This was a pathetically weak case even without the misconduct, with the prosecution pretending to be horrified that Baldwin wasn't following typical gun safety rules like he was at a shooting range. As if he wasn't an actor relying on the competence of multiple safety professionals who assured him that it was a safe prop.
> typical gun safety rules like he was at a shooting range
You mean, "treat all guns like they're loaded"? That typical gun safety rule?
If you hand me a gun and say, "it's not loaded" I'm not going to point it at my head and pull the trigger. There's a crime called "negligent homicide" for just that case.
So many guns are used in the movies. Sometimes there are RPGs and rockets. No of the actors using them adheres to safety rules. It's not their job. It's the job of someone other.
Baldwin was also a producer of the movie.
I am not sure what the rules in the movie business are regarding when you represent both roles (actor and producer) and whether they (partly) for safety
The producer handles financial risks. It's like you pay a company to get your house built and on the building site an deadly accident happens. It's not your problem. But, when the building company goes out of money, it's your problem. It's your risk of loosing money. I think the same will also be in any other Industry in every part of the world.
The next thing is to be considered, when did this incident happened. It was in the middle of a filming. He was playing the scene and it was filmed. It would be different if it was during the Coffee break. Taking a gun and pointing at people isn't considered healthy :)
Was not middle of filming for the recorded part of the film. It was a practice draw.
Even if Baldwin needed to practice drawing in front the camera there was no reason to have a human there, and he 100% knew it is a safety breach to unnecessarily fire even a prop gun at a human when not part of the scene, but decided to lazily break the rules anyway betting with someone elses life it would be ok.
Oh. you're right. I over flew "when it's happened" because I already read that in the beginning and remembered it was during a film shot. Now I learned new details. So, you wrote it properly and good. Thank you.
In one of the early reports, cast and crew were shooting at cans, bottles during breaks. So somebodies brought live ammo onto the set. Why would you do that? Interestingly, that report quickly disappeared.
You would think that basic safety precautions would be no live ammo, all guns modified to only use special effects stuff. But that's probably too complicated for the producers.
10 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 31.6 ms ] threadI wonder now if this will also reopen the case for Hannah Gutierrez-Reed.
You mean, "treat all guns like they're loaded"? That typical gun safety rule?
If you hand me a gun and say, "it's not loaded" I'm not going to point it at my head and pull the trigger. There's a crime called "negligent homicide" for just that case.
We should ask Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The next thing is to be considered, when did this incident happened. It was in the middle of a filming. He was playing the scene and it was filmed. It would be different if it was during the Coffee break. Taking a gun and pointing at people isn't considered healthy :)
Even if Baldwin needed to practice drawing in front the camera there was no reason to have a human there, and he 100% knew it is a safety breach to unnecessarily fire even a prop gun at a human when not part of the scene, but decided to lazily break the rules anyway betting with someone elses life it would be ok.
You would think that basic safety precautions would be no live ammo, all guns modified to only use special effects stuff. But that's probably too complicated for the producers.