The full statement from SAG-AFTRA read: “To the extent that the charges filed on January 19 are based on an accusation of negligent use of a firearm predicated on this or any actor having a duty to inspect a firearm as part of its use, that is an incorrect assessment of the actual duties of an actor on set.
“An actor’s job is not to be a firearms or weapons expert. Firearms are provided for use on set under the guidance of multiple expert professionals directly responsible for the safe and accurate operation of that firearm.
“The Industry Standards for safety with firearms and use of blank ammunition are clearly laid out in Safety Bulletin 1, provided by the Joint Industry-Wide Labor Management Safety Commission. The guidelines require an experienced, qualified armorer to be put in charge of all handling, use, and safekeeping of firearms on set. These duties include ‘inspecting the firearm and barrel before and after every firing sequence,’ and ‘checking all firearms before each use.'”
They continued: “The guidelines do not make it the performer’s responsibility to check any firearm. Performers train to perform, and they are not required or expected to be experts on guns or experienced in their use. The industry assigns that responsibility to qualified professionals who oversee their use and handling in every aspect. Anyone issued a firearm on set must be given training and guidance in its safe handling and use, but all activity with firearms on a set must be under the careful supervision and control of the professional armorer and the employer.”
Here’s the referenced Safety Bulletin 1.
And, some key items:
*Firearms in the film industry are considered props and are the responsibility of the Property Master
Property Manager (including the armorer) Responsibilities include:
*Securely storing firearms separately from blanks in accordance with federal, state, and local laws.
*Loading firearms with blanks or dummy rounds immediately before they are used in a scene
From the Safety Protocols:
*The Property Master should inspect the firearm and barrel before every firing sequence.
*If it is necessary to aim a firearm at another person on camera, the Property Master will be consulted to determine available options.
And I want to mention with these specific rules…
*Allowing cast and crew who are required to stand near the firing sequence to witness the loading of the firearm.
*Whenever the Property Master gives a firearm to a performer, the Property Master shall advise the performer of the type of blank or dummy round being used and afford the performer, cast, and crew the supervised opportunity to verify the same.
…both of those rules say that the cast/crew must be allowed to or afforded the opportunity to witness the armorer loading/checking the gun, not that the actor is required to see it or that the armorer is required to do that while the actor watches.
How that actually plays out IRL, I don’t know.
I’ll just reiterate that there was a union walk-out on the set specifically due to lack of safety protocols/compliance. Everybody there had crossed the line to keep shooting, which they really should not have done. For both union and safety reasons.
To those who think Cooper’s rules of gun safety are not applicable on set, here’s rule #1 in the mandatory safety briefing:
- It is important that everyone treat all firearms, whether they are real, rubber or replica firearms as if they are working, loaded firearms.
Rule 11 says anyone handling a firearm should refrain from pointing it at anyone, including themselves. If it is necessary to aim the gun at someone on camera, the property master or armorer is supposed to be consulted.
Also, it appears that they are supposed to establish ‘aim points’ where the gun is to be pointed, and then make sure the crew and unnecessary cast are safely clear of those points.
I’ll bet none of that was done. I’d be surprised if they even had the mandatory safety briefing, considering the way the guns were being handled.
That’s literally the point. None/some of that wasn’t done. The armorer didn’t do what she was supposed to do. More rules won’t fix that, it’ll just result in more rules that aren’t followed.
I’m not sure what the point here is. No one is saying there can’t be overlap between the two sets of rules, just that Cooper’s rules don’t apply here.
The rules of the road don’t apply in a grocery store, but I assure you, that doesn’t mean you can go 90mph down the vegetable aisle.
And certainly not if your banana is loaded.
(I was typing a similar response, yours was funnier.)
If the rule is no guns on a movie set than there will be far less rules to follow.
There are 7 “producers” on that film, some just brought a checkbook. I dont think Baldwin did day to day hiring.
Right.
Sigh. Yes. But not in a film.
I mean, you are not supposed to go on a car chase with a car for safe handling. or engage in a gunfight, etc. Films show many things are not used within safe handling guidelines.
Not in a film. Okay, look at AAA rules for safe driving- then watch any action film. I mean in 10 minutes of a Fast and Furious film they pretty much violate every single one.
So gun safety rules and driving safety rules and many other safety rules IRL can not be followed in a film. Thats why the film industry has it own safety rules- which werent followed.
No protocol is safe when someone violates it. Nothing is foolproof as fools are so ingenious. Obviously, there should never be life ammo on a set- yet there was.
It has happened- once iirc?
And guns capable of firing only blanks have also killed.
Firearms Safety Rules by Jeff Cooper.
1. Treat every weapon as if it were loaded. There is quite a bit of difference between your quote and his own quote.
OSHA determined that he did not. His producer role was limited to casting and script changes.
I think all the prosecutor might have for a case that even though Baldwin was not responsible either directly or in a production oversight role for gun safety, an actor with his experience should have noticed that standard safety protocols were not being followed; and as a powerful star he had more influence than others to refuse to continue shooting on an unsafe set. But that’s pretty nebulous - it’s almost literally saying we’re going after you because you’re rich and famous, you have a higher duty of care solely by virtue of being rich and famous.
And none of that makes the question of whether he accidentally pulled the trigger remotely relevant, which was the claimed basis for the DA refiling charges.
My quote came from Safety Bulletin #1, not Cooper. And no, there really isn’t any difference between the two statements, other than that the actor’s ones expands Cooper’s rule to apply even to rubber or replica guns. Cooper would agree with that, btw.
The attention being paid to the gun issue shows just how politicised we are over guns. Because as on-set safety goes, guns are one of the smallest issues. Sets have heavy things overhead, power cables snaking all over the place, lots of moving things, etc.
In the last four years alone, the following accidents happened, among others:
A production assistant was paralyzed by a bucket lift during the making of “Batwoman”.
A crew member stepped on an exposed wire, was electrocuted and died on the spot making “Love you Rachuchu”.
Actor Ryan Fellowes was killed in a car crash filming “Street Outlaws”.
During the filming of “Indian 2”, a crane collapsed on set killing three crew members and injuring ten others.
Those are just the major ones. There were also lots of concussions, broken bones, etc. Both Daniel Craig and John Cho were hospitalized from injuries on set and needed rehab before continuing the production.
None of those accidents created 1/100 the furor of the gun incident.
In part because so many people (like you, for example) feel that they are qualified to apply their personal amateur knowledge of gun safety to movie sets to condemn Baldwin, when they would never do so with any of the other things you mentioned.
Exactly.
The initial “furor” was driven by conservative schadenfreude. If Baldwin hadn’t been doing Trump on SNL I doubt this gets a quarter of the attention. Yes it would have made news, because of the nature of the accident, but the glee wouldn’t have been there.
Actually, I feel I am qualified to read the plain english in the safety bulletins.
And you insist that I am ‘condemning’ Baldwin, even though I have been taking his side. You don’t really read what I write, do you? You just skim looking for ‘gotchas’. But there are nuances here, and blame to go around for lots of people. Baldwin isn’t totally innocent, but he’s also not the professional charged with making sure guns on set are safe, which is where the large majority of the blame lies.
My position from the beginning has been that Baldwin should not be charged for his actions on set unless it can be shown that these practices are normally religiously adhered to and he violated them in a reckless fashion. I don’t believe either is true.
He may be liable in his position as producer, depending on what roles he took on and whether he personally waived safety protocols. I haven’t seen any evidence that he did.
And yes, the people on the right calling for Baldwin’s head are idiots and behaving as partisans. Partisans gotta partisan. The left does it too, of course.
While I firmly believe Baldwin bears no blame for the incident, I’m kind of thinking about no real guns (or maybe even knives) on sets as well. No matter how many rules are in place for safety, somewhere, some dolts are going to break those rules.
Yes. Statistically, it is far, far more dangerous to be on the set of a movie being directed by Paul W.S. Anderson than it is to be on a set where prop firearms are being used.
example one, example two, example three
But despite an overwhelming record of death and disfigurement, you don’t see people on message boards insisting that we should always assume the Resident Evil director is loaded. Because it’s easier to see “gun story” and imagine knowledge and expertise.
If you bring replica guns that look identical but cannot shoot, you’ve just added another safety checklist item: Make sure the gun is a replica and can 't shoot.
People who bring live ammunition on set can also bring real guns to ‘show people what a real one does’, and have it get mixed in with the replicas. So you still need to follow all the same rules of gun safety - you’ve just added one more layer.
But in the real world, I’ll bet that once everyone assumes all the guns are replicas, the culture of gun safety will break down, and there will still be risk. You can’t keep people from being stupid if they really want to be.
I would have thought that keeping live ammo off set would be rule #1, and the easiest rule to follow. Just don’t do it. Ever. And anyone who thinks about it for a second would realize just how many opportunities for disaster there are if you mix live ammo with dummies and blanks. And yet… That’s what happened. No amount of regulation will stop people intent on being that stupid.
Someone who will sneak live ammo onto a movie set for yucks is perfectly capable of sneaking in a real gun. Imagine a situation where they need a gun of a certain kind (say, a Colt 1911), and don’t have a prop gun available. Some enterprising producer might say, “Hey, you can use my 1911. Just be careful!”
At some point, you have to accept that you have decent rules in place, and just charge whoever broke them and move on. Not every accident is an excuse for making more regulations. Especially if the accident was caused by ignoring the regulations already in place.
Yeah. It was a big fuck-up not allowing the armorer on the set because of COVID. If they cleared everyone out who was not necessary for the filming on a scene that’s good-sense COVID protection. It’s just that whenever guns are on the set the armorer is 100% a critical crew member, just like director, cam operator, DP, and actors, etc.
I think some fault (whether expressly “legal fault” or not) can be applied to whoever made the decision to keep the armorer off the set. I don’t recall if Gutierrez-Reed was union or not but it certainly would have be appropriate, IMO, for her to make a formal complaint and give very strong push-back to whoever kept her off the set. If nothing else she should have called her dad for help navigating the production politics.
ISTM that knowing when you MUST put your foot down is something that a less-experienced employee may have trouble with. That comes with experience (but she should have known she needed to raise the alarm.
Add every fight scene in every movie that was ever made.
Heck, I’ve seen movies where the actors take off in one plane and land in a completely different one. Talk about problems making a connecting flight.