I think it may be an actual antique gun. If so, age and deterioration may have set in. Just a WAG.
Perhaps someone can clarify: exactly how much management responsibility did Baldwin have? For example he seems to be saying it was the producer’s responsibility for gun safety, but who hired the producer? If it was Alec Baldwin who hired a non-safety conscious producer then he has major responsibility.
Nope, it’s a high quality, modern reproduction of the original.
I have never heard that happrning before, ever. My first guess is that it’s the typically terrible reporting that you find in almost every story about guns. Second guess is that if the gun really did break, it’s because the FBI actually tested it to the breaking limit somehow to see if the hammer would drop in any situation at all, for the sake of being thorough. Maybe they cocked it and then started thwacking the hammer with increasing force until it either broke or went off. The 'broke in two places would then likely include the sear and/or the transfer bar if the gun has one.
But no gun capable of firing a .45 Colt cartridge is going to ‘break into two pieces’ upon being fired unless something was done to it to make it break.
The final authority for on-set gun safety should be the armorer. She is the one who bears most responsibility, and she should be the one most trained in gun safety and set procedures. She left the guns unattended outside on a cart, I presume she didn’t check the dummies before loading them, or she let someone else load the guns. All of those are violations of protocol.
Guns are surprisingly human proof as far as breakage goes.
Right, I can’t even imagine what they would have done in the process of testing to break a firearm.
And this happening makes her look even worse at her job if this somehow (?) happened during normal testing. It’s not like this gun had a million moving parts that could go wrong.
I’m also wondering what effect this will have on their case if they do charge someone with negligence or manslaughter. With no way for the defense to run their own tests on the weapon, will the testimony about how the gun was able to fire be allowed into evidence?
It wasn’t clear to me that the FBI tested the exact gun to destruction, or just another copy of the same gun from the same manufacturer. I doubt if they would have destroyed a gun that had been admitted into evidence. My guess is they simply bought one of their own and tested it.
I think Baldwin probably pulled the trigger without realizing it or else had the trigger down in order to manipulate the hammer back and forth to get the angles for the shot or whatever.
However, I wonder if the FBI did any testing with reloaded ammunition and in particularl badly reloaded ammunition. Cartridges can be loaded in such a way where it takes much less of a hit to detonate the primer.
The gun in question won’t let the hammer get anywhere near the primer unless the trigger is pulled. The original Colt had a dangerous feature - if you let the hammer down on an unfired cartridge, it was resting right on the primer. Give the hammer a smack and the gun could go off.
On modern reproductions like the Pietta Baldwin was using, the hammer never strikes the cartridge. It physically can’t. When you pull the trigger, a ‘transfer bar’ is raised. The hammer hits the transfer bar, which then strikes the primer. No trigger pull, no transfer bar. Even if you could break the sear and force the hammer to drop, without the trigger pull there would be no way for the hammer to fire the gun.
My guess as to what happened is that Baldwin had his finger pulling the trigger the whole time while he was practicing the draw. Then when he thumbed the hammer back for the camera test his thumb slipped, firing the gun. To him there was no ‘trigger pull’ - because he was accidentally holding it down. If he had only used double-action guns before, he might have thought it was safe to hold the trigger down or he wasn’t even aware he was doing it.
Earlier in the thread there was discussion that Pietta makes true replicas and also versions with a transfer bar. Do we know for sure which one it was?
Yeah, I think this is one likely way it happened, that he drew with the finger inside the trigger guard and in the crossdraw motion (pull and turn) the finger rested on the trigger creating pressure, though not travelling enough that he felt a “pull” – thus I completely accept that he is wholly sincere in that as far as what he experienced he was not “pulling the trigger”… because unwittingly he had it already pressed all along. And that meant that when he thumbed back the hammer the pressure was enough to disengage the catch so there was nothing to stop the hammer falling – he fanned it w/o realizing he was doing that.
Another thing I wonder about is if his finger is already resting against the trigger, when he thumbed back the hammer and his thumb slipped, his reflexive flinch caused him to apply pressure, to the same effect.
An update.
Reviving this thread in light of news that the Santa Fe district attorney’s office has been allocated funds to support criminal prosecutions of up to four individuals associated with the Rust set shooting. The filing requesting the funds specifically names Baldwin as a possible defendant.
I would be surprised if Baldwin were charged. You could articulate cases for negligent homicide in his handling of the firearm or in hiring the armorer and others if he had a real managerial role in the enterprise but both of those seem like weak cases at best to me based on what I’ve read so far. Of course, prosecutors have more information than we do, so maybe they have better facts supporting such a prosecution. If Baldwin misled police in the course of the investigation, it would also be a different kettle of fish.
Other than this case involving a celebrity and being of so much media/public interest, what is so above and beyond for this case other than other cases in the state that may be negligent homicide vs manslaughter or no charges indicated?
Pretty sure in New Mexico there are other deaths each year associated with alleged negligent firearm discharges. They don’t budget for them? Or are the others just ignored?
How many of those occur in a commercial enterprise and do they get this kind of attention? I expect they don’t always but this an unusual situation involving people from out of state and a variety of state regulations involved.
Why specifically does it being in a commercial enterprise make it special?
Not arguing just not understanding.
Being shot by a coworker while handling weapons as a part of their job.
I only know what’s in the article, but I’d imagine that the request for funding is because they expect them to fight the charges. I’m sure that most defendants in Santa Fe plead out.
Interesting to speculate who the four possible defendants are. They named Baldwin, and the armorer and AD are obvious candidates. Not sure who the fourth would be.
I mean specific to prosecution.
@flurb, that makes sense I guess.
The guy who provided the rounds?