Alec Baldwin Fatally Shoots Crewmember on Film Set

[The Crypto Guy]

It is not his duty to check a prop gun. He's an actor. That is not negligence. It's not grandpa's hunting rifle lying around in the living room or momma's handgun in her bag.

You know he is the producer right? Yea, he is responsible for things like that, he’s not just an actor on some random show.

 

[Hanji]

So would you take a firearm in that scenario, put it in your mouth and pull the trigger without checking it?

If not then why would you point it at anyone else with just trusting others.

If so then I don't know what to say

Because it's probably more dangerous to have an actor check a firearm. Most of these guns are modified and/or are real weapons with modified rounds.
The process far exceeds checking grandpa's rifle to see if some bullets are in it. It doesn't work that way.

For example, most movie guns contain cartridges w/o bullets. If an actor checks such a gun, there's a possibility of something (dirt, debris) getting into the barrel. That's a deadly situation, and WHY specialists should be the only ones to do as such.

 

[Beau Knows]

Because it's probably more dangerous to have an actor check a firearm. Most of these guns are modified and/or are real weapons with modified rounds.
The process far exceeds checking grandpas rifle to see if some bullets are in it. It doesn't work that way.

For example, most movie guns contain cartridges w/o bullets. If an actor checks such a gun, there's a possibility of something (dirt, debris) getting into the barrel. That's a deadly situation, and WHY specialist should be the only ones to do as such.

Yeah, there's a lot of people taking the standard rules of gun safety and saying they should apply in this case - that the person firing the gun is responsible for ensuring the weapon is safe to use. But I have no idea if that is true on the set of films, I don't know what the procedures are there, and I doubt most others here do either.

I've watched a few news segments where they interviewed prop masters, and the closest I've seen to that being addressed is here:



He says that the prop master would hand the inspected gun to the actors, and that it's not their responsibility to check it.

 

[Canucky]

It is not his duty to check a prop gun. He's an actor. That is not negligence. It's not grandpa's hunting rifle lying around in the living room or momma's handgun in her bag.

He is the f***ing Director.

 

[Osprey]

Two people clearly going for Baldwin’s throat in this thread because they don’t like his politics. Truly shameful and disgusting behavior. Someone died because of an accident and the first thought is “Screw the guy who made the mistake his politics are different than mine!”

Ironically, you're making as huge of an assumption here as you're accusing them of making. I don't see how that's much better. Criticizing them for jumping to a conclusion would have more weight if you didn't jump to a conclusion, yourself... and if one of the two posters presumably attacking the American actor over his politics weren't named Canucky.

 

[Beau Knows]

He is the f***ing Director.

Producer

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

This post is so damn embarrassing. Wow, you should have just stayed out, this has NOTHING to do with politics but an idiot who didnt follow basic safety procedures and ended up KILLING someone.

Ironically, you're making as huge of an assumption here as you're accusing them of making. I don't see how that's much better. Criticizing them for jumping to a conclusion would have more weight if you didn't jump to a conclusion, yourself... and if one of the two posters presumably attacking the American actor over his politics weren't named Canucky.

One person straight up brought up politics in a deleted post. Another poster’s leanings have been made obvious through their postings and is attacking him. None of this is jumping to conclusions or making an assumption.

 

[Canucky]

Because it's probably more dangerous to have an actor check a firearm. Most of these guns are modified and/or are real weapons with modified rounds.
The process far exceeds checking grandpa's rifle to see if some bullets are in it. It doesn't work that way.

For example, most movie guns contain cartridges w/o bullets. If an actor checks such a gun, there's a possibility of something (dirt, debris) getting into the barrel. That's a deadly situation, and WHY specialists should be the only ones to do as such.

You have been reading the media reporting on this? Another poster who has never handled a firearm yet post opinions. Specialists really?

 

[Canucky]

Producer

And Idian Chief

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

So would you take a firearm in that scenario, put it in your mouth and pull the trigger without checking it?

If not then why would you point it at anyone else with just trusting others.

If so then I don't know what to say

Well they don’t actually shoot the gun when it’s in the mouth so no, I wouldn’t. However if my duty in the scene is to shoot someone I’d pull the trigger while pointed at them as is my job for that scene. So… yes, I would?

 

[ManwithNoIdentity]

Producer

And owns the production company as well

 

[ManwithNoIdentity]

I'm seeing that a lot on the internet. Nobody knows yet the details of who was at fault, but the ones upset about Baldwin's portrayal of someone on his SNL appearances are convinced that it was all his fault and he needs to go to jail.

There’s been plenty of information out there since noon today

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I don’t blame Alec the actor but Alec the producer deserves a shit ton of blame for what happened here.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Is it actually the producer’s job to safety-check a prop gun during filming?

Maybe I’m naive but I would just assume that sort of thing would fall to the props department.

 

[Canucky]

I don’t blame Alec the actor but Alec the producer deserves a shit ton of blame for what happened here.

Now where getting somewhere. Wet enough for ya Pink? Rain till late Monday. Flash floods too. That's if your in the same Roseville.

 

[Osprey]

One person straight up brought up politics in a deleted post. Another poster’s leanings have been made obvious through their postings and is attacking him. None of this is jumping to conclusions or making an assumption.

Well, the jump to conclusion is assuming that his leanings are why he's attacking Baldwin. It's the same as assuming that your leanings are why you're attacking back and defending him. As for the other person, if he brought up politics and his post was deleted, it was dealt with. If you responded to it, anyways, just to get a few shots in, that doesn't seem much different than jumping on the opportunity to take shots at Baldwin. I agree with you that politics is a bad reason to dislike him, though, especially when there are better reasons.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Is it actually the producer’s job to safety-check a prop gun during filming?

Maybe I’m naive but I would just assume that sort of thing would fall to the props department.

Aren't the producers responsible for the hiring of those that would be in the production's props department?

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Now where getting somewhere. Wet enough for ya Pink? Rain till late Monday. Flash floods too. That's if your in the same Roseville.

I have moved to Folsom but it's raining quite a bit here too. Almost seven inches of rain here.

 

[North]

Is it actually the producer’s job to safety-check a prop gun during filming?

Maybe I’m naive but I would just assume that sort of thing would fall to the props department.

There is a head armorer who is responsible for the weapons used during filming.

There are some concerning articles out there about the person who was the head armorer on this project.

 

[Osprey]

There is a head armorer who is responsible for the weapons used during filming.

There are some concerning articles out there about the person who was the head armorer on this project.

Yikes. She's only 24 and has been an armorer on only one other film, during the filming of which she handed a gun to an 11-year-old actress without properly checking it first. You have to start somewhere, but starting as head armorer on a couple of Westerns doesn't sound right.

Apparently, on this film, she was supposed to put three unloaded guns on a cart. The Assistant Director picked one up and was supposed to double check that it wasn't loaded before handing it to Baldwin and didn't. It sounds like he and she share blame, as well as the people who hired them and the producers (including Baldwin) who didn't do anything about the safety concerns that were brought up as recently as that very morning.

 

[Egg]

Aren't the producers responsible for the hiring of those that would be in the production's props department?

Ultimately, the blame would lay on the production company that made the movie.

It would be like Wal-Mart hiring someone who spat in the bread loaves that they sell.

It makes absolutely no sense to blame that individual. Of course, they should face the consequences for their actions, but ultimately, the PR side show would fall squarely onto the shoulders of Wal-Mart.

They made the hire, as you said.

The black eye this will cause, will tar the reputation of the production company that is responsible for producing this film.

Baldwin trusted the person who handed him the gun, but ultimately if he is a leader, will be the fall guy for this accident.

Let's not kid ourselves here. This was a horrible accident, and don't be surprised if the only consequence of this are lawsuits or undisclosed settlements as a result.

If all we can think about is how "he killed someone", we are missing the mark.

Focus is how do we guarantee this doesn't happen again.

It's happened before. This clearly needs to be looked into as a result.

Talent has no business dying while making a scene.

They slow down car chases and speed them up in production to maximize safety. Why isn't this being done for firearms?

The gun flash?

CGI has the capability to add this in later? Is it the sound? Sound effects are so well advanced.

The smoke?

Honestly. No gun should be fired in the direction of another cast member if live rounds are inside. Blank or not.

Doing this in the name of cinema shouldn't be at the expense of anyone's life.

If this can be taken from this, than that woman didn't die for nothing.

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

Well, the jump to conclusion is assuming that his leanings are why he's attacking Baldwin. It's the same as assuming that your leanings are why you're attacking back and defending him. As for the other person, if he brought up politics and his post was deleted, it was dealt with. If you responded to it, anyways, just to get a few shots in, that doesn't seem much different than jumping on the opportunity to take shots at Baldwin. I agree with you that politics is a bad reason to dislike him, though, especially when there are better reasons.

The post wasn’t deleted when I said something.

 

[Richard]

Ultimately, the blame would lay on the production company that made the movie.

It would be like Wal-Mart hiring someone who spat in the bread loaves that they sell.

It makes absolutely no sense to blame that individual. Of course, they should face the consequences for their actions, but ultimately, the PR side show would fall squarely onto the shoulders of Wal-Mart.

They made the hire, as you said.

The black eye this will cause, will tar the reputation of the production company that is responsible for producing this film.

Baldwin trusted the person who handed him the gun, but ultimately if he is a leader, will be the fall guy for this accident.

Let's not kid ourselves here. This was a horrible accident, and don't be surprised if the only consequence of this are lawsuits or undisclosed settlements as a result.

If all we can think about is how "he killed someone", we are missing the mark.

Focus is how do we guarantee this doesn't happen again.

It's happened before. This clearly needs to be looked into as a result.

Talent has no business dying while making a scene.

They slow down car chases and speed them up in production to maximize safety. Why isn't this being done for firearms?

The gun flash?

CGI has the capability to add this in later? Is it the sound? Sound effects are so well advanced.

The smoke?

Honestly. No gun should be fired in the direction of another cast member if live rounds are inside. Blank or not.

Doing this in the name of cinema shouldn't be at the expense of anyone's life.

If this can be taken from this, than that woman didn't die for nothing.

That's not realistic either. You have productions like, for example, Band of Brothers, where thousands of blank rounds are fired and no mishaps because both the actors and the crew were given extensive direction (in this case from Dale Dye's company). One of the first is to treat every weapon like a loaded weapon-ie check after every take always hold never point etc.

 

[Osprey]

The post wasn’t deleted when I said something.

Ok, fair enough. Sorry, and thanks for pointing that out politely.

 

[Egg]

You have productions like

Tons of productions that have gone over without a hitch.

Procedures should be streamlined. Otherwise to me, consequences should match the level of negligence.