Alec Baldwin accidentally kills Director Of Photography on movie set

[sk270]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

Not sure how the blame can lie with anyone but the individual pointing and pulling the trigger. Gun safety 101

See Trochu's post above. Add bat119's citation which describes other safety precautions that should have been taken.

[fishnguy]

Who would have thought differently? Lol.

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by Big Grey Wolf

Most industrial accidents are usually a combination of 3 or more causes coming together at same time. I think Trouchu nailed it with his last post.

Originally Posted by sk270

See Trochu's post above. Add bat119's citation which describes other safety precautions that should have been taken.

Using accident investigation terminology....The basic cause was he pointed a loaded gun at someone and pulled the trigger. It is ultimately on him for the 2 mistakes that were made.
There is always a root cause if you dig deep enough so I suppose that would take away some of the blame if a hunter shoots another hunter. Or would that be different?

[EZM]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

Using accident investigation terminology....The basic cause was he pointed a loaded gun at someone and pulled the trigger. It is ultimately on him for the 2 mistakes that were made.
There is always a root cause if you dig deep enough so I suppose that would take away some of the blame if a hunter shoots another hunter. Or would that be different?

I agree - there was definitely a chain of precursory and subsequent "events" that all contributed to "the final outcome" of this tragedy.

From bringing the live ammo to site - to loading live ammo into prop gun - to armorer not checking it - to actor point it in an unsafe line of fire - to the actor pulling the trigger

There needs to be accountability in each of these steps and maybe a few people here end up facing consequences.

And, I'd say the final 2 acts my be viewed as "more serious" compared to the precursory steps here ...

Totally speculative here - but maybe live ammo was needed for other scenes? if that was the case the person who brought the ammo on site would be acquitted of any wrongdoing .... (again, just a speculation and example).

And each one of these steps would need to be investigated.

Such a preventable tragedy

[fishnguy]

What if an actor instead drove a tractor trailer with a heavy load on a movie set, loosing the load and killing a few crew members. Would it be his fault because he didn’t make sure the load was properly secured? What if he lost breaks and rolled over some people on the set and beyond. Would that be his fault knowing nothing about air breaks and not doing proper checks before operating?

Edit: It’s not the same as a hunter shooting another person while hunting, obviously. Just like it wouldn’t be the same as a truck driver loosing his load on the highway and killing occupants of a vehicle driving behind him.

[mooseknuckle]

One thing for certain, he will have to live with the guilt. Joe blow would be behind bars, but this Hollywood "hero" will get a slap on the wrist and write a check. And that's it.

[Grizzly Adams1]

he will have to live with the guilt.

I suspect the man's ego is too big for that.

Grizz

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by fishnguy

What if an actor instead drove a tractor trailer with a heavy load on a movie set, loosing the load and killing a few crew members. Would it be his fault because he didn’t make sure the load was properly secured? What if he lost breaks and rolled over some people on the set and beyond. Would that be his fault knowing nothing about air breaks and not doing proper checks before operating?

Edit: It’s not the same as a hunter shooting another person while hunting, obviously. Just like it wouldn’t be the same as a truck driver loosing his load on the highway and killing occupants of a vehicle driving behind him.

Baldwin isn't just the person that pulled the trigger, as the producer, it is his responsibility to hire competent people to supervise the firearms. So if he hired incompetent staff, he could be liable for that as well. The fact that crew members walked out complaining of safety issues, and that he did nothing to resolve those issues, doesn't look good for him, or his production company. He may avoid legal charges, but he will likely face lawsuits that could cost him many millions.

[RandyBoBandy]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Baldwin isn't just the person that pulled the trigger, as the producer, it is his responsibility to hire competent people to supervise the firearms. So if he hired incompetent staff, he could be liable for that as well. The fact that crew members walked out complaining of safety issues, and that he did nothing to resolve those issues, doesn't look good for him, or his production company. He may avoid legal charges, but he will likely face lawsuits that could cost him many millions.

PLUS the fact he 100% anti-gun advocate

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by RandyBoBandy

PLUS the fact he 100% anti-gun advocate

Ironically, while he is outspoken against firearms, he didn't hesitate to pick one up, point it at another human being,and pull the trigger, and he didn't bother to even confirm if it was loaded before doing so.

[badbrass]

If you don't know the diffenance between a dud and a live round? Get out of the business! The person has no right to be there! WOW!

[Bushrat]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Ironically, while he is outspoken against firearms, he didn't hesitate to pick one up, point it at another human being,and pull the trigger, and he didn't bother to even confirm if it was loaded before doing so.

Yep and not to proud to make millions from the guns he supposedly hates that are portrayed in many of his movies. If he had any conscience he wouldn't do that.

[fishnguy]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Baldwin isn't just the person that pulled the trigger, as the producer, it is his responsibility to hire competent people to supervise the firearms. So if he hired incompetent staff, he could be liable for that as well. The fact that crew members walked out complaining of safety issues, and that he did nothing to resolve those issues, doesn't look good for him, or his production company. He may avoid legal charges, but he will likely face lawsuits that could cost him many millions.

I would agree with that. Pulling the trigger doesn’t make him guilty. Incompetent staff probably does, though I don’t know how it works in their industry who hires what and whatever. His company will probably get sued and will probably settle out of court. That would be my guess how this plays out. Unless more information comes to light.

Staff walking out, etc is hearsay for the time being.

[North40Rules]

Whenever I get handed a firearm of any type I check the chamber, the breach, and the barrel especially if I am going to shoot it before I do anything else. I have seen many a wad stuck in the barrel when I loaded homemade shotgun shells, from misfires. I do the same when I hand someone a firearm out of caution and common courtesy.


Everyone should operate that way, then there would never be any idiot mistakes made. Foolproof actually!

[RandyBoBandy]

Originally Posted by fishnguy

I would agree with that. Pulling the trigger doesn’t make him guilty. Incompetent staff probably does, though I don’t know how it works in their industry who hires what and whatever. His company will probably get sued and will probably settle out of court. That would be my guess how this plays out. Unless more information comes to light.

Staff walking out, etc is hearsay for the time being.

He is 100% guilty for not following the basic rules of firearm handling

[RandyBoBandy]

Originally Posted by North40Rules

Whenever I get handed a firearm of any type I check the chamber, the breach, and the barrel especially if I am going to shoot it before I do anything else. I have seen many a wad stuck in the barrel when I loaded homemade shotgun shells, from misfires. I do the same when I hand someone a firearm out of caution and common courtesy.


Everyone should operate that way, then there would never be any idiot mistakes made. Foolproof actually!

X2

[CaberTosser]

Baldwin failed the simplest of safety tasks. A 12 year old Boy Scout with a firearms badge could school him up, down and sideways. There is no making this somebody else’s fault, no offloading culpability. He didn’t personally check the firearm and he pointed it at shot it at 2 humans.

I’m the only me with access to my gun safe. I’m the only one who puts them in there and locks it up. When I open it up and grab a firearm, the first thing I do it check the action, despite it having been me who last handled it and locked it in there. Juxtapose that against Baldwin taking some other hipster yokels word for it and going off with it as though he was Yosemite Sam himself.

[huntinstuff]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams1

he will have to live with the guilt.

I suspect the man's ego is too big for that.

Grizz

Yup

They just use more drugs and booze to numb the pain.......like the rest of them.....

Well publicized stint in rehab, ghost the world for a bit, then come back with lots of hype in a new "blockbuster" movie


Same script every time

Robert Downey Jr was the same. Jail, rehab, total mess....now men flock to see Iron Man.......fml

[fishnguy]

Originally Posted by RandyBoBandy

He is 100% guilty for not following the basic rules of firearm handling

Originally Posted by CaberTosser

Baldwin failed the simplest of safety tasks.

I’d bet my house it’s not in his job description as an actor.

If you hand a loaded gun to a kid and the kid shoots somebody dead, it isn’t kid’s fault. No different here. Should an actor be a proficient truck driver knowing all about secured loads and air breaks next time they drive a truck in a movie? Or just being able to drive one would do? I am assuming someone who was hired to look after these things would make sure the truck is ready and safe to operate, no? What about when they throw a grenade, do they need to be able to tell the difference between a dud and the real deal; or do they just throw what is handed to them? Doing anything else potentially dangerous? What about survival skills when they shoot somewhere in no man’s land? Handling bears? Common. That’s why there is gazillion people working on movie sets, each doing their job they were hired to do.

I know better, most of you know better, others don’t and it isn’t in their job description to know. When I take someone shooting who had never touched a gun before, the first thing we do is go over safety. There are no exceptions. No one but me touches a gun while we do so. Firearms are treated as if they are loaded. Not sure if they are doing the same and not sure if they need to either. I am not on a movie set. I don’t point my rifle at people no matter what. They obviously do. You can’t make actors being responsible for making sure the set is a safe place for everyone to be at. Maybe they should also check all the electrical stuff? Maybe climb the ladder and make sure the decoration hanging above, that may weigh a tonne or more, is properly secured before they ask a co-actor to step under it. Same should be true for directors when they tell actors where to go and whatnot.

While tragic, this had nothing to do with “oh my gawd, guns!”. Could have been a decoration falling on someone’s head and killing someone after Baldwin stepped on it (because he had to as prescribed in the script) because safety procedures weren’t followed by personnel hired to follow them.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by fishnguy

I’d bet my house it’s not in his job description as an actor.

If you hand a loaded gun to a kid and the kid shoots somebody dead, it isn’t kid’s fault. No different here. Should an actor be a proficient truck driver knowing all about secured loads and air breaks next time they drive a truck in a movie? Or just being able to drive one would do? I am assuming someone who was hired to look after these things would make sure the truck is ready and safe to operate, no? What about when they throw a grenade, do they need to be able to tell the difference between a dud and the real deal; or do they just throw what is handed to them? Doing anything else potentially dangerous? What about survival skills when they shoot somewhere in no man’s land? Handling bears? Common. That’s why there is gazillion people working on movie sets, each doing their job they were hired to do.

I know better, most of you know better, others don’t and it isn’t in their job description to know. When I take someone shooting who had never touched a gun before, the first thing we do is go over safety. There are no exceptions. No one but me touches a gun while we do so. Firearms are treated as if they are loaded. Not sure if they are doing the same and not sure if they need to either. I am not on a movie set. I don’t point my rifle at people no matter what. They obviously do. You can’t make actors being responsible for making sure the set is a safe place for everyone to be at. Maybe they should also check all the electrical stuff? Maybe climb the ladder and make sure the decoration hanging above, that may weigh a tonne or more, is properly secured before they ask a co-actor to step under it. Same should be true for directors when they tell actors where to go and whatnot.

While tragic, this had nothing to do with “oh my gawd, guns!”. Could have been a decoration falling on someone’s head and killing someone after Baldwin stepped on it (because he had to as prescribed in the script) because safety procedures weren’t followed by personnel hired to follow them.

To start with, we don't know if he was handed the firearm and was told that it was safe , or if as was reported, he took it off of a prop cart, without checking with the person in charge of firearms. And whether it's for movies or industry, when you hire someone to work with firearms, explosives, vehicles etc, you as the employer must employ qualified personnel. If you hire incompetent people, and someone is injured or killed as a result, you can be found liable. In the movie industry, the producer is the employer of the crew, and Baldwin is the producer for this movie, so it is his responsibility to employ qualified people. So when law suits are launched over the death and injuries, Baldwin will likely be named as an individual for pulling the trigger, and as the producer, for hiring incompetent people, so one way or the other, he will likely end up paying a huge settlement, or being sued for a large amount. Trying to blame the incident entirely on the people that he employed likely won't work to absolve him of responsibility.
And as dangerous as Baldwin makes firearms sound when he condemns them, he of all people should use extra care when firearms are used on his set, especially when he is the one using them.

[RandyBoBandy]

Originally Posted by fishnguy

I’d bet my house it’s not in his job description as an actor.

.

Might not be in his job description BUT as an adult human being with a firearm in his hand, he NEEDS to respect it.
Anyways FNG, your just trying to cut him some slack and I don't mind your take on it. G'nite

[Bushrat]

Originally Posted by fishnguy

I’d bet my house it’s not in his job description as an actor.

It should be. The gun is part of his trade. He should be well versed in guns. Nobody on a set should be able to touch a gun unless certified and it is hard to believe this is apparently unregulated in that industry.

I can't do hardly anything at my job without being certified let alone handle firearms

[fishnguy]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

To start with…

(Cut the post for length, not for substance )

I read that someone handed him the gun. It’s all hearsay for now. We don’t know what happened. However, if it was just an acting scene and he shot someone with the firearm provided to him, it’s not his fault as an actor (reiterating it again, as an actor).

I also mentioned that his company will probably settle out of court. I am sure his legal team is better than the team in charge of firearms.

His stance on firearms has no substance here. It doesn’t matter in regards to what happened. It also doesn’t matter that someone got killed by a projectile fired out of a firearm. Could have been anything else, but happened to be that.

A few weeks ago, an actor got killed in Russia while on stage of a theatre during a live performance. A two-tonne decoration fell on his head and killed him instantly. Not making it up, it really happened.

Originally Posted by RandyBoBandy

Might not be in his job description BUT as an adult human being with a firearm in his hand, he NEEDS to respect it.
Anyways FNG, your just trying to cut him some slack and I don't mind your take on it. G'nite

Haha, RBB. Not trying to cut him any slack. The whole thing appears to be a cluster you know what from what the media is reporting. Who knows.

Just saying that he, as an actor, is there to do a job, just like anyone else, safety of which is dependent on others. I couldn’t care less about the guy personally and the same is true about his thoughts on guns, cars, or whirlpools, lol.

Not the same, but as an adult, should I check the torque you applied to my wheel after fixing the vehicle before I put my kids in it?

Good night to you as well

Originally Posted by Bushrat

It should be. The gun is part of his trade. He should be well versed in guns. Nobody on a set should be able to touch a gun unless certified and it is hard to believe this is apparently unregulated in that industry.

I can't do hardly anything at my job without being certified let alone handle firearms

We don’t know what happened and how the gun got in his hand. All am saying is that if he was handed a gun and shot someone dead with it, as an actor, he isn’t responsible.

His job is acting. Today he “shoots” someone, tomorrow throws someone off an airplane, next time drives over someone with a car, throws a grenade at a bunch of people, presses the button that sends a few nuclear warheads towards China, etc. In doing so, he doesn’t (and shouldn’t) have to make sure a gun is safe, parachute to be operational, the car is set up properly and the guy has proper safety equipment, grenade is a dud, and the button isn’t real. His job is to pull the trigger, push the person, drive the car, throw a grenade, push a button, respectively.

The fact that it happened to be a gun, just happened to be so. This is all I am saying.

All of our jobs depend on someone else doing theirs. Like the safety of the building we work at, the torque the mechanic applied when he tightened the ball joint on an ambulance, the properly designed and built hoist the mechanic used when he lifted the ambulance to change the ball joint, and so on. If I worked in an office on the 20th floor, I wouldn’t have to inspect the elevator for safety every time I had a client coming in and so wouldn’t a client. We would both, however, demand that the building owner follow the proper protocol and the inspector properly do his job in order to ensure our safety.

[Rdamours]

From what I’ve read the gun was used by crew members for target practise the day before. They use real guns with blanks it seems…most of the time.

[elkhunter11]

This is what should happen, and apparently what is normal procedure, on most sets.

Hollywood professionals say they're baffled by the circumstances and production crews have quickly stepped up safety measures.

Jeffrey Wright, who has worked on projects including the James Bond franchise and the upcoming movie "The Batman," was acting with a weapon on the set of "Westworld" when news broke of the shooting Thursday at a New Mexico ranch. "We were all pretty shocked. And it informed what we did from that moment on," he said in an interview Sunday at the Newport Beach Film Festival.

"I don't recall ever being handed a weapon that was not cleared in front of me — meaning chamber open, barrel shown to me, light flashed inside the barrel to make sure that it's cleared," Wright said. "Clearly, that was a mismanaged set."

Actor Ray Liotta agreed with Wright that the checks on firearms are usually extensive.

"They always — that I know of — they check it so you can see," Liotta said. "They give it to the person you're pointing the gun at, they do it to the producer, they show whoever is there that it doesn't work."

Here is an article outlining the safety procedures to be followed when firearms are used

Before the shooting, it appears that the assistant director , not the armorer provided Baldwin with the firearm, and obviously it wasn't checked, before Baldwin took possession. We can be certain that it wasn't checked, because if it had been checked, the live rounds would have been discovered. So if the standard safety protocols were not followed, it was because the producer/Baldwin allowed the crew to not follow the safety protocols, and since Baldwin is the producer , and he is the one that was holding the firearm when it was fired, he can't deny that he was unaware of safety protocols not being followed. So whether you try and blame the shooter, or the crew for not following safety protocols, it all comes back to Baldwin, he employed the crew, and the actors, and he is responsible for seeing that safety protocols are followed, by both the crew, and the actors.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainmen...sets-1.6221637

What are the rules for firearms on set?

The weapons master is required to be on set whenever a weapon is being used. The Actors' Equity Association's guidelines state that, "Before each use, make sure the gun has been test-fired offstage, and then ask to test fire it yourself. Watch the prop master check the cylinders and barrel to be sure no foreign object or dummy bullet has become lodged inside." Further, "All loading of firearms must be done by the property master, armourer or experienced persons working under their direct supervision."

"Nowadays, all weapons are checked before your blanks are put into the weapon.… The blanks themselves are never loaded until the very last minute, when all crew is in position, so the armourer knows exactly where every member of the crew is so that no one's walking through any danger areas the armourer has set up," said armoury co-ordinator Sam Dormer.

Again, this is not what happened on the set of the shooting. Having been in multiple movies involving firearms, Baldwin should have known this, and as the producer, it is his responsibility to see that safety protocols are followed on his set. If Baldwin was a rookie actor, with no experience with firearms on set, and he wasn't the producer, he could use ignorance as an excuse, but that is not the situation here.

[270person]

Originally Posted by fishnguy

(Cut the post for length, not for substance )

I read that someone handed him the gun. It’s all hearsay for now. We don’t know what happened. However, if it was just an acting scene and he shot someone with the firearm provided to him, it’s not his fault as an actor (reiterating it again, as an actor).

I also mentioned that his company will probably settle out of court. I am sure his legal team is better than the team in charge of firearms.

His stance on firearms has no substance here. It doesn’t matter in regards to what happened. It also doesn’t matter that someone got killed by a projectile fired out of a firearm. Could have been anything else, but happened to be that.

A few weeks ago, an actor got killed in Russia while on stage of a theatre during a live performance. A two-tonne decoration fell on his head and killed him instantly. Not making it up, it really happened.


Haha, RBB. Not trying to cut him any slack. The whole thing appears to be a cluster you know what from what the media is reporting. Who knows.

Just saying that he, as an actor, is there to do a job, just like anyone else, safety of which is dependent on others. I couldn’t care less about the guy personally and the same is true about his thoughts on guns, cars, or whirlpools, lol.

Not the same, but as an adult, should I check the torque you applied to my wheel after fixing the vehicle before I put my kids in it?

Good night to you as well


We don’t know what happened and how the gun got in his hand. All am saying is that if he was handed a gun and shot someone dead with it, as an actor, he isn’t responsible.

His job is acting. Today he “shoots” someone, tomorrow throws someone off an airplane, next time drives over someone with a car, throws a grenade at a bunch of people, presses the button that sends a few nuclear warheads towards China, etc. In doing so, he doesn’t (and shouldn’t) have to make sure a gun is safe, parachute to be operational, the car is set up properly and the guy has proper safety equipment, grenade is a dud, and the button isn’t real. His job is to pull the trigger, push the person, drive the car, throw a grenade, push a button, respectively.

The fact that it happened to be a gun, just happened to be so. This is all I am saying.

All of our jobs depend on someone else doing theirs. Like the safety of the building we work at, the torque the mechanic applied when he tightened the ball joint on an ambulance, the properly designed and built hoist the mechanic used when he lifted the ambulance to change the ball joint, and so on. If I worked in an office on the 20th floor, I wouldn’t have to inspect the elevator for safety every time I had a client coming in and so wouldn’t a client. We would both, however, demand that the building owner follow the proper protocol and the inspector properly do his job in order to ensure our safety.

Hey now. Stop making so much sense. You nailed it but some can't see past Baldwin's anti gun, anti Trump stances and want him to burn for an accident not of his doing.

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by Bushrat

It should be. The gun is part of his trade. He should be well versed in guns. Nobody on a set should be able to touch a gun unless certified and it is hard to believe this is apparently unregulated in that industry.

I can't do hardly anything at my job without being certified let alone handle firearms

There may be the problem unregulated but even then by certified people poop happens...look at other threads floating around by certified gun owners who scope people out....just saying.

At the end of this thread I think we can all agree it was a preventable tragic incident that took place no matter hw we spin it.

[bat119]

Sounds like the Assistant director Dave Halls is a loose cannon on movie sets with little regard for safety or procedures.

The gun Baldwin used was one of three that a firearms specialist, or “armorer,” had set on a cart outside the building where a scene was being rehearsed, according to court records. Halls grabbed a gun off a cart and handed it to Baldwin, indicating that the weapon was safe by yelling “cold gun,” court papers say. But it was loaded with live rounds, according to the records.

Baldwin should have not accepted the gun from an unqualified person

She became most concerned, however, when the supervising pyrotechnician, who is diabetic, was found unconscious in a chair, she said. Halls wanted to resume filming after the man was removed from the set even though Goll, the remaining pyrotechnician on site, didn’t have the qualifications to supervise the complicated series of pyrotechnic effects that were planned.

“One of the things that stuck out to me most about that day is the fact that he called out on radio over channel one, `Hey, Maggie says we can keep going!’ and I basically held the button down so he couldn’t transmit to anyone else on that channel while I yelled out, `No, Dave, that’s not what I said. We’re not doing that,”’ she recalled in a phone interview.

She filed an internal complaint with the executive producers of Blumhouse Productions about that day, she said.

https://globalnews.ca/news/8318521/b...tant-director/

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

There may be the problem unregulated but even then by certified people poop happens...look at other threads floating around by certified gun owners who scope people out....just saying.

At the end of this thread I think we can all agree it was a preventable tragic incident that took place no matter hw we spin it.

Holding a PAL in no way makes a person an expert on firearms, some people have PALs with zero training or testing, so a PAL is really nothing more than a legality. And that is why some idiots holding a PAL scope people. On the other hand, when you are paid to make your living with firearms, you should be properly trained and certified, which is why armorers for movie sets must complete an actual apprenticeship. https://www.careersinfilm.com/armorer/

Baldwin should have not accepted the gun from an unqualified person

As an actor, he should not have accepted the firearm from an unqualified person, as the producer, he should not have allowed anyone to accept the firearm until it was checked by the armorer, in front of himself and the cast/crew.

[Ackleyman]

lots of people killed with un loaded guns.....