come up with a way to 100%, or as close to it as possible verify..
Someone will say.. "hey, there's times that an 8 year old is shown handling a gun in film.. Should they be responsible?".. and I say.. Yes, absolutely. They should have to go through a firearm safety course like anyone else. Now.. Whether they'd be CRIMINALLY responsible.. Well.. Pretty much goes that an 8 year old can't be held criminally responsible, but.. Never too young to be taught safety. Whether it's firearm or any other kind of safety.
I'm actually becoming more convinced that the actor should NOT be responsible. It's not their area of expertise.
Sure, they may be morally compelled to know more, but I think the argument is compelling that if an expert loads the gun, the MOST unsafe thing might be to require that some inexperienced or child actor open the gun up and mess with it. That introduces more opportunities for mistakes or malfeasance.
Again, the rules need to be written by experts for the particular situation. That's the best way to have the best rules.
Will people occasionally falter and will we occasionally have to argue things out in court.... yes. that's life.
Rich actors with good lawyers don't get convicted. Also, their acting skills make them perfect on the witness stand.
A good lawyer can program them to convincingly say anything on the witness stand, to make them sympathetic and appeal to the jury. All they have to do is act the part.
Beyond that, the armorer has main responsibility. It is there JOB to insure prop guns are not loaded with live ammunition. It is not the actor's job.
That said, Baldwin was producer and responsible for hiring the armorer and how weapons were handled on the set. He also pulled the trigger while aiming the gun at another human being. Negligence, at best.
I don't agree that Baldwin should be charged wtih manslaughter. I think negligent homicide would have been the correct charge. Manslaughter sounds right to me for the armorer.
Criminally Negligent Homicide vs. Manslaughter: What’s the Difference?
Criminal Negligence vs. Reckless Behavior
Criminal negligence is legally defined as the failure to realize that your behavior is so dangerous that it could kill someone. In order to prove you were criminally negligent, the prosecution must be able to show that a reasonable person in your situation would have realized that their behavior was potentially dangerous.
Which Crime is More Serious?
Any crime involving the loss of another person’s life should be taken seriously. But, manslaughter is a more serious crime than criminally negligent homicide. Manslaughter is charged as a class 4 felony in Colorado, whereas criminally negligent homicide is charged as a class 5 felony. Both of these crimes are far less serious than first degree and second degree murder, which cannot be charged unless the defendant had the intent to kill.
Yes. She killed her. Alec was handed a gun, that was said to be cleared. This was a movie people.
I let him walk if I'm on the jury, and she would be held responsible.
It was the assistant director who handed him the gun and told Alec it was "cold" without checking it, didn't he have any responsibility? Plus he pointed it directly at her chest and fired, who does that even if they think it's loaded with blanks?
The real guilty party is the person who put real bullets in the gun, but we will probably never know that.
I don't agree that Baldwin should be charged wtih manslaughter. I think negligent homicide would have been the correct charge. Manslaughter sounds right to me for the armorer.
The only thing I'll point out here is that is a Colorado law firm, and the definitions/statutes MAY be different between CO and NM.
Don't get me wrong and think I'm arguing that the armorer bears no responsibility or that i'm saying Baldwin has MORE responsibility than her.
She certainly is more responsible than he is and likely has the MOST responsibility of anyone on set, at least from a criminal standpoint. From a Civil standpoint? Maybe not.
And, again, as I said, do I believe he should serve time due to this? No. Do I believe he was negligent? Yes. "Just doing what I was told" doesn't fly. Didn't work for German soldiers after WWII.
Does he have ANY responsibility? Yes. And.. The level is a bit murky because I don't know the details of his acting as a producer and all that. This part of things makes me glad I'm not in the legal field.
So.. If I don't think he should serve time for this.. Why do I think it's right to prosecute him? Isn't it just a waste of time? Well.. Justice is never a waste of time.
Also. Once again I'll say.. The person, or persons, MOST responsible are the people who brought live ammunition onto the set in the first place. Even moreso than the armorer, assuming they're different people. Also, the person(s) in charge who did nothing after the accidental discharge previously on set.
The people who are totally in the right in this whole situation are the group of people who walked off the set after the accidental discharge and refused to work because they knew this was an unsafe environment.
This whole thing reminds me of the old adage about why does a plane crash? Planes don't crash for one reason.. Takes a whole string of things all going wrong to bring down a plane. And this here took a whole lot of things going wrong for someone to lose their life.
Alec Baldwin has handled guns in previous movies and sitcoms thus he has experience with guns. Thus, I think he should go to jail for not checking the gun that killed Halyna Hutchins. He should have take responsibility and checked his gun before he pulled the trigger. And why was he pointing it at Halyna? That doesn't make sense to me.
Alec Baldwin has handled guns in previous movies and sitcoms thus he has experience with guns. Thus, I think he should go to jail for not checking the gun that killed Halyna Hutchins. He should have take responsibility and checked his gun before he pulled the trigger. And why was he pointing it at Halyna? That doesn't make sense to me.
I've seen lots of movies where we, the audience, look right down the barrel of a gun that is fired. She was behind the camera.
Obviously some safety measure was missed, but movies ARE an exception to a lot of rules - and guns are pointed at people and fired in ways the rest of us don't usually do.
I've seen lots of movies where we, the audience, look right down the barrel of a gun that is fired. She was behind the camera.
Obviously some safety measure was missed, but movies ARE an exception to a lot of rules - and guns are pointed at people and fired in ways the rest of us don't usually do.
If he was supposed to shoot then for the camera, then why is he insisting he didn't pull the trigger?
If he was supposed to shoot then for the camera, then why is he insisting he didn't pull the trigger?
Because he's an idiot?
Let me be clear, I don't know a thing about what they were trying to shoot in this scene. I'm just saying, in movies, sometimes the scene calls for pointing the gun at people and pulling the trigger. Obviously there have to be rules about how to do that without killing people.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
