Alec Baldwin kills one, injures another

[berryberry]

Looking more and more likely libtard Baldwin is guilty of manslaughter at a minimum.

Maybe he should have learned a little about guns instead of bashing gun owners

[DrivesAllDay]

Originally Posted by berryberry

Looking more and more likely libtard Baldwin is guilty of manslaughter at a minimum.

Maybe he should have learned a little about guns instead of bashing gun owners

Yep! And we know he will not serve any time. Rich, Hollywood Elite,Anti-Trumper? He'll get a slap on the wrist, if that, and be on his merry way.


Just maybe they should train these celebrities how to check the gun themselves instead of relying on someone else??

[anmar85]

That's not the way it works. Chances are Baldwin won't be on the hook for anything, because it's really not his responsibility. It's looking more and more like there are four people who will potentially be on the hook for this:
- The Master Armorer: It's literally her job to make sure all firearms on set are safe before they are handed off to anyone
- The Assistant Director: It was his job to confirm with the armorer that the firearm was safe before taking it on set
- The Director: I hate to blame one of the victims here, but it's his job to confirm with the assistant director that the firearm is safe before it is handed off to talent.

- The Co-Producer (And MAYBE Baldwin here, but I doubt it): It is the producer's job to ensure that safety protocols are being followed on set.


If talent is handed a fire arm and is told that it is cold, they are supposed to be able to believe that, because there's people who are paid a ton of money to make sure that is true. Honestly it's kind of stupid that in the year 2021 we are even still using real fire arms on set, there's really no need for it. Hopefully this will also open up a serious dialogue about on set safety procedure, the importance of it, and the consequences of not following it. It's starting to feel like we're reaching a minimum of 1 death per year on film sets, and that's insane.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by anmar85

That's not the way it works. Chances are Baldwin won't be on the hook for anything, because it's really not his responsibility. It's looking more and more like there are four people who will potentially be on the hook for this:
- The Master Armorer: It's literally her job to make sure all firearms on set are safe before they are handed off to anyone
- The Assistant Director: It was his job to confirm with the armorer that the firearm was safe before taking it on set
- The Director: I hate to blame one of the victims here, but it's his job to confirm with the assistant director that the firearm is safe before it is handed off to talent.

- The Co-Producer (And MAYBE Baldwin here, but I doubt it): It is the producer's job to ensure that safety protocols are being followed on set.


If talent is handed a fire arm and is told that it is cold, they are supposed to be able to believe that, because there's people who are paid a ton of money to make sure that is true. Honestly it's kind of stupid that in the year 2021 we are even still using real fire arms on set, there's really no need for it. Hopefully this will also open up a serious dialogue about on set safety procedure, the importance of it, and the consequences of not following it. It's starting to feel like we're reaching a minimum of 1 death per year on film sets, and that's insane.

They already had prior accidents on the set. The union workers walked off so Baldwin had to hire some locals. Baldwin was the Producer. He’s responsible for everything.. They were using it for target practice during the filming. He should have checked the weapon before pulling the trigger. That’s basic gun safety training.

https://www.etonline.com/rust-crew-w...rts-174160?amp

[anmar85]

Yeah, that's why I said he might be held accountable with the co-producer. I just doubt it, because it can be pretty easily argued that between producing and acting in the film, he would have a little bit on his plate at the time, as opposed to the co-producer who is only doing that job.


As far as him personally checking a gun every time it enters his hands, I understand basic gun safety procedure, but that's just not the procedure on a film set. It's the responsibility of the people in charge of the fire arm, and the people in charge of handing off the fire arm to inspect it and make sure it is safe to be on set. Should there be better safety procedures? Absolutely, but I also don't think we live in an age where people should be using real guns in movies at all. I have a sneaking suspicion that if this gets pinned on a single person, then it's going to be the AD that handed him the gun and declared it cold. It's most definitely part of his job description to make sure that stuff like this doesn't happen, and it was happening on set regularly. Rumor has it that he has kind of a reputation for skirting safety regulations already.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by anmar85

Yeah, that's why I said he might be held accountable with the co-producer. I just doubt it, because it can be pretty easily argued that between producing and acting in the film, he would have a little bit on his plate at the time, as opposed to the co-producer who is only doing that job.


As far as him personally checking a gun every time it enters his hands, I understand basic gun safety procedure, but that's just not the procedure on a film set. It's the responsibility of the people in charge of the fire arm, and the people in charge of handing off the fire arm to inspect it and make sure it is safe to be on set. Should there be better safety procedures? Absolutely, but I also don't think we live in an age where people should be using real guns in movies at all. I have a sneaking suspicion that if this gets pinned on a single person, then it's going to be the AD that handed him the gun and declared it cold. It's most definitely part of his job description to make sure that stuff like this doesn't happen, and it was happening on set regularly. Rumor has it that he has kind of a reputation for skirting safety regulations already.

Have you worked on a Hollywood film set?

[anmar85]

Originally Posted by bambino

Have you worked on a Hollywood film set?

Yup, a couple

[bambino]

Originally Posted by anmar85

Yup, a couple

Well, I guess you didn’t read the actors guild protocol on gun safety. ANYONE that will be handling a weapon needs to go thru safety classes. Including actors.


The SAFETY MEETING shall include an “on-site walk through” and/or “dry-run” with the Property Master (or, in his/her absence, the weapons handler and/or other appropriate personnel determined by the locality or the needs of the production), Range Master (if applicable), designated production representative, and anyone that will be using and/or handling the firearms. An understanding of the intended action, possible deviations, plans to abort, emergency procedures, and chain of command should be made clear.
10. Cast and crew members shall be limited to those members absolutely required to capture the effect. No minor(s) may be present in any scene or in the vicinity

Baldwin should have taken the time to inspect the weapon before pointing and firing. Especially since there were two other incidents the prior week and experienced union workers walking off the set that morning in protest of safety.

Here’s a 16 minute with the latest details the MSM aren’t reporting


https://www.bitchute.com/video/QCvNu160cfE/

[bambino]

https://t.me/RealDonaldoTrumpo/4361

[anmar85]

Originally Posted by bambino

Well, I guess you didn’t read the actors guild protocol on gun safety. ANYONE that will be handling a weapon needs to go thru safety classes. Including actors.


The SAFETY MEETING shall include an “on-site walk through” and/or “dry-run” with the Property Master (or, in his/her absence, the weapons handler and/or other appropriate personnel determined by the locality or the needs of the production), Range Master (if applicable), designated production representative, and anyone that will be using and/or handling the firearms. An understanding of the intended action, possible deviations, plans to abort, emergency procedures, and chain of command should be made clear.
10. Cast and crew members shall be limited to those members absolutely required to capture the effect. No minor(s) may be present in any scene or in the vicinity

Baldwin should have taken the time to inspect the weapon before pointing and firing. Especially since there were two other incidents the prior week and experienced union workers walking off the set that morning in protest of safety.

Here’s a 16 minute with the latest details the MSM aren’t reporting


https://www.bitchute.com/video/QCvNu160cfE/

Well no I didn't, because I was set labor so the guidelines of the Screen Actor's Guild didn't really apply to anything I was up to. What you just described though is the safety meeting that needs to take place on any set where guns are being used. It's usually either the armorer or prop master's responsibility to check firearms before and after they are used. At least from my understanding so far what happened was: Armorer said the guns were cold before the crew broke for lunch, crew breaks for lunch, AD grabs one of the guns and takes it to set, AD hands the gun to Baldwin and calls out that it is cold, Baldwin starts blocking the scene when the incident occurs.


I don't disagree that anyone that holds a real life fire arm should inspect it first, but I'm just telling you that's usually not the procedure on a set.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by anmar85

Well no I didn't, because I was set labor so the guidelines of the Screen Actor's Guild didn't really apply to anything I was up to. What you just described though is the safety meeting that needs to take place on any set where guns are being used. It's usually either the armorer or prop master's responsibility to check firearms before and after they are used. At least from my understanding so far what happened was: Armorer said the guns were cold before the crew broke for lunch, crew breaks for lunch, AD grabs one of the guns and takes it to set, AD hands the gun to Baldwin and calls out that it is cold, Baldwin starts blocking the scene when the incident occurs.


I don't disagree that anyone that holds a real life fire arm should inspect it first, but I'm just telling you that's usually not the procedure on a set.

It is the protocol. Baldwin failed miserably every step of the way. The actor is the last safety step. I wouldn’t point and fire a gun just because someone said it was safe. They actually skipped step 3.

[berryberry]

Originally Posted by anmar85

That's not the way it works. Chances are Baldwin won't be on the hook for anything, because it's really not his responsibility. It's looking more and more like there are four people who will potentially be on the hook for this:
- The Master Armorer: It's literally her job to make sure all firearms on set are safe before they are handed off to anyone
- The Assistant Director: It was his job to confirm with the armorer that the firearm was safe before taking it on set
- The Director: I hate to blame one of the victims here, but it's his job to confirm with the assistant director that the firearm is safe before it is handed off to talent.

- The Co-Producer (And MAYBE Baldwin here, but I doubt it): It is the producer's job to ensure that safety protocols are being followed on set.


If talent is handed a fire arm and is told that it is cold, they are supposed to be able to believe that, because there's people who are paid a ton of money to make sure that is true. Honestly it's kind of stupid that in the year 2021 we are even still using real fire arms on set, there's really no need for it. Hopefully this will also open up a serious dialogue about on set safety procedure, the importance of it, and the consequences of not following it. It's starting to feel like we're reaching a minimum of 1 death per year on film sets, and that's insane.

You do realize Baldwin is the producer. It is ultimately his responsibility. Also it is the responsibility of every actor using a gun on set to check the chamber to ensure it is not loaded. Baldwin did not do so.

[anmar85]

I mean you're absolutely welcome to believe whoever you want is responsible and for whatever reason. I'm not really trying to argue who should or shouldn't be at fault. I'm just trying to explain the reality of what's going to probably happen because of this. Truthfully no one is probably going to be held legally accountable and it is going to be called a tragic accident in a dangerous field. I mean shit, do you guys not remember The Twilight Zone movie? That was a much clearer case of someone being at fault and nothing came of it. My only point was that even though they were being REALLY sloppy with procedure from the looks of things, you're going to be really hard pressed to pin that on a single person legally speaking. Maybe there will be some professional ramifications for some of the people involved, but that's probably as far as it is going to go. All I'm really saying is that realistically speaking, if the state decided to bring charges against anyone, and that's a very massive if, it would be to either the person in charge of the firearms on set, or the person who handed the firearm off. I'm basing this off of what I know about that industry from study and experience as well as what has happened in these kinds of situations historically.

[chizzy]

Originally Posted by anmar85

I mean you're absolutely welcome to believe whoever you want is responsible and for whatever reason. I'm not really trying to argue who should or shouldn't be at fault. I'm just trying to explain the reality of what's going to probably happen because of this. Truthfully no one is probably going to be held legally accountable and it is going to be called a tragic accident in a dangerous field. I mean shit, do you guys not remember The Twilight Zone movie? That was a much clearer case of someone being at fault and nothing came of it. My only point was that even though they were being REALLY sloppy with procedure from the looks of things, you're going to be really hard pressed to pin that on a single person legally speaking. Maybe there will be some professional ramifications for some of the people involved, but that's probably as far as it is going to go. All I'm really saying is that realistically speaking, if the state decided to bring charges against anyone, and that's a very massive if, it would be to either the person in charge of the firearms on set, or the person who handed the firearm off. I'm basing this off of what I know about that industry from study and experience as well as what has happened in these kinds of situations historically.

First off, you wrote some very good posts.
Secondly, man I bet there is going to be alot of civil lawsuits being handed out over this

[anmar85]

Originally Posted by chizzy

First off, you wrote some very good posts.
Secondly, man I bet there is going to be alot of civil lawsuits being handed out over this

Thanks,
And oh yeah absolutely. Civil Litigation in that entire industry is about to blow up. There was already a lot of unrest from the labor unions brewing before this happened, so I think this is about to set off something big on that front.