Alec Baldwin Insists He ‘Didn’t Pull the Trigger

[We Never Know]

If it could come from another gun then that would be another reason not to convict. I'm not for convicting if there is doubt. After all this is our actor from Hunt For Red October. I'd really rather not have him convicted of manslaughter if it isn't necessary.

Have you seen "The Getaway" with Alec and Kim Basinger? I thought it was pretty good. Early 90's movie.

 

[F1fan]

If computers can make superman fly, Spiderman shoot webbing, autobots come to life, they could make it look like a gun fired.

Well that is more money. You tell that to investors.

It's simpler to just have competent armorers on set, as many shows/films do already. This was a rare exception. Someone needs to be held accountable for an unsafe gun on set.

Whose job is it? Armorers. It's their one job.

 

[F1fan]

Have you seen "The Getaway" with Alec and Kim Basinger? I thought it was pretty good. Early 90's movie.

I think I saw it. The original with Steve McQueen was great.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Have you seen "The Getaway" with Alec and Kim Basinger? I thought it was pretty good. Early 90's movie.

No, I haven't seen it.

Oh, so they were married. I tend to doubt such public marriages of thespians. It could always just be a ruse to keep attention away from their real relationships unless there are children. It could be like a "Do business as" identity and maybe something to double up on fame. Could be real. Don't know. I don't follow the stories well enough to know.

What do you think? Think there are DBA marriages?

 

[We Never Know]

Well that is more money. You tell that to investors.

It's simpler to just have competent armorers on set, as many shows/films do already. This was a rare exception. Someone needs to be held accountable for an unsafe gun on set.

Whose job is it? Armorers. It's their one job.

Can you show its more expensive to computer edit a gun firing ...that its cheaper having professional armorers on hand, probably most of the time?

 

[We Never Know]

No, I haven't seen it.

Oh, so they were married. I tend to doubt such public marriages of thespians. It could always just be a ruse to keep attention away from their real relationships unless there are children. It could be like a "Do business as" identity and maybe something to double up on fame. Could be real. Don't know. I don't follow the stories well enough to know.

What do you think? Think there are DBA marriages?

I think most anything is possible in hollywood with rich stars.

 

[We Never Know]

I think I saw it. The original with Steve McQueen was great.

I haven't seen a bad Steve Mcqueen movie yet

 

[Brickjectivity]

I think most anything is possible in hollywood with rich stars.

Technically they are middle class. They aren't all *that* rich.

 

[We Never Know]

No, I haven't seen it.

Oh, so they were married. I tend to doubt such public marriages of thespians. It could always just be a ruse to keep attention away from their real relationships unless there are children. It could be like a "Do business as" identity and maybe something to double up on fame. Could be real. Don't know. I don't follow the stories well enough to know.

What do you think? Think there are DBA marriages?

I once read that stars tend to marry other stars because they understand time away for a movie, kissing on screen, etc etc.

 

[We Never Know]

Technically they are middle class. They aren't all *that* rich.

Stars are pretty rich. So so actors are upper middle class

 

[F1fan]

I haven't seen a bad Steve Mcqueen movie yet

If I was half as cool as Steve McQueen I'd be pretty cool. All my girlfriend's friends would be hitting on me, and I could blow them off. Alas.

What were we talking about?

 

[Brickjectivity]

Stars are pretty rich. So so actors are upper middle class

You mean like Tom Selleck and cloud.

***edit*** Cloud is the new word for 'Posse'. All the coolest people are using it, now.

 

[We Never Know]

You mean like Tom Selleck and cloud.

***edit*** Cloud is the new word for 'Posse'. All the coolest people are using it, now.

I hadn't heard that. I guess I'm not cool lol

 

[Brickjectivity]

I hadn't heard that. I guess I'm not cool lol

Dude, you're web 3.0. You're fine.

 

[PureX]

First as @Revoltingest pointed out the revolver was a single action.
It really doesn't matter if the "trigger pull" was extra light or not, he cocked the revolver.
Now since this was a movie set firearm, was it ever examed by a comptent armorer to insure
that the sear was not worn to the point that the slighest vibration would release the hammer.
So, yes if the revolvers sear was worn to a dangerous point it could have been an accidental discharge.
But he still cocked the firearm and pointed it in an unsafe direction; it doesn't matter if a firearm is single action or double action
you do not point it in a unsafe direction.

They were making a movie, where firearms are ROUTINELY POINTED AT PEOPLE for visual effect. In fact, that's exactly what the actors are HIRED TO DO with them. And in no instance is there ever a live round in a prop gun. So the question is not about Baldwin pointing a gun at someone, or fiddling with the hammer (as instructed). The question is how did a live round get into a prop gun that is NEVER supposed to have a live round in it.

 

[PureX]

Ref....
An inside look at type of gun used in Alec Baldwin 'Rust' shooting incident
Since it's a modern manufacture single action with
better metalurgy than back in the day, I think it very
very unlikely that a worn sear caused the problem.
Of course, cocking the hammer & placing one's
finger on the trigger is the fundamental flaw here.

Note: The gun is now in therapy, suffering from
PTSD & shame over having been improperly handled
by a dangerous fool. Recovery will take years.

Being a prop gun for a western movie, the catch-back for the hammer could have been deliberately altered to allow for 'fanning the hammer' as they sometimes did in old western movies. And you keep ignoring the fact that the actor was doing EXACTLY as he was being directed to do, AS IS HIS JOB. In fact, the person directing him was the woman that was shot. So CLEARLY no one there had any idea that the prop gun was an actual weapon.

But by all means, don't let reality or common sense cloud your rush to pass judgment, and pretend you're the expert on all things gun related, and on how movies are made.

 

[PureX]

It's almost as if this was an extremely rare freak accident.

There are no accidents, anymore. The lawyers have seen to it. Someone must always be blamed, and more importantly, someone must always PAY!

 

[Glaurung]

I think it's unfair to blame an actor for not knowing a live round was in a prop gun. Especially considering the gun was handed to him by the another. And of course he was pointing the gun at people, as (IIRC) they were taking camera shots and planning out a scene. But I do think whoever is responsible for the live rounds being there should be held to account for negligence.

 

[esmith]

All prop guns should have the firing pins removed/filed down.

Of course the most resonable action would to have nonfunctional replics of a firearm and use computer editing to provide the sound.
But that cost money....

 

[Revoltingest]

Being a prop gun for a western movie, the catch-back for the hammer could have been deliberately altered to allow for 'fanning the hammer' as they sometimes did in old western movies. And you keep ignoring the fact that the actor was doing EXACTLY as he was being directed to do, AS IS HIS JOB. In fact, the person directing him was the woman that was shot. So CLEARLY no one there had any idea that the prop gun was an actual weapon.

But by all means, don't let reality or common sense cloud your rush to pass judgment, and pretend you're the expert on all things gun related, and on how movies are made.

I don't know that he was doing as directed or not.
My criticism is of very unsafe gun handling.
And not just by Baldwin.