choccy77
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2008
- Messages
- 6,059
David Halls apparently admitted that he only checked 3 of the barrels on the gun and not all of them before he passed to Baldwin.
fecking hell. It doesn't take much effort to check all the cylinders on a revolver, even an old fixed cylinder single action one.David Halls apparently admitted that he only checked 3 of the barrels on the gun and not all of them before he passed to Baldwin.
Yeah,fecking hell. It doesn't take much effort to check all the cylinders on a revolver, even an old fixed cylinder single action one.
I read a twitter thread of an armourer (that was posted here) and they say that they use props, replicas and real guns in a set. In Spain you don't use real guns, only replicas that use a different caliber from the real ones. So a gun that looks exactly the same but internally a real bullet don't fit. So it can't be a mistake because no one brings a real gun as a tool to make a movieSame in the US because that wasn’t a prop gun but a replica of a 1800’s gun, in other words that was a real gun and the guy who survived had a real bullet in his shoulder, now the big question: they say they should be using a prop gun in a rehearsal, they told the actor the gun was cold he shoots the gun makes a big bang then he shoots again…wait they told you the gun was cold shouldn’t you stop immediately and request an explanation why the gun wasn’t cold?
Edit: just read was only one shot
How completely sketchy.Yeah,
This whole production just sounds so dodgy and they also didn't take out insurance to cover the film not being completed either.
It's crazy especially in the Covid era.How completely sketchy.
See that makes sense, a poka-yoke gun design that makes things unfeckupable. But Americans need real guns as ever, even to pretendI read a twitter thread of an armourer (that was posted here) and they say that they use props, replicas and real guns in a set. In Spain you don't use real guns, only replicas that use a different caliber from the real ones. So a gun that looks exactly the same but internally a real bullet don't fit. So it can't be a mistake because no one brings a real gun as a tool to make a movie
Yeah but when was the last time you watched a Spanish movie? ExactlySee that makes sense, a poka-yoke gun design that makes things unfeckupable. But Americans need real guns as ever, even to pretend
They spend all the budget in sophisticated prop guns and blanksYeah but when was the last time you watched a Spanish movie? Exactly
It was a single action revolver. The only way you're going to accidentally discharge it while drawing is if you've already cocked the hammer (or you're holding down the trigger, because you're an idiot, and the hammer snags on something and gets pulled back and then immediately drops, because the sear isn't engaged.)It was probably an accidental discharge while he was practicing removing it from the holster, which is pretty common.
I think someone has posted a youtube video in this thread showing what you're saying there is not quite true.It was a single action revolver. The only way you're going to accidentally discharge it while drawing is if you've already cocked the hammer (or you're holding down the trigger, because you're an idiot, and the hammer snags on something and gets pulled back and then immediately drops, because the sear isn't engaged.)
From my perspective he was obviously practicing drawing and firing so it's reasonable to assume that it was cocked. Maybe he didn't have great trigger discipline or maybe the trigger was very light and easily engaged. That said, if you're going to have an accidental discharge when handling a firearm, the most common moment is probably when removing one from a holster. That motion takes a lot of practice.It was a single action revolver. The only way you're going to accidentally discharge it while drawing is if you've already cocked the hammer (or you're holding down the trigger, because you're an idiot, and the hammer snags on something and gets pulled back and then immediately drops, because the sear isn't engaged.)
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Good to know that the gun magically loaded itself and pulled its own trigger.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Wasn’t it only about 4 weeks ago?I certainly feel reassured by that suavely edited ad scored like a sexy Hollywood trailer that this thing is going to be tasteful and respectful, befitting a tragedy that happened mere months ago. Good work everyone.
Surprised a full feature film is not already in the works.I certainly feel reassured by that suavely edited ad scored like a sexy Hollywood trailer that this thing is going to be tasteful and respectful, befitting a tragedy that happened mere months ago. Good work everyone.
To be fair this is more of a made for TV movie.Surprised a full feature film is not already in the works.
Well the only thing that was actually said in this clip is that he definitely didnt point a gun at someone and pull the trigger (despite someone being killed as a result of having a gun pointed at them and then, apparently magically, going off).I certainly feel reassured by that suavely edited ad scored like a sexy Hollywood trailer that this thing is going to be tasteful and respectful, befitting a tragedy that happened mere months ago. Good work everyone.
Not to forget the new "load an actual bullet instead of blanks" feature that they have now. Just like magicI mean, guns assume autonomy all the time right? Self aiming mechanisms, automatically deciding when to fire and stuff, it's not like they have, for want of a better term, a trigger.
Begs the question - if he didn't, then who did.Well the only thing that was actually said in this clip is that he definitely didnt point a gun at someone and pull the trigger (despite someone being killed as a result of having a gun pointed at them and then, apparently magically, going off).
That's definitely not a narrative being set up to support a defense.
I mean, guns assume autonomy all the time right? Self aiming mechanisms, automatically deciding when to fire and stuff, it's not like they have, for want of a better term, a trigger.
Yeah, plus, crying!
Just in case that's not a joke: I would imagine he's saying the gun fired without him deliberately pulling the trigger. Not that he's being framed.Baldwin now insists he didn’t fire the gun.
I’d have thought ballistics would match the bullet with the gun used by Baldwin.
Apparently he’s now saying he didn’t pull the triggerJust in case that's not a joke: I would imagine he's saying the gun fired without him deliberately pulling the trigger. Not that he's being framed.
Actually yeah, fair points.It's entirely possible that he didn't. A period correct revolver would have a single action trigger, (someone clarified that it was SA above) which can easily be activated when drawing from a holster, moreso if the trigger has had any modifications to reduce the length of pull/amount of pressure required. Assuming that Baldwin was doing a cross draw (i.e. weapon holstered on the left and drawn with the right hand) it's possible that he neither pulled the trigger nor aimed the firearm at anyone intentionally. Based on when an accidental discharge like that would typically happen (i.e. just as the gun comes out of the holster), it's feasible that Ms. Hutchins was at 7 or 8 o'clock position in relation to Baldwin.
It's a shitty situation. The lesson is never trust anyone when they hand you a gun and tell you that it's safe. Check it yourself.Actually yeah, fair points.
I hadn't considered it being a period revolver.
That makes a bit more sense.