6 ms·

They were using blanks on set so Baldwin would have to be able to (a) reliably differentiate between blanks and live rounds and (b) re-check the gun for live ro

They were using blanks on set so Baldwin would have to be able to (a) reliably differentiate between blanks and live rounds and (b) re-check the gun for live rounds before each take. Making sure props are safe to use in a scene is just not an actor's job on set.

dragonwriter 4y ago
(a) is trivial with fairly mininal familiarization, (b) is more the issue (ideally, you would want then to be withbthe armorer, when the gun is orepared for that, ir you would want a process established where they verify the condition before chambering a “blank” round.) But, it boils down tk the only argument against the rule that anyone handling a firearm is responsible for awareness of its condition is that on-set processses have been set up by the responsible authorities in a way which makes that impractical, which would shift the responsibility to those authorities—which, apparently, in this case is (or at a minimum includes) Baldwin in his role as Executive Producer.
- jdm2212 4y ago
  Executive Producer usually means: this person helped make this movie happen (e.g. helped line up financing, pitched the movie to the studio), but has no direct role in overseeing day-to-day work on the movie. An actor's job is acting. That's basically it. There are lots of things on set that could be dangerous (horses, knives, furniture, electrical wires, forklifts, etc.) and it's the crew's job to make sure that the dangerous stuff is not dangerous when the actor is shooting a scene, or that the actor is carefully briefed on how to use the thing safely. In this case, "cold gun" was the crew briefing him -- telling him the gun could be used because it had no live ammo.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Executive Producer usually means Executive Producer (and producer) means a wide variety of different things, and there are frequently many with different substantive roles on any given production; but the accounts I’ve seen of Baldwin’s specific role as EP on this production, not a general inference from the scope of what the title usually means or can mean, was the basis of the description. EDIT: In any case, per protocols nominally in place for the production, as an actor he was supposed to have inspected the firearm and ammunition with the armorer. There are different accounts over the exact narrative around how that didn't happen, but none of them that I’ve seen appear to be exonerative to Baldwin.
    - jdm2212 4y ago
      Curious to read accounts of his managerial role on the production, if you have links.
pjc50 4y ago
To complicate this issue, Baldwin is one of the producers; he has some managerial responsibility in the way gun safety issues were being handled, which was already at "badly" ( https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-22/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-set https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/20... ) The pre-existing warnings about gun safety issues and the walkoff of the union crew and their replacement by scabs? Yeah, whoever's responsible for that workplace is extremely liable.
- jdm2212 4y ago
  Where does that article describe Baldwin having a day-to-day management role?
tengbretson 4y ago
Blanks are not safe to point at people either, so the point is moot.
- jdm2212 4y ago
  As I replied below... > Baldwin did not shoot someone at short range with a blank round. By all public accounts, he handled the gun in a manner consistent with the scene's directions and safety information provided by the crew. He's no more responsible for making sure a gun is safe than he is for making sure the electrical circuits for the scene lighting won't short out.
  - barelysapient 4y ago
    Anytime you're holding a gun, its incumbent on you handle it safely. Period.
    - jdm2212 4y ago
      You can make up whatever rules you want and say "Period" afterward for emphasis. That doesn't make those rules real or relevant to how movies are made.
philwelch 4y ago
Even a blank round can cause injury or death at short range. At any rate, safe weapons handling means you do, in fact, check every gun you pick up every time you pick it up.
- jdm2212 4y ago
  Baldwin did not shoot someone at short range with a blank round. By all public accounts, he handled the gun in a manner consistent with the scene's directions and safety information provided by the crew. He's no more responsible for making sure a gun is safe than he is for making sure the electrical circuits for the scene lighting won't short out.
  - philwelch 4y ago
    No, he shot the person to death with a live round. He picked up a loaded revolver, pointed it at another human being, and pulled the trigger. That other human being is now dead as a consequence of his actions. Even if he didn’t know it was loaded, which seems likely, there was no excuse for him pulling the trigger.
    - jdm2212 4y ago
      If he was driving a car on set, and someone cut the brake lines so he ran over a production assistant, a "human being is now dead as a consequence of his actions". But that doesn't make it his responsibility to check the brake lines every time he gets behind the wheel of a new car.
      - _-david-_ 4y ago
        We don't know somebody else cut the brakes. Baldwin allegedly had real bullets on his belt. If Baldwin cut the brakes in his car and then ran somebody over it would be his fault.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]

dragonwriter 4y ago

(a) is trivial with fairly mininal familiarization, (b) is more the issue (ideally, you would want then to be withbthe armorer, when the gun is orepared for that, ir you would want a process established where they verify the condition before chambering a “blank” round.) But, it boils down tk the only argument against the rule that anyone handling a firearm is responsible for awareness of its condition is that on-set processses have been set up by the responsible authorities in a way which makes that impractical, which would shift the responsibility to those authorities—which, apparently, in this case is (or at a minimum includes) Baldwin in his role as Executive Producer.

jdm2212 4y ago
Executive Producer usually means: this person helped make this movie happen (e.g. helped line up financing, pitched the movie to the studio), but has no direct role in overseeing day-to-day work on the movie. An actor's job is acting. That's basically it. There are lots of things on set that could be dangerous (horses, knives, furniture, electrical wires, forklifts, etc.) and it's the crew's job to make sure that the dangerous stuff is not dangerous when the actor is shooting a scene, or that the actor is carefully briefed on how to use the thing safely. In this case, "cold gun" was the crew briefing him -- telling him the gun could be used because it had no live ammo.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > Executive Producer usually means Executive Producer (and producer) means a wide variety of different things, and there are frequently many with different substantive roles on any given production; but the accounts I’ve seen of Baldwin’s specific role as EP on this production, not a general inference from the scope of what the title usually means or can mean, was the basis of the description. EDIT: In any case, per protocols nominally in place for the production, as an actor he was supposed to have inspected the firearm and ammunition with the armorer. There are different accounts over the exact narrative around how that didn't happen, but none of them that I’ve seen appear to be exonerative to Baldwin.
  - jdm2212 4y ago
    Curious to read accounts of his managerial role on the production, if you have links.

pjc50 4y ago

To complicate this issue, Baldwin is one of the producers; he has some managerial responsibility in the way gun safety issues were being handled, which was already at "badly" ( https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-22/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-set https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/20... ) The pre-existing warnings about gun safety issues and the walkoff of the union crew and their replacement by scabs? Yeah, whoever's responsible for that workplace is extremely liable.

jdm2212 4y ago
Where does that article describe Baldwin having a day-to-day management role?

tengbretson 4y ago

Blanks are not safe to point at people either, so the point is moot.

jdm2212 4y ago
As I replied below... > Baldwin did not shoot someone at short range with a blank round. By all public accounts, he handled the gun in a manner consistent with the scene's directions and safety information provided by the crew. He's no more responsible for making sure a gun is safe than he is for making sure the electrical circuits for the scene lighting won't short out.
- barelysapient 4y ago
  Anytime you're holding a gun, its incumbent on you handle it safely. Period.
  - jdm2212 4y ago
    You can make up whatever rules you want and say "Period" afterward for emphasis. That doesn't make those rules real or relevant to how movies are made.

philwelch 4y ago

Even a blank round can cause injury or death at short range. At any rate, safe weapons handling means you do, in fact, check every gun you pick up every time you pick it up.

jdm2212 4y ago
Baldwin did not shoot someone at short range with a blank round. By all public accounts, he handled the gun in a manner consistent with the scene's directions and safety information provided by the crew. He's no more responsible for making sure a gun is safe than he is for making sure the electrical circuits for the scene lighting won't short out.
- philwelch 4y ago
  No, he shot the person to death with a live round. He picked up a loaded revolver, pointed it at another human being, and pulled the trigger. That other human being is now dead as a consequence of his actions. Even if he didn’t know it was loaded, which seems likely, there was no excuse for him pulling the trigger.
  - jdm2212 4y ago
    If he was driving a car on set, and someone cut the brake lines so he ran over a production assistant, a "human being is now dead as a consequence of his actions". But that doesn't make it his responsibility to check the brake lines every time he gets behind the wheel of a new car.
    - _-david-_ 4y ago
      We don't know somebody else cut the brakes. Baldwin allegedly had real bullets on his belt. If Baldwin cut the brakes in his car and then ran somebody over it would be his fault.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]