Alec Baldwin kills one,inures another with Prop Gun on set.

It is a strange set of circumstances several are rather suspicious.

Why would they even have live ammo there?

 

Well, if you are making a movie, you'll have to point the gun at others to make it look realistic.

It sounds like it was part of a movie scene. She and the other guy were behind the camera.

Its weird that they would have live ammo there.

 

Maybe we will better understand what happened when the live videos that are bound to be out there start showing up on twitter?

 

Saying the left places politics above all else is not the equivalent of saying the right does not. That's English language 101. I did, however, say they aren't comparable as the left takes it to an extreme that the right does not. You have also 100% verified my point by ignoring the majority of my post. You know what I posted was accurate and thus avoided it because...i mean...what were you really going to deny?

I also am not talking about worldwide politics, I'm talking about US politics.

 

It's multiple peoples fault. Yes, Baldwin is one of them.

It was clearly pointed out to you that it wasn't part of the scene and therefore, NO, it should NOT have been pointed at anybody. Your scenario doesn't apply here.

Also, what's Baldwin's fault is he clearly didn't check the gun himself which he is supposed to do regardless of what was told to him by the person who gave it to him and this story is EXACTLY why you check regardless of what you're told. This is Gun Safety 101.

 

I agree, no-such thing as accidental discharge". But it's too early to call it manslaughter; manstupid, absolutely.

1. All guns are always loaded ALL of the time.

2. Never (EVER) point a gun at something you don't want to destroy.

3. Keep your finger off the trigger until you're on target. On target finger on the trigger, Off target finger OFF the trigger.

4. Be sure of your target AND what's behind it.

Those are the four, MUST ALWAYS, rules of gun safety. Baldwin seems to have broken them all.

 

Its ironic that the poster who said that is the one who brought politics even to this thread, which has nothing to do with politics.

 

Yes, that is a basic rule, unless you are making a movie or making an arrest or something.

 

But radical libs like Alec Baldwin are the same ones who typically hate the 2nd Amendment.

They'll blame this on some movie-set "armorer", but as ALL gun owners know, when a person handles any (ANY) weapon, or even anything that looks like a weapon, THAT PERSON is responsible for anything that 'object' DOES -- period!

You pick up a gun, and the first (FIRST) thing you do is check to see whether it's loaded, and, if so, with WHAT. But it would probably never occur to some radical jerk like Alec Baldwin to do that....

 

Sure, but maybe he is not a gun owner. As a matter of fact, he is a vocal anti-gunner, and this incident is not going to change that stance.

 

If he is so anti gun then why is he making movies that involve using them, probably in heroic fashion?

 

Like most prostitutes the deed doesn't matter, only THE MONEY....if he were so true blue to his beliefs he wouldn't' touch a gun in his movies or appear in one that glorified guns in any way, shape, or form....the LAST people on earth I take seriously are actors, when do you know they're NOT acting?

 

What I'm reading is even when making a movie guns are pointed a few degrees away from actors, not directly at them. Even when making an arrest officers don't put their finger on the trigger until ready to shoot. There is redundancy built into Coopers rules.

 

To this day I still recall the time we were at the Army firing range at Ft. Ord, CA and one of the basic trainees was pointing his M1 Garand around. A Sgt. damned near beat him up. No he did not hit him but he scared the hell out of the kid.

As with stop lights, handicapped parking, speed limits, there are activities with established rules.
With guns assume they are loaded. And never point them at humans. (this is not wartime rules) Cops do it during arrests but that is over a crime. Bystanders will not have the cops point their guns their way.

 

Isn't it obvious? To make money.

 

You mean like this. Gun pressed to the side of a kids head and finger on the trigger. Don't get me wrong, I have been shooting all my life, and safety rules are very important.

 

The karma is incredible.

A very rich, hate-filled, anti-gun, left-wing egomaniac with anger problems, that insults Genuine Americans every chance he gets (where have I seen that before?), endeavors to make a western-themed movie, replete with guns, for an audience he hates, on a welfare-mom's budget, and he shoots and kills the cinematographer...

And "thinkers" say there is no God...

 

I didn't say always, and have never been on a movie set; just repeating what I've read since this tragedy. I would hope that pistol is disabled, minus the firing pin or something.

 

I'm curious why when you post a post like this you apparently believe that you are in a position to imply that the member you are engaged with has a reading comprehension deficit. Winning only in your head it appears to me. Stating that the left places politics above all else implicitly asserts that the right does not. That's not even English 101, not for me anyway. I learned this sort of stuff in high school. And if that's not enough, then you point out that you did in fact explicitly state that "the left takes it to an extreme that the right does not." Not quite the Jedi Master or Sith Lord you believe yourself to be regarding your ability to use your words to prove your mastery of English 101, 102 or any other 13th-to-16th year of education in the subject, much less to prove your unbiased non-partisan comprehension of contrast and comparison techniques regarding the right versus the left.

Irrefutable only in your own head. Riots? Cell phone video of a cop killing a man with his knee on the man's neck will tend to create such repercussions. Portland. Portland does not represent the interests of those that also oppose the right's new normal supporting Trump and his attempt to overthrow the government of the United States. But apparently from your point-of-view every city in the US fell subject to leftist riots simply on behalf or their political leftist leanings. The urban leftists and their rioting over what ought to be unacceptable uses of deadly force by every member of a so-called free society. Breanna Taylor killed by Louisville Metro cops serving a no-knock warrant. The Dallas cop that entered a man's apartment and shot him dead, in a case supposedly of her simply being too tired to know it wasn't her apartment.

Extremes, pfffttt. Please do get back to us with the reasonable moderate conservative positions of governance you seem to believe the right represents if ever they manage to shake off the flea ridden influence of curs and mongrels like Trump, Bannon, Parscale, Stone and Miller.

No need to employ violence when your team is working on behalf of Corporate interests that hold all of the keys to power - a paradigm common to both the left and the right supposedly working on behalf of the American people in Washington D.C. Policies like inclusion and diversity and social justice cost the Corporations nothing more than lip service as they establish politically correct standards across the education and employment segments of US society. Policies like permanent tax cuts for these Corporations stuff cash into C level suites around the Earth and leave the vast majority of people to scrap out a living as best they can - turning to a demagogue like Trump who talks out of one side of his mouth and sets policies that do little-to-nothing to improve their lives in any significant threat against the power of the Corporations.

Us versus Them, Roger Waters, you might consider taking some time to listen to some Pink Floyd and get back to this discussion when you've gained a bit better understanding of who represents your interests. You might want to consider whether or not a Corporation like UHC actually has the health of its policy holders above its interests in its profits. You might want to consider the difficulty of enacting a $15/h minimum wage when the all volunteer military relies on financial needs of the nation's citizens to influence and support their "voluntary" service. Service that places their lives on the line when they are not legally old enough to have a beer or smoke a cigarette. In short, you might want to consider if your partisan position and tribal commitment to it aren't possibly blinding you and many others to much broader incursions on the lack of freedom that keeps us all bound to our employers for access to affordable health care and to what extent US military adventurism and exploits call into question the legitimacy of US status as a superpower and representative of freedom and democracy around the world. And the ability that status provides the US with such that it floats such an incredible amount of debt riding on top of the global acceptance of the USD as the world's primary fiat currency.

In any event, apologies to all for expanding on derailing the thread, but I found this to be an interesting opportunity to post a contrasting viewpoint.

 

I read the same thing, but I have seen lot of movies with guns to the head. There was lot of shooting in Platoon, since it was in fact a war movie, and I assume they used blanks + special effects for the tracer rounds.

 

My God how can you stand living in such a society...?

 

Negligent homicide. No matter what comes down that would be a reasonable charge. Definitely a civil case here. Learned the crew recently walked off the set due to the gun safety issues.

 

My aim is not to defend personalities but to defend solid gold plated principles and hammer back the misuse of Government to simply foil other humans.
Democrats are outrageously authoritarian. When you say so what, it means they can do the same thing to you.

 

I'm pretty sure you are supposed to check to make sure it's not loaded, EVERY time you pick up a gun, no matter who handed it to you.

 

If the gun he used was a Colt replica single action then having ammunition for it would have been a deliberate act. Security would probably be armed but the ammunition they used would be for modern weapons and wouldn't fit in Baldwin's gun. The armorer will be the one checked most closely. Everything that went bang was under their responsibilities I would think.

News is reporting that the gun was used by crew members for target shooting so it was a functioning firearm. Said live ammo and blanks were stored in the same place as well.