Baldwin says he doesn't feel guilty for 'Rust' shooting: Someone else 'is responsible'

KARMA, it's a bitch!!

 

Firearm safety 101.

The 4 universal rules of gun safety are:

1. Treat all guns as if they are always loaded.
2. Never let the muzzle point at anything that you are not willing to destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target and you have made the decision to shoot.
4. Be sure of your target and what is behind it.

 

Not innocent. Manslaughter at a minimum. But there probably is an element of karma in his travails. I say that because smugness generally leads to a life lesson in humility as most of us have learned by experience.

 

It would go totally unnoticed? I'm far from a Trump supporter, but it was blasted all over the news fer cryin out loud. Only the deaf, dumb and blind wouldn't have heard something on it.

Your attempt at painting this about left or right, gives a poor picture of anyone who doesn't understand personal responsibility. He pointed a weapon at a person. There is a responsibility that far exceeds left or right BS.

 

Since handling guns is a part of what Baldwin does in his movies, a simple firearm safety course would have taught him the basics. The fact that you absolve him of responsibility shows that if he had done the same with a crossbow instead of a gun, the woman would still be dead, and you would still proclaim him not responsible.

 

It may not be their job, but it is their responsibility. And in this particular case Baldwin wasn't just an actor, he was a producer, which makes it even more clearly his responsibility.

For an analogy: if a ship crashes into something, it may not have been the captain's job to avoid it (they might have lookouts / helmsmen or maybe the XO was on watch at the time and the captain was asleep in his cabin, etc) but it is the captain's responsibility.

Since we're on a political forum, it's an old adage that the buck stops with the President. Evacuating people from Afghanistan wasn't Biden's job, but it was his responsibility (one at which he failed terribly, and with tragic results - sort of like Baldwin).

 

You really didn't ****ing write that, did you?

 

No.

Baldwin's responsibility is to be a credible actor and live up to the fee he's paid.

There should be enough competent people around him to make sure that it's safe to give him a gun that is supposedly loaded with blanks.

 

I don't think he is guilty of a crime, may even be a victim if this was sabotage of the set by a disgruntled employee or a Trump supporter

 

"All those Stupid Trump skits he did on SNL, I wonder who's laughing now"

maybe the one that put a real bullet in the gun?

Your post proves how upset the right was with him cause he made fun of Trump

 

FA, he was a producer of this show, would he have hired/allowed someone to be hired who was even vaguely a Trump supporter? That's kinda stretching credulity.

 

I doubt that is on the application, but like I said, we do not know yet who put the real bullet in the gun

but if someone did so maliciously, I am betting a disgruntled employee or a Trump supporter

 

Yes, you can't pull back the hammer on a single action and let go and it will fire the bullet. There are two cocking points, first the safe position so you can't bump that hammer it in might fire the bullet, the second all the way back then it is ready to fire. You can't pull it back and just let go and the hammer will hit the bullet you HAVE to pull the trigger to release it.

 

He simply said that he didn't pull the trigger. That may well be true. Pretty much everything else in this thread is just made up assumption.

His remorse looked genuine. Why would it not be?

Yep, all because of the Trump skits. There is 0 search for truth in these threads.

 

I'm not sure how accurate this is, but I was hearing that if the actor interferes with or checks the gun anyway, the gun then needs to be handed back to the armourer to be designated safe again. That's the protocol.

So, if true, gun safety on set is actually not the actor's responsibility at all.

 

More info:

https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/alec-baldwin-rust-shooting-responsible/story?id=81490389

 

Any appearance publicly is obviously choreographed for legal purposes. I’m sure it will work.

 

I don't think I've seen such blatant MAGA hackery of reality in this thread. Well, not since Jan 6th.

Again, what is more plausible: Evil Baldwin holds up the gun and shoots at camerawoman...

Or the account 2 posts up (which has many witnesses):

 

I like to take 211 inline muzzleloader primers and use foil tape to tape the striking surface to a 44 lead ball, I leave a little bit of tape behind the other end of the primer and attached several short pieces of yarn then fire it with a slingshot at a brick wall and watch it go pop.

They're pretty damn loud, same size as a 12 gauge primer.

 

Hm! Interesting!

 

please don’t touch any guns.

 

You can until you reach the safe position cocking point. In interview he said something about thinking back what he could have done differently and not coming up with any answers. He could of slowly allowed the hammer to return to its original position instead of allowing the spring pressure to quickly return to its original position.

 

The safety position is mere millimeters not enough to have the hammer strike with enough force to shot a bullet. Even if by some strange occurrence to have done so while pointing at someone he is responsible for the death. You cannot pull the trigger from the safety position he would have then had to **** it all the way back. You are advised to KEEP it in the safety position if you are handling it in case you drop it THEN there could be an accidental firing, but not from the safety position. It he cocked it back all the way he HAD to pull the trigger to release it, if the hammer THEN slipped from his thumb he is responsible for the death.

 

It's good to see that all the "experts" here can make such "factual" pronouncements condemning someone that already hate while at the same time not knowing
(among many other things):

The functional status of the weapon (remember, it's described as an "antique Colt .45 revolver" )
If the revolver was a true single action or double action revolver ( remember, it's an "antique" )
The travel of the hammer, to full cqck
The trigger pressure
Any modifications made to the weapon during routine maintenance( it's a prop gun and may have been in inventory for some time)

I'll wait for the official results of the investigation.

 

With and old Colt Army revolver I know you can fire the weapon simply by pulling back the hammer and releasing it. And-

I have a .44 Magnum revolver. Last night I unloaded it and played with releasing the hammer during retraction before the hammer reached the lock-back position. I found that releasing the hammer just before it reached lock-back position allows the hammer to fall on the cylinder port in firing position. Hence for my revolver, it indeed would be possible to fire it with touching the trigger.
Did Alec Baldwin fire the weapon without pulling the trigger? - American Thinker