How is he supposed to check the gun is safe?You're probably right, but using a gun without checking if it's safe sits somewhat uneasy with me.
Yeah, I'm not trusting an actor to be qualified to determine whether a gun is safe or not, particularly if there are paid professionals around to do exactly that.You're probably right, but using a gun without checking if it's safe sits somewhat uneasy with me.
Quite!Blaming an actor for not checking the prop he was handed by experts is a bizarre take.
Apparently the director was stood behind the woman at the time of the shooting.How did he manage to shoot a camera women and the director?
I thought the space behind the camera was supposed to be empty when you do that but I don't know.Apparently the director was stood behind the woman at the time of the shooting.
How is he supposed to check the gun is safe?
It's not like it's highly complex procedure. It's trivial to do, and takes approximately 5 seconds. If the problem is that instructing actors to do so when dealing with unmodified, fully functional firearms isn't standard procedure, then it's nor necessarily Baldwin's failing personally, but it's definitely a massive error from the industry.Yeah, I'm not trusting an actor to be qualified to determine whether a gun is safe or not, particularly if there are paid professionals around to do exactly that.
I totally disagree with this. It's not an actor's job to do health and safety checks. They employ others specifically to do this sort of thing. You wouldn't expect him to assist with checking the microphones were working or that the lighting was correct, and this is no different. There are a multitude of jobs that need doing on a production, but an actor isn't expected to do anything but act.Real, functional firearms are often used on sets, but it kept being referred to as a 'prop gun' everywhere. Since most big productions have stopped using real, unmodified firearms, I assumed that was the case here as well, but the latest reports have the gun as an actual live firearm. In that case he definitely shouldn't have relied on some assistant going "I swear it's empty." He arguably shouldn't have done so with a blank firing prop either, but neglecting to do it with a fully functional firearm definitely puts him on the hook here.
If it's an unmodified firearm capable of firing live rounds, personally checking to make sure that said firearm isn't loaded (especially not with live rounds) is part of basic gun safety protocols. Actors should definitely be expected to make that check, seeing as everyone else in every other circumstance is.
Not if you're not familiar with firearms.It's not like it's highly complex procedure. It's trivial to do, and takes approximately 5 seconds. If the problem is that instructing actors to do so when dealing with unmodified, fully functional firearms isn't standard procedure, then it's nor necessarily Baldwin's failing personally, but it's definitely a massive error from the industry.
How's that any more stupid than expecting an actor to have a level of knowledge where he can check the safety of guns and tell the difference between live rounds and blanks? He's the guy from Beetlejuice, not a firearms expert.You don't get to fly an aeroplane either because you are not qualified. So there is no risk of you fecking up the landing as you don't get to do it.
Stupid response
I find your ignorance incredibly stupid, to be honest. It's an exaggerated example to make a point for delegation of the management and organisation of safety obligations.You don't get to fly an aeroplane either because you are not qualified. So there is no risk of you fecking up the landing as you don't get to do it.
Stupid response
Yeah, obviously that might be the case.I can't see Baldwin being held personally responsible for the actual shooting itself, but the movie was being made by El Dorado Pictures, which seems to be a production company that he owns, so the buck might ultimately stop at him anyway, regardless of who pulled the trigger.
It's definitely an issue if there's no proper safety protocols, but whether they are implemented/acted to accordingly doesn't necessarily mean it's his fault in this case. Experts/armorers are bought in to specifically prevent these things from happening; it's their duty to enforce gun safety on a set (monitor gun placement, how many and what rounds are given out, loading magazines etc.) and it's El Dorado Pictures' duty to hire them. And it might even be Baldwin's duty to double check the gun that's been given to him (depending on what everybody agreed on, but so far I've read nothing about Baldwin violating agreements), but that's down to the specific gun safety protocol. If it's a bad one or not properly enforced, it's also the armorer's fault.Don't think anyone here is an expert on the use of guns on movie sets. However, I'm fairly good with guns, what with having served in the military and prepared and given lectures on how to safely handle and use firearms.
I'd say he, like anyone else, was definitely obligated to. So really, the question is whether he (and other actors) are given the minimum of training needed to know and do so.
If he's a complete novice, then it's definitely understandable that he might not have been aware. If it's industry standard to just trust the word of whomever hands you a gun as to whether or not it's empty, then that's a big issue. One would think they had learned something from the Jon-Erik Hexum and Brandon Lee incidents, with regards to both checking the firearms used, and to properly inform actors about how dangerous even blankfiring props can be.
I just want to add that I do feel horrible for him, and that I see it as a tragic accident.
I think you are taking a lot of specialist knowledge that you have as the default for all of mankind here. Most people have absolutely no experience with guns. I know he's American and he's probably fired a gun on set before, but he's not ex-military, and he would have trusted the word of the experts they paid.It's not like it's highly complex procedure. It's trivial to do, and takes approximately 5 seconds. If the problem is that instructing actors to do so when dealing with unmodified, fully functional firearms isn't standard procedure, then it's nor necessarily Baldwin's failing personally, but it's definitely a massive error from the industry.
Assume you mean he should personally empty the magazine/barrel and check the bullets? ….I somehow doubt any other actors would do that.It's not like it's highly complex procedure. It's trivial to do, and takes approximately 5 seconds. If the problem is that instructing actors to do so when dealing with unmodified, fully functional firearms isn't standard procedure, then it's nor necessarily Baldwin's failing personally, but it's definitely a massive error from the industry.
That's how I see it as well. And to specify: El Dorado Pictures' fault.It's not like it's highly complex procedure. It's trivial to do, and takes approximately 5 seconds. If the problem is that instructing actors to do so when dealing with unmodified, fully functional firearms isn't standard procedure, then it's nor necessarily Baldwin's failing personally, but it's definitely a massive error from the industry.
Actors aren't allowed to though, if they did any kind of interference with the gun it's dangerous. The only person allowed are the propmasters and armourers.You're probably right, but using a gun without checking if it's safe sits somewhat uneasy with me.
Fair enough, that would make a lot of sense. I have no idea about the protocols in place.Actors aren't allowed to though, if they did any kind of interference with the gun it's dangerous. The only person allowed are the propmasters and armourers.
If you aren’t familiar with firearm safety you shouldn’t be using then.Not if you're not familiar with firearms.
Some of the shit I've seen inexperienced people do at gun ranges over the years would make your blood run cold.
Maybe that's the case, although as far as I can recall there are not many accidents on movie sets, or am I wrong here?If you aren’t familiar with firearm safety you shouldn’t be using then.
I used firearms in military. I was handed my weapons by others more experienced than me. I always clear any weapon handed to me. Always. It’s a fundamental tenet of handling firearms that is taught to everyone. Even if I see it cleared in front of me. Maybe they need to ensure actors who handle firearms take a safety training class.
I agree with your last point completely.
I agree with you 100%, and I'm the same myself. But I think that level of awareness and respect around firearms is often only present in people who have been around them a lot.If you aren’t familiar with firearm safety you shouldn’t be using then.
I used firearms in military. I was handed my weapons by others more experienced than me. I always clear any weapon handed to me. Always. It’s a fundamental tenet of handling firearms that is taught to everyone. Even if I see it cleared in front of me. Maybe they need to ensure actors who handle firearms take a safety training class.
I agree with your last point completely.
That would just mean that multiple actors on each set who aren't experts, in all likelihood don't regularly handle firearms and who've taken a course some time ago would then be doing the job previously done by a couple of experts. I think that would be a recipe for disaster.If you aren’t familiar with firearm safety you shouldn’t be using then.
I used firearms in military. I was handed my weapons by others more experienced than me. I always clear any weapon handed to me. Always. It’s a fundamental tenet of handling firearms that is taught to everyone. Even if I see it cleared in front of me. Maybe they need to ensure actors who handle firearms take a safety training class.
I agree with your last point completely.
Difference being that a microphone not working or the lighting being wrong isn't going to kill someone. Guns are dangerous, and checking to make sure that they're safe is quick and trivial. There's literally no reason and no excuse for it not being standard procedure to instruct actors to do so when handing them fully functional firearms.I totally disagree with this. It's not an actor's job to do health and safety checks. They employ others specifically to do this sort of thing. You wouldn't expect him to assist with checking the microphones were working or that the lighting was correct, and this is no different. There are a multitude of jobs that need doing on a production, but an actor isn't expected to do anything but act.
Well yes, people at firing ranges can be massive idiots. We're talking professional actors on decent sized productions here, though. They have all sorts of rules and procedures with regards to how to do things safely, including how to safely use the guns they're handed, so I don't see why it'd be an issue to instruct an actor on how to make sure that they gun they're using is safe.Not if you're not familiar with firearms.
Some of the shit I've seen inexperienced people do at gun ranges over the years would make your blood run cold.
I don't think he means that actors should check weapons exclusively, it'd be additional safety measures.That would just mean that multiple actors on each set who aren't experts, in all likelihood don't regularly handle firearms and who've taken a course some time ago would then be doing the job previously done by a couple of experts. I think that would be a recipe for disaster.
The reason you have specialists is so you have a smaller group responsible and you can be more sure of the quality of their work.
From what I've read the safety protocols are fine, if they are followed, as this is a rare occurrence but one or more people here made errors.
If you are the one with the finger on the trigger it is your responsibility to be part of health and safety. There is a clip floating around of Will Smith on a Bad Boys set slapping a gun away from someone who has poor muzzle discipline. Safety is everyones responsibility. The rest of the points are strawman arguments.I totally disagree with this. It's not an actor's job to do health and safety checks. They employ others specifically to do this sort of thing. You wouldn't expect him to assist with checking the microphones were working or that the lighting was correct, and this is no different. There are a multitude of jobs that need doing on a production, but an actor isn't expected to do anything but act.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I may not have been clear on this, appologies, I don’t advocate replacing those on set who are responsible for weapons or repacing current protocols that seem to be good as far as they go. Just that those handling also need safety and handling training.That would just mean that multiple actors on each set who aren't experts, in all likelihood don't regularly handle firearms and who've taken a course some time ago would then be doing the job previously done by a couple of experts. I think that would be a recipe for disaster.
The reason you have specialists is so you have a smaller group responsible and you can be more sure of the quality of their work.
From what I've read the safety protocols are fine, if they are followed, as this is a rare occurrence but one or more people here made errors.
Press one release button on a gun vs being a pilot.How's that any more stupid than expecting an actor to have a level of knowledge where he can check the safety of guns and tell the difference between live rounds and blanks? He's the guy from Beetlejuice, not a firearms expert.
YepBlaming an actor for not checking the prop he was handed by experts is a bizarre take.
What a fecking cnut.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
No words how insensitive this is. fecking psychopathic troll.
Obviously not, he relies on the crew to do their job accordingly.To make a fairly crude analogy - imagine an actor is doing a stunt, and everything is set up by the stunt team and they ensure it is safe. An accident happens and the actor dies or gets injured. Is it the actor's fault for not checking the safety of it themselves?
Yeah, seems like a lot of shit was wrong on that set. Baldwin the actor might not necessarily be responsible, but as a producer, he could very well bear some responsibility for the unsafe conditions.Obviously not, he relies on the crew to do their job accordingly.
But:
I just read that the responsible armorer is only 24 years old, has only worked for one other set as an armorer. She also said in a podcast that she doubts being the right one for the job. According to the LA Times, there were issues regarding gun safety. On thursday, Baldwin's double's gun fired without him pulling the trigger twice, for example. The armorer had prepared 3 guns for Baldwin's shot, which the director assistant picked up and handed it to the Baldwin while saying "cold gun".
The bullet hit the victims in the head/the shoulder.
Catastrophic work from the armorer and whoever hired such an inexperienced armorer.
Edit:
There's some tape availabale on which the screenwriter yells at a crewmember that "he should have checked the gun" and "he's responsible". Meaning Halls, the assistant director.
Can anybody here explain to me why actual rounds are available at a hollywood set? I don't get it.
Definitely, that changes a lot imo.Yeah, seems like a lot of shit was wrong on that set. Baldwin the actor might not necessarily be responsible, but as a producer, he could very well bear some responsibility for the unsafe conditions.
As far as I've understood, only two people are supposed to handle a gun: the armourer and the actor. In this case, it was apparently grabbed by an assistant director who, in addition to doing something that shouldn't be done in touching the gun, also failed to ensure that it was empty before handing it to Baldwin. Many redditors who claim to work on movies also say that it's definitely not unheard of or a strange idea for actors to double check that the cold guns they are handed are, in fact, cold. And, I would think, if you're having issues with supposedly cold guns going off randomly, you'd make it a priority to triple check them before using them for anything. They apparently weren't even shooting, just setting up the shot, so there really was no reason for Baldwin to be waving a real gun around to begin with.
Producer role for actors usually just means that they brought in financing for the movie and they're given producer credits on exchange.Yeah, seems like a lot of shit was wrong on that set. Baldwin the actor might not necessarily be responsible, but as a producer, he could very well bear some responsibility for the unsafe conditions.
As far as I've understood, only two people are supposed to handle a gun: the armourer and the actor. In this case, it was apparently grabbed by an assistant director who, in addition to doing something that shouldn't be done in touching the gun, also failed to ensure that it was empty before handing it to Baldwin. Many redditors who claim to work on movies also say that it's definitely not unheard of or a strange idea for actors to double check that the cold guns they are handed are, in fact, cold. And, I would think, if you're having issues with supposedly cold guns going off randomly, you'd make it a priority to triple check them before using them for anything. They apparently weren't even shooting, just setting up the shot, so there really was no reason for Baldwin to be waving a real gun around to begin with.
So obviously I don't know all the details here, but apparently, the term "live" on a film set just refers to a gun that has been loaded with a blank. As opposed to a proper live round that we would use in the real world. I'm pretty sure they would not allow real live rounds on set under any circumstances.Why the hell are there live rounds on a film set.
I was shocked that they even use real firearms, add in that there are live rounds floating around and the only thing that shocks me is that this sort of thing doesn't happen more often.
members are now saying that the union Camera Crew all quit because of safety issues. They were replaced by non-union workers on Friday morning the day of the shooting. Union members specifically quit because of the use of live ammo on the set previously - and two separate accounts of weapons misfiring.
The gun Baldwin killed the victim with had real world live rounds in it. Apparantly, she was killed by an actual bullet, not a gas blow.So obviously I don't know all the details here, but apparently, the term "live" on a film set just refers to a gun that has been loaded with a blank. As opposed to a proper live round that we would use in the real world. I'm pretty sure they would not allow real live rounds on set under any circumstances.
So apparently, the assistant director handed the gun to Alec Baldwin and yelled 'cold gun', indicating the prop gun did not have any "live" rounds.
