fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 39,606
|
Post by fw91 on Jul 13, 2024 18:48:42 GMT -5
Am I totally ignorant in thinking Baldwin shouldn’t have been charged to begin with? Seemed like a freak accident that he had no awareness of the dangers of the gun. Or did he?
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,458
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Jul 13, 2024 18:56:05 GMT -5
Am I totally ignorant in thinking Baldwin shouldn’t have been charged to begin with? Seemed like a freak accident that he had no awareness of the dangers of the gun. Or did he? As a producer he has some responsibility for what happened but being criminally liable just seems to be an extreme stretch.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi-El of Tomorrow on Jul 13, 2024 19:03:21 GMT -5
Really just makes you wonder how often this same shit's been pulled by these people on folks who can't afford lawyers that might actually catch it. It's not just lawyers that might catch it, John Oliver talked about it years ago, but far too many public defender offices are understaffed big time. Some public defenders aren't even able to review the case, till the day they're in court. Less are wanting to become public defenders because the lack of money. So good lawyers have absolutely no time to give a case the proper time it needs.
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 39,606
|
Post by fw91 on Jul 13, 2024 19:44:35 GMT -5
Am I totally ignorant in thinking Baldwin shouldn’t have been charged to begin with? Seemed like a freak accident that he had no awareness of the dangers of the gun. Or did he? As a producer he has some responsibility for what happened but being criminally liable just seems to be an extreme stretch. Ah I see. I mistakenly thought he charged for pulling the trigger, but the producer argument makes complete sense.
|
|
|
Post by YAKMAN is ICHIBAN on Jul 13, 2024 20:17:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jul 13, 2024 20:23:23 GMT -5
Ah I see. I mistakenly thought he charged for pulling the trigger, but the producer argument makes complete sense. That's the thing, he was charged for pulling the trigger. If they'd just gone with criminal negligence they'd very likely have gotten a conviction, even if the new evidence had been filed correctly. But because the prosecution were hell bent on putting him away for involuntary manslaughter we wound up here.
|
|
|
Post by darbus alan on Jul 14, 2024 13:10:00 GMT -5
Ah I see. I mistakenly thought he charged for pulling the trigger, but the producer argument makes complete sense. That's the thing, he was charged for pulling the trigger. If they'd just gone with criminal negligence they'd very likely have gotten a conviction, even if the new evidence had been filed correctly. But because the prosecution were hell bent on putting him away for involuntary manslaughter we wound up here. That's what's so dumb about this. Involuntary manslaughter because he pulled the trigger was a blatant reach. Really comes off like a prosecutor who wanted to make a name for themselves rather than actually trying to see justice served. If anyone deserved to be charged with manslaughter, it's the armorer. And if I was her, I'd at least try to get her conviction appealed because of how this case went down. For all we know, the prosecution hid some evidence from the defense that would exonerate her, too.
|
|
Feyrhausen
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,302
Member is Online
|
Post by Feyrhausen on Jul 14, 2024 13:53:34 GMT -5
SAG rules prohibit an actor from checking a gun or ammunition after an armorer has cleared it and declared it safe. Baldwin would be more at fault if had tried to check it.
The gun was supposed to be loaded with dummy rounds. Rounds that look real but have no powder. Because Baldwin would be pointing the gun and firing it directly at the camera, where it would be obvious if the rounds were fake or missing.
As producer Baldwin could be at fault if he was anything more than a producer on paper. But that would most likely never come to criminal charges, just civil liability.
This was just a case of an aspiring politician trying to make a name for themselves and botching it.
|
|
Gunhaver
Team Rocket
"Gunhaver! You actually have a gun!"
Posts: 831
|
Post by Gunhaver on Jul 14, 2024 14:59:32 GMT -5
SAG rules prohibit an actor from checking a gun or ammunition after an armorer has cleared it and declared it safe. Baldwin would be more at fault if had tried to check it. This is a safety thing, right? Even when using blanks or whatever, they can still be dangerous, so I imagine this is to minimize something going wrong by fiddling with the equipment after it's all set by the pros. I'll admit that I didn't follow this closely at all, but I'm stunned at some of the armchair lawyering I've seen in other places. Some people were really invested in the idea of Baldwin going to prison.
|
|
Feyrhausen
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,302
Member is Online
|
Post by Feyrhausen on Jul 14, 2024 16:31:57 GMT -5
SAG rules prohibit an actor from checking a gun or ammunition after an armorer has cleared it and declared it safe. Baldwin would be more at fault if had tried to check it. This is a safety thing, right? Even when using blanks or whatever, they can still be dangerous, so I imagine this is to minimize something going wrong by fiddling with the equipment after it's all set by the pros. I'll admit that I didn't follow this closely at all, but I'm stunned at some of the armchair lawyering I've seen in other places. Some people were really invested in the idea of Baldwin going to prison. Blanks are cartridges with the bullet removed and replaced with paper wadding to keep the gunpowder in. They can still be dangerous at close range. An actor famously killed himself by shooting at his own head at point blank range. A dummy cartridge has the bullet removed, gunpowder removed, then the bullet replaced. This way it looks intact but will not fire. Can still be dangerous if the percussion cap is still intact, but not likely to kill anyone, especially if the bullet was replaced properly as the force of the cap is unlikely to be able to push the bullet out of the cartridge. Brandon Lee died because a dummy bullet was not properly prepared and the cap did propel the bullet out where it stuck in the barrel. No one noticed this and later the gun was reloaded with blanks which had the force to unstick and propel the bullet with lethal force. But yes, after an armorer has handed you a gun and declared it safe you are not to open it, touch the rounds, do anything except hold it and do whatever the scene calls for. Baldwin was supposed to be firing the gun at the camera so accidentally pulling the trigger at any other point was careless but should have been no harm, if the armorer was competent as the actual scene called for was pointing the gun directly at someone in the first place. If the gun had been loaded with blanks he would have been very careless. The armorer was the only one at any fault here for there being live bullets in the gun. And as I said as a producer if it was anything other than a paper title Baldwin could be very civilly liable but any criminal charges are a real stretch.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jul 14, 2024 18:14:58 GMT -5
And as I said as a producer if it was anything other than a paper title Baldwin could be very civilly liable but any criminal charges are a real stretch. The production company making the movie (El Dorado Pictures) was founded by Baldwin, and the movie itself is something of a passion project Baldwin has been trying to get made for about a decade, so he's almost certainly liable. He already settled a civil suit from the victim's immediate family, and there's at least three more currently in progress. Whether he'd be found criminally liable is definitely open to debate, but a more competent prosecutor than the one that was used could probably make it stick. It does seem that there were a lot of cut corners on that production when it came to health and safety.
|
|
Feyrhausen
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,302
Member is Online
|
Post by Feyrhausen on Jul 14, 2024 18:32:47 GMT -5
And as I said as a producer if it was anything other than a paper title Baldwin could be very civilly liable but any criminal charges are a real stretch. The production company making the movie (El Dorado Pictures) was founded by Baldwin, and the movie itself is something of a passion project Baldwin has been trying to get made for about a decade, so he's almost certainly liable. He already settled a civil suit from the victim's immediate family, and there's at least three more currently in progress. Whether he'd be found criminally liable is definitely open to debate, but a more competent prosecutor than the one that was used could probably make it stick. It does seem that there were a lot of cut corners on that production when it came to health and safety. If thats true and I have no reason to doubt then the it might be pulling the trigger is the least of all reasons to go after him.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi-El of Tomorrow on Jul 30, 2024 3:54:35 GMT -5
|
|
cosmo
Unicron
Posts: 2,911
|
Post by cosmo on Jul 30, 2024 9:27:56 GMT -5
SAG rules prohibit an actor from checking a gun or ammunition after an armorer has cleared it and declared it safe. Baldwin would be more at fault if had tried to check it.
This sounds so stupid. Rule number one of gun safety was you always, always, always, always check a gun when someone hands it to you, even if you know with 100% certainty that it's safe. Even if it's unloaded, you check it anyway just in case.
|
|
|
Post by Confused Mark Wahlberg on Jul 30, 2024 9:35:01 GMT -5
I'm just trying to figure out how with the millions of movies with guns and huge shootouts how (almost) no one is accidentally killed.
So there was very clearly some serious protocols that were missed or ignored by the people in charge.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyoldman on Jul 30, 2024 9:43:06 GMT -5
Don't understand why dont they just make prop guns? Surely cheaper (and safer) than employing an 'expert' to look after real guns.
|
|
Feyrhausen
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,302
Member is Online
|
Post by Feyrhausen on Jul 30, 2024 13:29:49 GMT -5
SAG rules prohibit an actor from checking a gun or ammunition after an armorer has cleared it and declared it safe. Baldwin would be more at fault if had tried to check it. This sounds so stupid. Rule number one of gun safety was you always, always, always, always check a gun when someone hands it to you, even if you know with 100% certainty that it's safe. Even if it's unloaded, you check it anyway just in case.
That is for real life. This is a movie. Thats why you have an armorer to make sure a gun is safe. In this case the gun was supposed to be loaded. Just with a dummy bullet that looks real but will not fire. An untrained actor cant tell the difference between a dummy bullet and a live bullet. Which is why you have the armorer to make sure that gun is safe. And once an armorer has handed you a gun and cleared it safe you do not tamper with it. The scene called for him to point the gun at the camera and fire it. All normal gun safety rules are out the window at that point. Someone was probably going to die no matter what. He just fired it early by accident. If the armorer had done their job the gun would have never fired.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jul 30, 2024 14:20:47 GMT -5
Don't understand why dont they just make prop guns? Surely cheaper (and safer) than employing an 'expert' to look after real guns. Prop guns "lack authenticity" – no recoil – while the cost of adding muzzle flashes from scratch in post-production exceeds the cost of an on-set armorer in most cases.
|
|
cosmo
Unicron
Posts: 2,911
|
Post by cosmo on Jul 30, 2024 14:41:40 GMT -5
This sounds so stupid. Rule number one of gun safety was you always, always, always, always check a gun when someone hands it to you, even if you know with 100% certainty that it's safe. Even if it's unloaded, you check it anyway just in case.
That is for real life. This is a movie. Thats why you have an armorer to make sure a gun is safe. In this case the gun was supposed to be loaded. Just with a dummy bullet that looks real but will not fire. An untrained actor cant tell the difference between a dummy bullet and a live bullet. Which is why you have the armorer to make sure that gun is safe. And once an armorer has handed you a gun and cleared it safe you do not tamper with it. The scene called for him to point the gun at the camera and fire it. All normal gun safety rules are out the window at that point. Someone was probably going to die no matter what. He just fired it early by accident. If the armorer had done their job the gun would have never fired.
And I get that. But at the same time, I had a parent who was a gun enthusiast and was practically beaten over the head with "all guns are dangerous and can potentially kill someone, and it doesn't matter whether or not they're fake." I guess that's where my personal line of thinking comes from.
|
|
|
Post by darbus alan on Jul 30, 2024 14:58:38 GMT -5
That is for real life. This is a movie. Thats why you have an armorer to make sure a gun is safe. In this case the gun was supposed to be loaded. Just with a dummy bullet that looks real but will not fire. An untrained actor cant tell the difference between a dummy bullet and a live bullet. Which is why you have the armorer to make sure that gun is safe. And once an armorer has handed you a gun and cleared it safe you do not tamper with it. The scene called for him to point the gun at the camera and fire it. All normal gun safety rules are out the window at that point. Someone was probably going to die no matter what. He just fired it early by accident. If the armorer had done their job the gun would have never fired.
And I get that. But at the same time, I had a parent who was a gun enthusiast and was practically beaten over the head with "all guns are dangerous and can potentially kill someone, and it doesn't matter whether or not they're fake." I guess that's where my personal line of thinking comes from.
A lot of actors aren't gun enthusiasts, and are just as likely to screw something up while checking a weapon as anything else. And if something does go wrong it causes a clusterf*** in terms of who is ultimately responsible. That's why armorers exist. They're ideally those experts that are supposed to check everything and then some.
|
|