Alec Baldwin Fired Prop Gun That Killed Halyna Hutchins, Injured Director

Callinectes said:
Yes, as I stated. "Accidents" also happen much more frequently among the untrained.



Here's the really important "facts":

1) Baldwin discharged at least one projectile from a firearm into the bodies of two human beings, killing one and seriously injuring the other.

2) He is a shrill, abrasive, obnoxious Hollywood lefty activist and sycophant.

3) He is virulently anti-gun.

Some nice to know stuff:

1) Did the script call for him to point the gun at the victims?

2) What was his role as an actor in this film? He had a gun. Was he a bad guy with a gun, or a good guy? If he was playing a bad guy, that would be understandable because he could camp it up a little and play the evil right wing gun nut to the hilt. But for him to play a white hat gun toting problem solver here to save the town, well, that would be the pinnacle of hypocrisy right there, seeing as how the left believes the prevalence of guns in America causes more problems than it solves. I think any anti-gun Hollywood lefty should publicly state their position and publicly refuse to accept any role in any movie that involves guns.

I'm not saying "dumb libbie actor can't handle guns". I'm saying uneducated and undisciplined PEOPLE shouldn't handle guns. And shit like this will still happen because this is not heaven. There are a whole lot of us plebs in jail for negligent use of a gun resulting in death or serious bodily injury right now. Many of these crimes are carbon copies of this case. Baldwin should not get any preferential treatment, don't you agree?
Click to expand...

Of course. No way that Baldwin should get preferential treatment - though I'd be surprised at this point if an investigation finds any sort of criminal liability.

I agree w/ you though. I'm not anti-gun, but people handling them without proper training - or in any sort of careless fashion - is a bad situation.
 
volsrock said:
tragedy due to human negligence

guns do not kill anyone..if it wasn't for stupid people this woman would still be alive
Click to expand...

you are incredibly stupid. guns are used by people to kill people, asshole moron. why do you love guns so much? because you like to suck on the barrel?
 
BartenderElite said:
Of course. No way that Baldwin should get preferential treatment - though I'd be surprised at this point if an investigation finds any sort of criminal liability.

I agree w/ you though. I'm not anti-gun, but people handling them without proper training - or in any sort of careless fashion - is a bad situation.
Click to expand...

an actor pretending to shoot a gun he has been told is safe is not liable for anything. good god.
 
Callinectes said:
Yes, as I stated. "Accidents" also happen much more frequently among the untrained.



Here's the really important "facts":

1) Baldwin discharged at least one projectile from a firearm into the bodies of two human beings, killing one and seriously injuring the other.

2) He is a shrill, abrasive, obnoxious Hollywood lefty activist and sycophant.

3) He is virulently anti-gun.

Some nice to know stuff:

1) Did the script call for him to point the gun at the victims?

2) What was his role as an actor in this film? He had a gun. Was he a bad guy with a gun, or a good guy? If he was playing a bad guy, that would be understandable because he could camp it up a little and play the evil right wing gun nut to the hilt. But for him to play a white hat gun toting problem solver here to save the town, well, that would be the pinnacle of hypocrisy right there, seeing as how the left believes the prevalence of guns in America causes more problems than it solves. I think any anti-gun Hollywood lefty should publicly state their position and publicly refuse to accept any role in any movie that involves guns.

I'm not saying "dumb libbie actor can't handle guns". I'm saying uneducated and undisciplined PEOPLE shouldn't handle guns. And shit like this will still happen because this is not heaven. There are a whole lot of us plebs in jail for negligent use of a gun resulting in death or serious bodily injury right now. Many of these crimes are carbon copies of this case. Baldwin should not get any preferential treatment, don't you agree?
Click to expand...

1) Baldwin discharged at least one projectile from a firearm into the bodies of two human beings, killing one and seriously injuring the other.

He was rehearsing. The first time he took the gun out of his holster, nothing happened.

2) He is a shrill, abrasive, obnoxious Hollywood lefty activist and sycophant.

Maybe. So what? Plenty of actors/actresses are like that. Entitled rich people.

3) He is virulently anti-gun.

That is a lie.

1) Did the script call for him to point the gun at the victims?

Nope. They know not to ever point a gun at someone even if they're filled with blanks.

2) What was his role as an actor in this film? He had a gun. Was he a bad guy with a gun, or a good guy? If he was playing a bad guy, that would be understandable because he could camp it up a little and play the evil right wing gun nut to the hilt. But for him to play a white hat gun toting problem solver here to save the town, well, that would be the pinnacle of hypocrisy right there, seeing as how the left believes the prevalence of guns in America causes more problems than it solves. I think any anti-gun Hollywood lefty should publicly state their position and publicly refuse to accept any role in any movie that involves guns.

This has nothing to do with politics. Stop making it political.
 
BartenderElite said:
Of course. No way that Baldwin should get preferential treatment - though I'd be surprised at this point if an investigation finds any sort of criminal liability.

I agree w/ you though. I'm not anti-gun, but people handling them without proper training - or in any sort of careless fashion - is a bad situation.
Click to expand...

It sure does look like the more the experts hear about what happened the more they think that criminal charges are likely.
 
But those aren’t the only safeguards in place. Actors and even sometimes crew will receive training from weapons professionals on gun safety. “You spend time with them, showing how a gun works, how you don’t point it at anyone ever, how you keep your finger off the trigger and always point it down,” Walters says.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/ente...ng-avoidable-gun-safety-protocols/6161048001/


you don’t point it at anyone ever, keep your finger off the trigger...BINGO


If Baldwin was rehearsing practicing his quick draw..and pointed the gun at the woman who was not part of any scene and pulled the trigger he is responsible! you dont do that!!
 
Last edited:
BartenderElite said:
Do you have a quote from someone, or a link?

I have not heard that.
Click to expand...

Over the last two days the tone on criminal charges has changed from "almost certainly not" to "well, maybe". The details keep getting worse, and the state has as said that if charges are justified then there will be charges, that there will be no leniency.

Nobody doubts that there well be tons of civil actions, lasting years.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Over the last two days the tone on criminal charges has changed from "almost certainly not" to "well, maybe". The details keep getting worse, and the state has as said that if charges are justified then there will be charges, that there will be no leniency.

Nobody doubts that there well be tons of civil actions, lasting years.
Click to expand...

The tone?

Where....here?
 
I think the worse things are

1) There was live ammo on set

2) it was stored with the blanks.

3) this gun was used for fun time shooting with real bullets by actors and/or crew.

4) the AD was known to have been reckless on gun safety in previous movies
 
AProudLefty said:
1) Baldwin discharged at least one projectile from a firearm into the bodies of two human beings, killing one and seriously injuring the other.

He was rehearsing. The first time he took the gun out of his holster, nothing happened.

2) He is a shrill, abrasive, obnoxious Hollywood lefty activist and sycophant.

Maybe. So what? Plenty of actors/actresses are like that. Entitled rich people.

3) He is virulently anti-gun.

That is a lie.

1) Did the script call for him to point the gun at the victims?

Nope. They know not to ever point a gun at someone even if they're filled with blanks.

2) What was his role as an actor in this film? He had a gun. Was he a bad guy with a gun, or a good guy? If he was playing a bad guy, that would be understandable because he could camp it up a little and play the evil right wing gun nut to the hilt. But for him to play a white hat gun toting problem solver here to save the town, well, that would be the pinnacle of hypocrisy right there, seeing as how the left believes the prevalence of guns in America causes more problems than it solves. I think any anti-gun Hollywood lefty should publicly state their position and publicly refuse to accept any role in any movie that involves guns.

This has nothing to do with politics. Stop making it political.
Click to expand...

Why did he point it pull the trigger at someone that was not part of any movie scene?

Brandon Lee was shot but was part of the movie scene
 
volsrock said:
Why did he point it pull the trigger at someone that was not part of any movie scene?

Brandon Lee was shot but was part of the movie scene
Click to expand...

Why don't you wait until the investigation is over?

You seem to think he deliberately pointed it at them.
 
Warnings about the production arose in September, when Neal Zoromski, a veteran property master, told one of the producers that he had concerns about how and where they were sourcing props and personnel for the film. On Sept. 20, Row Walters, a unit production manager, reached out to Zoromski asking if he would be interested in joining the Tier 1A feature (that classification means it’s a low-budget production), shooting in Santa Fe, starting Oct. 6, according to emails obtained by BuzzFeed News. But the low rates, slim staffing, and rushed timeline were red flags, said Zoromski, who has been in the industry since 1989, is a 25-year union member, and has worked on everything from 7th Heaven to The Day After Tomorrow.

“They didn’t seem to be playing it right from the beginning,” he said. “It felt slipshod, and the vibe was that this is a very unsafe situation, and I told them as such.”

Based on conversations with Walters and a production designer, the prop master realized that they “were behind the eight ball” and trying to prepare a project days before it was about to start. Unfortunately, that has become the trend in Hollywood, he said, to try to throw a production together in 8 to 10 days when the “bare minimum should be three weeks.”

They were “flippant” with details about the weapons that were to be provided and shrugged off his questions about who was going to be on staff, Walters added. He also said they insisted they had everything they needed locally — “and that’s a great concern.”
Click to expand...
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/briannasacks/rust-film-prop-safety-protocols

So Buzzfeed is doing more to cover this than either Variety or Hollywood Reporter?

Decent piece at the link.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top