Alec Baldwin

sparkwright said:
What do we think about the verdict regarding Alec Baldwin?

Personally I always believed that actors were always to be given 'safe' props, such as dummy knives, fake swords, blunt scissors, etc.

Surely someone in charge of the props hasn't done their job properly?
Click to expand...
There isn't a verdict yet 'cos we haven't yet had a trial.

I firmly believe that if I'm given a heavy blunt object as a stage prop then I can bash my fellow actor about the head with absolutely no consequence whatsoever.
 
FB72E33E-A12E-43E8-B701-A5DCA410A213.jpeg
 
From my understanding and ancient and basic firearms experience….

Yes the general firearm rule is never point a weapon at a person unless you intend to kill them.
Even if you believe the weapon is safe.

However the rules for film and TV are different due to the needs of the media because the film shots have to look real.
Non firing replica weapons are used normally
When a shot “to camera” is needed, and blank rounds are fired, ballistic screens are in place due to blanks discharging gas and detritus towards the camera.
Some films use replicas and add the muzzle flash in post. It looks ok but not fantastic.

From my understanding, this was a rehearsal so potentially screens may not have been in place, and live rounds would go though anyway. The weapon was supposed to be cold/clear (no live round of blank)?

So a scenario may be that the actor used a real gun, to be loaded with a blank in the take, to rehearse a shot.
He claims that it went off without his finger on the trigger.

The armourer is responsible for gun safety and loads/unloads weapons. Nobody is allowed to touch the weapons other than the armourer and chosen actor.

However it appears that the “Armourer” was inexperienced, and had posted photos that show posing with weapons.

reports emerged that some crew members had been using the same weapon for target practice. The issue would be that live rounds shouldn’t be on the site and you should never use a theatrical weapon for live firing.

Baldwin has implications/issues because he was not only a “victim” of the event but was in charge of the whole production.
As employer of the whole crew he must have some responsibility even if the actions of the individual crew members breached the rules.

Maybe the sensible way to approach the issue is regard Baldwin as two people?
The person holding the weapon
The person responsible for the crew and site.
 
They'd want some live ammo for things that get hit. Far easier than rigging up little explosives - which needs explosives.

He should have known about and checked procedures. Some, but not all, his fault.
 
trazor said:
His fault entirely, if you are passed a weapon capable of live fire, it's YOUR responsibility to ensure it's unloaded/safe.

He is familiar with firearms, no excuses.
Click to expand...
Is he 'qualified' to check whether a weapon is live?
 
denso13 said:
If not then he shouldn't be handling a gun. Still his fault.

Although someone else has also been charged.
Click to expand...
I always thought it wrong & we don't tend to do it these days, but until very recently we would gladly hand our children a toy gun as a present, to play with.

At what age do you think our children should be required to check that the gun is capable of live fire & whether or not it is loaded?
 
Dork Lard said:
but until very recently we would gladly hand our children a toy gun as a present, to play with.
Click to expand...
Guns used on film sets aren't toys. Grown ups, including seasoned actors, should know better and a quick check would have saved someone's life.

Would you happily shoot at someone with a real gun if I handed it to you and said "go ahead, it isn't loaded"?
 
denso13 said:
Guns used on film sets aren't toys. Grown ups, including seasoned actors, should know better and a quick check would have saved someone's life.

Would you happily shoot at someone with a real gun if I handed it to you and said "go ahead, it isn't loaded"?
Click to expand...
I am very highly qualified in the handling of firearms, both legally & through experience. I am one of very few who are allowed private ownership of single & automatic fire pistols right through to 1000+rpm machine guns. The chap that taught & schooled me through most of this wrote the book for modern Police firearms procedures & I will hang this out there for your abuse . . . . He also invented & presented the SAS 'tap tap' method of incredibly accurate & incredibly successful method of close quarter enemy engagement.

Alex Baldwin 'might' have a case to answer in his role as a producer of the movie. IMO he does not have a case to answer in his role as an actor.

Myself, & many others like me, are watching this case very closely. We are qualified & we are informed, you my son are clearly none of those.
 
Dork Lard said:
I am very highly qualified in the handling of firearms, both legally & through experience. I am one of very few who are allowed private ownership of single & automatic fire pistols right through to 1000+rpm machine guns. The chap that taught & schooled me through most of this wrote the book for modern Police firearms procedures & I will hang this out there for your abuse . . . . He also invented & presented the SAS 'tap tap' method of incredibly accurate & incredibly successful method of close quarter enemy engagement.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant nonsense.
Dork Lard said:
IMO he does not have a case to answer in his role as an actor.
Click to expand...
He acted irresponsibly and murdered an innocent party by his own inactions.

Care to answer this?

denso13 said:
Would you happily shoot at someone with a real gun if I handed it to you and said "go ahead, it isn't loaded"?
Click to expand...
 
denso13 said:
Irrelevant nonsense.

He acted irresponsibly and murdered an innocent party by his own inactions.

Care to answer this?
Click to expand...
You don't know what you don't know, & you Sir know very little about most things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top