alec baldwin's shooting

[Crabbyguy]

Figured this was a good place to leave these.

 

[BluesBrother]

He's head of the chain of command, and the shooter, so he should be relieved and charged with something... anything... the hell he gets to walk around with just an "I'm sorry"

Someone mentioned earlier that a drug/alcohol test should have been taken to either eliminated that possibility or revealed an explanation. Is it so beyond the realm of possibilities that actors might indulge a habit while they practice their craft?

 

[Duckyou]

No cameras recording as they were setting up the shot.

This was an accidental discharge (not supposed to be shooting) while they were trying to figure out the shooting angle in a church.

There were supposedly 3 other accidental discharges on set before this.

Anyone on set is allowed to check and see if the gun is safe - anyone.

- I am more inclined to say Negligent Discharge as it is a Single Action Revolver. How do you accidentally pull the hammer back and fire.

The bullet traveled through the girl in the abdomen and hit the guy behind her. She was caught by others (must have been more there).

A single shot was fired.

They had just come back from lunch and the armorer had not rechecked the firearms. The assistant director grabbed it, did not check, but told everyone it was a “cold” gun (apparently movie lingo for unloaded/safe to handle).

 

[BluesBrother]

No cameras recording as they were setting up the shot.

This was an accidental discharge (not supposed to be shooting) while they were trying to figure out the shooting angle in a church.

There were supposedly 3 other accidental discharges on set before this.

Anyone on set is allowed to check and see if the gun is safe - anyone.

- I am more inclined to say Negligent Discharge as it is a Single Action Revolver. How do you accidentally pull the hammer back and fire.

The bullet traveled through the girl in the abdomen and hit the guy behind her. She was caught by others (must have been more there).

A single shot was fired.

They had just come back from lunch and the armorer had not recheckeThis tragety the firearms. The assistant director grabbed it, did not check, but told everyone it was a “cold” gun (apparently movie lingo for unloaded/safe to handle).

In short a multitude of safe firearms practices recommend by ALL responsible gun owners and the NRA were not employed. I don't want to hear faux criticism from anti gunners at all when basic common sense measures are not implemented. This tragedy was avoidable.

 

[Welldoya]

The more I hear about this, the more it sounds like sabotage to me.
What was a live round doing anywhere near the set, let alone finding it’s way into a prop gun.
And the assistant director was an idiot for declaring “cold gun” when he obviously had not checked it.

 

[BluesBrother]

The more I hear about this, the more it sounds like sabotage to me.
What was a live round doing anywhere near the set, let alone finding it’s way into a prop gun.
And the assistant director was an idiot for declaring “cold gun” when he obviously had not checked it.

The main stream media (msm) is controlling the narrative, the language, again. Don't let them do it. A prop gun is inert. It doesn't have the ability to carry out the original intended purpose of a weapon. Maybe made of polymer or plastic, wax, et al. A gun that is able to fire live ammo is a weapon not a prop. The weapon was brandished as if it was a prop. That's why a cinematographer is dead. The capability of the weapon was grossly underestimated.

 

[Welldoya]

I assumed they use actual guns with blanks.
So, if they normally use “guns” that are not capable of firing, this looks even more suspicious.

 

[BluesBrother]

I don't think I'm being naive to think they would listened to experienced gun handlers and use inert guns. Guns that had a barrel block to thwart a projectile from exiting the barrel but allow flash and smoke to exit for realism. But what do I know about play acting? What I do know is they all make a lot of money per hour for not a whole lot of effort. Once a year they have an award ceremony that no one but themselves care about to pat each other on the back. You'd think some of those millions could go toward making violent scenes safer so fewer cinematographers would die. Is one life worth more than a lavish over the top life style? I think yes. My criticism is not only of the ones that fund and profit from these projects but of the people that work and also profit by working in these unsafe environments.

 

[Aluc4rd13]

+1

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

[DAS HUGH!]

Prop gun is actually a loose term. I've read that the word prop merely implies "property of production".. and in this case and many others, there's several versions on a set of any style of a gun. A plastic/rubber one. They usually are for scenes where fighting is involved so no one falls n gets hurt on one.. same with knives etc. They'll cast it and make a fake. Then there's blank only models that are plugged. Those I assume are for yeah scenes where they are pointed at others etc. But I've heard alot of folks say real ammo is never allowed near sets. But I've also seen where people say yes it is used alot. Cause it's hard for an actor to fake the realism of recoil etc. If I'm not mistaken I think John wicks movies used many real guns. So there's a 3rd kind.. and that's the real actual guns. I saw a report from somewhere actually saying that the gun in question was used shortly before all this at a range with live ammo off the set someplace. Which would account for why real ammo was maybe left inside it. So I'm assuming there's a rack of guns somewhere on the sets. And on that rack there's several models of the exact same gun for different scenarios and they all look exactly alike. All but the rubber one feel alike. And someone messed up and grabbed the wrong one. And since this gun was a single action. They maybe used it for blanks and real fire according to the movies needs. Since it don't require a sealed barrel/bullet to cycle it. So I guess in many ways the older revolver style guns would be the ones most likely to get mixed up on sets.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

 

[Welldoya]

Wow, if that’s true and they really do mix real guns with props, there is no way I would be on that set.

 

[BluesBrother]

Wow, if that’s true and they really do mix real guns with props, there is no way I would be on that set.

From what we know now, it's true, dumb but true. You're falling trap to the media narrative. There're not props, there're weapons that shoot real bullets and can kill as evidenced by a dead cinematographer. She had a husband and a 9 year old boy. If you call it something that it is not than the reckless behavior that killed her seems less horrifying.

 

[DAS HUGH!]

Yep. So when I hear people clear him of wrong doing by saying it was someone else's job to check it. It's not true. Some guns are very real. Or close enough to be real. So much so they need to be treated as real. If there's 4-5 of each gun. There's bound to be mixups. So he should have inspected it.. and never pointed at anyone. And then there's many ammo types. Which by how I understand is how Brandon Lee died. I think a "hero" bullet was used. They're real bullets. But emptied out. But you're supposed to empty the primer out also. I think someone didn't. And put the bullet back in. And when fired it had just enough power to pop the bullet into the bore on a previous scene. And caused a squib. Then later when they used a blank in it... which many blanks have more power than real bullets btw.. when it went off it shot the bullet just like a real gun. Don't quote me on that but it's how I heard it went down and it's the only way it makes sense in my mind. So I think when you see all these movie people claim there's no real ammo or guns on the sets. They're saying it to save thier butts and not have thier insurance people to cancel thier policies lol. But yeah like in some scenes you'll see things that can't be faked. Like when they shoot beer bottles and they break. There's recoil.. smoke out of the barrel.. then bam the glass breaks. I think that's real. Cause I've also seen where they use fake guns. There's no ejecting brass.. there's zero recoil.. and if they do fake the recoil it don't look real cause the timing of the fake video edited muzzle flash don't match etc. Point is when they fake it, a real gun owner can tell very easy. But in scenes where it can be faked and the camera isn't close.. and they can get away with it.. (and if they have to the budget to do so).. they fake it. But on a low budget film especially like this one. I'm willing to bet it's just cheaper and easier to shoot a real bullet for some things. Anyways yeah don't believe when they say real guns aren't used. Cause if it was true. Well this conversation wouldn't be happening would it lol?

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

 

[Welldoya]

By what we know now, it's true, dumb but true. You're falling trap to the media narrative. There're not props, there're weapons that shoot real bullets and can kill as evidenced by a dead cinematographer. She had a husband and a 9 year old boy. If you call it something that it is not than the reckless behavior that killed her seem less horrifying.

I’m not “falling” for anything.
It’s obvious that poor judgment was used, many people failed to use common sense and some people didn’t do their job.
To me it looks like sabotage.
I think Baldwin is a scumbag and hope that he gets more out of this than just losing a few million.

 

[Snake-Eyes]

Alec Baldwin Shoots Woman Dead: Innocent Accident, or Involuntary Manslaughter? – Law of Self Defense

lawofselfdefense.com

^--- Good legal review of how to look at the incident, depending on the facts of the case (which are "strangely difficult" to find out).

 

[BluesBrother]

Alec Baldwin Shoots Woman Dead: Innocent Accident, or Involuntary Manslaughter? – Law of Self Defense

lawofselfdefense.com

^--- Good legal review of how to look at the incident, depending on the facts of the case (which are "strangely difficult" to find out).

Very good read, Thank You.

 

[Duckyou]

Very good read, Thank You.

+1

 

[Raven]

Nevermind the Clinton angle, I'm surprised nobody but reddit is talking about the Illuminate sacrifice angle...

 

[fl57caveman]

He's head of the chain of command, and the shooter, so he should be relieved and charged with something... anything... the hell he gets to walk around with just an "I'm sorry"

Nevermind the Clinton angle, I'm surprised nobody but reddit is talking about the Illuminate sacrifice angle... View attachment 134874

loose rounds and a fanny pack of rounds found mixed at the scene... sloppy .

 

[DAS HUGH!]

Haven't heard that yet. Sounds par for the course. Heard they executing search warrants at a few places. Likely looking for matching bullets to the ones shot at the scene. They can do a lead batch analysis and trace the bullet to a box and or lot batch number sold. So long as they find the remaining box of ammo. So in theory they can tie the actual bullet to the owner if they find the remaining rounds by matching them. It's a more accurate method than simply relying on the brand of casing found. That's if it hasn't been tossed by then tho of course. They can also take prints off the shell casing sometimes. So they in theory could find who put the bullet in it.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk