If I’m a juror, that person has legal fault. That’s violating the rules, and the violation led to a death. Yeah, there were other fuck ups, too. But when the rules are good, it takes more than one error to kill someone.
Ideally, there are several layers of checks to make sure dangerous things are handled/done safely.
But, in pursuit of cost cutting and saving a buck such redundant layers might be left out. That is where, I think, a producer might be held liable for some of what happened (not saying Baldwin did this…just in general).
“No Guns” does not mean more rules. It means less rules. All the other rules about guns go away. It is far easier to enforce a single rule than the multiple rules that allow bringing real guns onto a movie set.
It is not a good idea to create habits of casual gun handling. And once a gun makes it past the one safety check, it’s an accident waiting to happen.
It took a chain of failures and multiple rules violations here to allow that accident to happen. That, plus rarity of accidenta, is actually a sign that the rules are pretty good.
And again, firearm accidenta are WAY down the list of on-set risks. Including risks of fatal accidents. Aircraft and helicopters and cars kill far more. Stuff dropping on people on a working set is always a hazard, as are the myriad electrical cables, pyrotechnics, rigging, yada yada.
Accidents. Not ‘accidenta’. Although that should be a word.
I think a distinction has to be made, if a cast member was shot and killed as part of a rehearsal or filmed scene obviously due to negligence that is one thing.
But is there yet another layer of negligence here? How is it that the Director had a gun pointed at her by Baldwin in the first place? Is this part of the script? I doubt it.
The very first reports of the incident that day were incomplete, but rumor control had it that Baldwin was getting a bit impatient with the pace and multiple rehearsal takes. “Oh, you want another take, huh?” Bang.
My understanding is that he was supposed to be drawing at the camera, so yes.
OK, but the camera didn’t get shot.
Guns don’t make it past a No Guns safety check. The casual gun handling is the idea of using a gun as a toy. That’s what a prop is in a movie, a toy for playing make believe. A ‘prop gun’ is a toy, can’t hurt anybody. This was not a ‘prop gun’, it was a real gun. There is absolutely no need to bring a real gun onto a movie set. Prop guns can’t hurt anyone. Baldwin shot and killed someone when he was playing with a real gun like it was a toy. “Everybody does it” is not an excuse.
Not surprised. He was doing a fast crossbody draw, to a position with the gun low at his side so he could fan the hammer. Zero precision in that move.
Right - something he had absolutely no business doing whatsoever, no way no how. Real people are never in the line of fire (even if it’s a non-firing prop) for just this reason.
There’s a fishing spot I go to. There is also a section of abandoned railroad track that is convenient to park.
Well, the odds of me getting hit by a train on a section of abandoned track are highly remote. But I still won’t park on the tracks. Good habits are just that.
It’s amazing to me how so many layers and instances of inept clown show fucked-up-edness have been revealed, and yet people want to defend this or handwave it away as some sort of “well these things happen”. It would be comical if it wasn’t so deadly.
Some purported news stories characterized this with phrases “Baldwin, who was holding the gun that went off, blah blah blah” as if he were a spectator.
Well, that was the scene direction. So he had business doing that.
First example that came to mind. 2:57 at this link. Check out our friend Bond. James Bond.
Say, have you ever seen a movie? A western? People are in the line of fire all the time. Sure in a lot of shots they can cheat that by aiming off a few degrees but there’s no shortage of closer scenes out there including, dunno, dozens of times I’ve seen an actor hold a gun to another actor’s head.
Yeah. I have to think that’s on the list of “stuff you never do in real life”
Unless it’s a prop gun that has no functionality.
And if you were an actor and the part required you to park your car on railroad tracks, you’d refuse, right?
Nobody is claiming that ‘these things happen’, people are saying that this happened because, as you pointed out, so many layers of safety weren’t working as they should have been.
I did this myself, in fact.
And I am getting really, really tired of repeating the same information over and over for people who don’t know how performance protocols are supposed to work.
This thread is basically Groundhog Day. So many in this country are just deeply in love with their self image as amateur gun owners. They just can’t help themselves, they have an uncontrollable urge to give patronizing explanations of how gun safety works and how this would never happen on their watch.
I’m not sure this is accurate. According to Wikipedia, she checked the guns before placing them on a cart. The director was also supposed to check the guns after taking them off the cart according to safety protocol, but he didn’t check the gun thoroughly. It’s also on her that live rounds got mixed in with blanks.
Probably should have posted the link.
I don’t understand which part you are saying may not be accurate.