For 30 years I carried a gun that I was trained to use in self-defense or to defend others from death or great bodily harm. Somehow, I can never recall asking this question (below). Color me terminally unimaginative, I suppose, but the idea of wrongfully killing someone never occurred to me.
When told he needed to shoot the scene again, Baldwin jokingly said "why don't I just shoot the two of you" then aimed and began firing the gun. Afterward Baldwin repeatedly asked “why was I handed a hot gun?” while the woman bled out. The Daily Mail reported.
We obviously don't know yet but from formerly working for one of the bigger studios, this probably comes down to budgeting.
Most production companies swore off of using any firearms that were functional a decade plus ago. This is usually governed by contracts but most of the firearms you see with the actors in movies are modified versions of real guns that have specially machined chambers and barrels to take a specific non commercial custom calibers. Or in the case of larger stuff propane/gas operated. The armors that own them are contractors who basically lease their collections and services to the filming studios.
Live fire filming, especially the close up type with functional firearms usually takes place off set elsewhere using a completely different set of firearms and is spliced in during editing. (Or these days is just CGI)
However, because these guys and their props cost bank if your shooting a low budget film you can save a lot of cash by hiring a prop supplier that's still using unmodified chambers aka functional firearms and try to control it.
I'm guessing that was the start of the issue and someone skipped their weight checks and other basic safety protocols.
IMHO it's kinda hard to mistake a real round for a dummy or blank though and by Baldwins twitter post it seems they were playing fast and loose if they were showing him how to load on set like it was no big deal.
Thanks--I agree. My speculation on blanks in .38 and wadcutters was offered because I assume there was no malign intent and I couldn't think of any other way to account for such terrible negligence. I also wonder whether the union armorer was present or was one of those who had walked off the set. If so, serious liability awaits Baldwin as the producer.
I'm not willing to speculate as to motives. My explanations go to this issue--how could live round be mistaken for a blank. That's where the wadcutter part comes in.
As to the person responsible, the first girl on the 911 call explicitly places responsibility on the "AD"--Ass't Director--who she says was responsible for the guns. So, probably not a union member? Not sure.
There is just nothing about this story which adds up. There is absolutely no way this would happen after the Brandon Lee incident (assuming that was real). They don't just have armors on set, they have representatives from the insurers. Not only was the main victim not an actor, she was a foreigner unknown to the American public. I'm inclined to believe it is a distraction/psyop/publicity stunt. Given the number of historic events which have been staged, I'm going to ignore this and have a look at what else is happening which might be overshadowed by this news.
So, that's exactly what Baldwin is claiming--that he was handed a gun to use by "the armorer" and instructed to load it with ammunition that was provided. Exactly why it was pointed at the cinematographer when he pulled the trigger is unknown and could depend on a number of factors.
My guess. I've never handled "blank" rounds. However ...
This was a Western movie. Therefore, I assume that the gun used was a revolver. I wonder whether "blank" rounds look like wadcutter rounds, which are commonly used for target shooting with revolvers, including by Cowboy Action Shooting (CAS) participants. Did a wadcutter get mixed in with blank ammo? Shouldn't have, but ... would explain.
However, in CAS a very common round used is .38 special. This link to images of .38 special "blanks" shows that a "live" .38 Special wadcutter might, to someone not very knowledgeable, be mistaken for a .38 Special blank.
Was he given the weapon to load while being filmed doing the loading as part of the movie? If so, those rounds would have been dummy rounds that look like real rounds but without any powder or a functioning primer. Dummy rounds are typically used for training personnel in loading and unloading weapons and are marked or modified to show they are inert. Of course in a film where the actor is shown loading a weapon, the rounds would have to look 'real.'
If he was given the weapon and some 'blank' cartridges and told to load them, that seems odd as that is what the armorer would do.
He shot people behind the camera, so in all likelihood he was assing around. The media has gone to great lengths to avoid mentioning that at the end of the day this was a negligent discharge of a firearm.
And as for that gun you carried, before they ever issued it to you, they told you and told you and they told you again
Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not prepared to destroy.
I haven't checked the NM laws, but it seems to me that--barring something really nefarious--negligent homicide of some sort would apply. What I mean by nefarious is something like this: Baldwin was handed gun for use in a scene, under the assurance that it had been duly checked and was "safe" for use in the scene. Any other scenario such as "horsing around" that involves pointing a gun and pulling the trigger and results in someone's death seems to lead to some sort of negligent homicide.
Depending on the weapon being used, the blank would have to be powerful enough to blow back the bolt and eject the spent case in an automatic or semi-automatic weapon for continued operation. Other than a live round being used, the only other possibility that comes to mind is that a foreign object, or objects - think gravel for instance - could have been lodged in the barrel of the weapon used. The force of the blank would propel the object out of the weapon.
If you recall, Brandon Lee was killed with a "prop" gun as well.
From wikipedia: the prop gun, which was a real revolver, was loaded with improperly-made dummy rounds, cartridges from which the special-effects crew had removed the powder charges so in close-ups the revolver would show normal-looking ammunition. However, the crew neglected to remove the primers from the cartridges. At some point before the fatal event, one of the rounds had been fired; although there was no powder charges, the energy from the ignited primer was enough to separate the bullet from the casing and push it part-way into the gun barrel, where it got stuck (a condition known as a squib load). For the fatal scene, which called for the revolver to be fired at Lee from a distance of 3.6–4.5 meters (12–15 ft), the dummy cartridges were replaced with blank rounds, which contained a powder charge and the primer, but no solid bullet, allowing the gun to be fired with sound and flash effects without the risk of an actual projectile. However, the gun was not properly checked and cleared before the blank round was fired, and the dummy bullet previously lodged in the barrel was then propelled forward by the blank and shot out the muzzle with almost the same force as if the round were live, striking Lee in the abdomen
Given that history, one would think that the movie industry would have updated their safety protocols when using weapons firing blanks. If the barrel wasn't clear, the fault would be with the armorer who prepared and verified the weapon for use on the movie set unless someone else had the opportunity to tamper with the weapon subsequent to being used. Calling Columbo...
Further reporting indicates the movie being filmed was a Western. I have not read anything about the type of weapon involved, be it a long gun or a handgun, but being a Western that narrows the field to probably a revolver or lever action rifle.
It gets worser ...
J.
@JamieCorridon
When told he needed to shoot the scene again, Baldwin jokingly said "why don't I just shoot the two of you" then aimed and began firing the gun. Afterward Baldwin repeatedly asked “why was I handed a hot gun?” while the woman bled out. The Daily Mail reported.
We obviously don't know yet but from formerly working for one of the bigger studios, this probably comes down to budgeting.
Most production companies swore off of using any firearms that were functional a decade plus ago. This is usually governed by contracts but most of the firearms you see with the actors in movies are modified versions of real guns that have specially machined chambers and barrels to take a specific non commercial custom calibers. Or in the case of larger stuff propane/gas operated. The armors that own them are contractors who basically lease their collections and services to the filming studios.
Live fire filming, especially the close up type with functional firearms usually takes place off set elsewhere using a completely different set of firearms and is spliced in during editing. (Or these days is just CGI)
However, because these guys and their props cost bank if your shooting a low budget film you can save a lot of cash by hiring a prop supplier that's still using unmodified chambers aka functional firearms and try to control it.
I'm guessing that was the start of the issue and someone skipped their weight checks and other basic safety protocols.
IMHO it's kinda hard to mistake a real round for a dummy or blank though and by Baldwins twitter post it seems they were playing fast and loose if they were showing him how to load on set like it was no big deal.
Thanks--I agree. My speculation on blanks in .38 and wadcutters was offered because I assume there was no malign intent and I couldn't think of any other way to account for such terrible negligence. I also wonder whether the union armorer was present or was one of those who had walked off the set. If so, serious liability awaits Baldwin as the producer.
Uh oh ...
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/alec-baldwins-rust-movie-set-reportedly-plagued-with-multiple-firearm-mishaps-safety-protocols-all-but-ignored/
Union people walked off set earlier, and were replaced with locals.
Can't ignore the possibility a disgruntled union goon slipped a live round in with the blanks.
I'm not willing to speculate as to motives. My explanations go to this issue--how could live round be mistaken for a blank. That's where the wadcutter part comes in.
As to the person responsible, the first girl on the 911 call explicitly places responsibility on the "AD"--Ass't Director--who she says was responsible for the guns. So, probably not a union member? Not sure.
Very informative:
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-prop-gun-shooting-experts
There is just nothing about this story which adds up. There is absolutely no way this would happen after the Brandon Lee incident (assuming that was real). They don't just have armors on set, they have representatives from the insurers. Not only was the main victim not an actor, she was a foreigner unknown to the American public. I'm inclined to believe it is a distraction/psyop/publicity stunt. Given the number of historic events which have been staged, I'm going to ignore this and have a look at what else is happening which might be overshadowed by this news.
The Murder of Kitty Genovese http://mileswmathis.com/kitty.pdf
The Murder of Mathew Shepard http://mileswmathis.com/shep.pdf
The University of Texas Tower Shooting http://mileswmathis.com/chaswhit.pdf
The Death of General Patton http://mileswmathis.com/patton.pdf
So, that's exactly what Baldwin is claiming--that he was handed a gun to use by "the armorer" and instructed to load it with ammunition that was provided. Exactly why it was pointed at the cinematographer when he pulled the trigger is unknown and could depend on a number of factors.
My guess. I've never handled "blank" rounds. However ...
This was a Western movie. Therefore, I assume that the gun used was a revolver. I wonder whether "blank" rounds look like wadcutter rounds, which are commonly used for target shooting with revolvers, including by Cowboy Action Shooting (CAS) participants. Did a wadcutter get mixed in with blank ammo? Shouldn't have, but ... would explain.
Links:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowboy_action_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadcutter
Now, check out these two links. In the first the rounds don't look like wadcutters:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blank_(cartridge)
However, in CAS a very common round used is .38 special. This link to images of .38 special "blanks" shows that a "live" .38 Special wadcutter might, to someone not very knowledgeable, be mistaken for a .38 Special blank.
So, it's possible.
As the worm turns...
Was he given the weapon to load while being filmed doing the loading as part of the movie? If so, those rounds would have been dummy rounds that look like real rounds but without any powder or a functioning primer. Dummy rounds are typically used for training personnel in loading and unloading weapons and are marked or modified to show they are inert. Of course in a film where the actor is shown loading a weapon, the rounds would have to look 'real.'
If he was given the weapon and some 'blank' cartridges and told to load them, that seems odd as that is what the armorer would do.
Sorry, here's that second link of .38 Special blanks:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=.38+special+blank+ammo&t=qupzilla&iax=images&ia=images&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fd3s1gm5djwyp3q.cloudfront.net%2Fmedia%2Fcatalog%2Fproduct%2Fcache%2F7%2Fimage%2F1000x%2F77ba421d8081ac2d2e37a88847456282%2F5%2Fa%2F5ac60571276e6f18b13d6df7c02cac1b_2.jpg
This is true:
Adam Baldwin
@AdamBaldwin
Negligent Discharge ≠ Accident.
He shot people behind the camera, so in all likelihood he was assing around. The media has gone to great lengths to avoid mentioning that at the end of the day this was a negligent discharge of a firearm.
And as for that gun you carried, before they ever issued it to you, they told you and told you and they told you again
Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not prepared to destroy.
The UK Sun reports:
"The tragic death was caused by a prop gun firing off ..."
Uh, no. Guns don't kill people. People kill people--through instrumentalities such as guns.
I haven't checked the NM laws, but it seems to me that--barring something really nefarious--negligent homicide of some sort would apply. What I mean by nefarious is something like this: Baldwin was handed gun for use in a scene, under the assurance that it had been duly checked and was "safe" for use in the scene. Any other scenario such as "horsing around" that involves pointing a gun and pulling the trigger and results in someone's death seems to lead to some sort of negligent homicide.
Depending on the weapon being used, the blank would have to be powerful enough to blow back the bolt and eject the spent case in an automatic or semi-automatic weapon for continued operation. Other than a live round being used, the only other possibility that comes to mind is that a foreign object, or objects - think gravel for instance - could have been lodged in the barrel of the weapon used. The force of the blank would propel the object out of the weapon.
If you recall, Brandon Lee was killed with a "prop" gun as well.
From wikipedia: the prop gun, which was a real revolver, was loaded with improperly-made dummy rounds, cartridges from which the special-effects crew had removed the powder charges so in close-ups the revolver would show normal-looking ammunition. However, the crew neglected to remove the primers from the cartridges. At some point before the fatal event, one of the rounds had been fired; although there was no powder charges, the energy from the ignited primer was enough to separate the bullet from the casing and push it part-way into the gun barrel, where it got stuck (a condition known as a squib load). For the fatal scene, which called for the revolver to be fired at Lee from a distance of 3.6–4.5 meters (12–15 ft), the dummy cartridges were replaced with blank rounds, which contained a powder charge and the primer, but no solid bullet, allowing the gun to be fired with sound and flash effects without the risk of an actual projectile. However, the gun was not properly checked and cleared before the blank round was fired, and the dummy bullet previously lodged in the barrel was then propelled forward by the blank and shot out the muzzle with almost the same force as if the round were live, striking Lee in the abdomen
Given that history, one would think that the movie industry would have updated their safety protocols when using weapons firing blanks. If the barrel wasn't clear, the fault would be with the armorer who prepared and verified the weapon for use on the movie set unless someone else had the opportunity to tamper with the weapon subsequent to being used. Calling Columbo...
Further reporting indicates the movie being filmed was a Western. I have not read anything about the type of weapon involved, be it a long gun or a handgun, but being a Western that narrows the field to probably a revolver or lever action rifle.
The tweet appear legitimate, Mark- blue checkmarks indicate Twitter verified this was, indeed, Alec Baldwin's account.
Thanks, Yancey.
My extremely bad. I thought that that was a real tweet, meaning, by Alec Baldwin. Nevertheless, everything I wrote stands. Lesson learned.
It appears that Baldwin sent this tweet back in 2017 in response to a LEO shooting an individual in a SoCal convenience store parking lot. Here's the link from TGP; all the way at the bottom. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/wonder-must-feel-wrongfully-kill-someone-alec-baldwins-2017-tweet-attacking-cop-comes-back-haunt/
Tx, I was a bit confused. It doesn't affect what I wrote, but ...
Or maybe I'm wrong? Can anyone clear this up?
I believe "blue checks" were of more recent (than 2017) origin to protect celebrity elites from having their accounts spoofed by non-elites.
In the Gateway Pundit story, linked by DJL above, the 2017 Alec Baldwin tweet has a blue check mark next to his name.
The blue checkmarks are probably applied to older tweets retroactively- it is still the same account.
Right. The checkmarks are per account, not per tweet.
Reasonable. Check out my new comment.