Alec Baldwin accidentally kills Director Of Photography on movie set

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

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/



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.

you point out valid points in a perfect world.... seen too many times so called experts, certified, armorers etc make bad choices....brain farts that all seem to line up and equal a bad outcome....many and I mean many are not reported but it is hard to cover up a death as in this case.

like i mentioned it is simply tragic...truly hard lessens learnt.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

you point out valid points in a perfect world.... seen too many times so called experts, certified, armorers etc make bad choices....brain farts that all seem to line up and equal a bad outcome....many and I mean many are not reported but it is hard to cover up a death as in this case.

like i mentioned it is simply tragic...truly hard lessens learnt.

For this to happen, not only the armorer would have to make a mistake , every person present would have to overlook the safety protocols, from the actors, to the director, to the cinematographer, to the producer, and everyone else on the set. It would only have taken one person to ask to have the firearm checked , as appears to be the standard practise, and this tragedy would have been avoided. The only thing left to be determined , is how the legal liability is to be assigned, even if there are no criminal charges, there will likely be law suits, and even if there are no law suits, because of legal settlements , insurance will likely be involved , so someone at some point will likely find someone legally liable. The sad part, is that even though Baldwin is both the person that pulled the trigger and the producer, and he had by far the most control over the situation , because of his wealth and celebrity status, someone else will likely be assigned the blame, and Baldwin will continue using firearms in the movies, while ranting on how dangerous they are, and how other citizens shouldn't have access to them.

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

For this to happen, not only the armorer would have to make a mistake , every person present would have to overlook the safety protocols, from the actors, to the director, to the cinematographer, to the producer, and everyone else on the set. It would only have taken one person to ask to have the firearm checked , as appears to be the standard practise, and this tragedy would have been avoided. The only thing left to be determined , is how the legal liability is to be assigned, even if there are no criminal charges, there will likely be law suits, and even if there are no law suits, because of legal settlements , insurance will likely be involved , so someone at some point will likely find someone legally liable. The sad part, is that even though Baldwin is both the person that pulled the trigger and the producer, and he had by far the most control over the situation , because of his wealth and celebrity status, someone else will likely be assigned the blame, and Baldwin will continue using firearms in the movies, while ranting on how dangerous they are, and how other citizens shouldn't have access to them.

we don't know how this will play out as there is so many things we will never be privilidge to know other than social media spew but you are right that it is another black mark on gun ownership and a complete preventable incident.

[CaberTosser]

I look at this comparing it to a construction or industrial site incident. It’s inherent on all workers to be safe, but also for them to point out lack thereof (like the crew who walked out for that very reason). The remaining people who kept working seemed to be the safety problem and it manifested itself in tragedy.


The negligent homicide committed by Baldwin should serve as a means to get some new safety requirements on movie and TV production sets. The entire crew and all actors and directors should have to get firearms safety certification, and refresher courses just like a construction worker needs to renew their fall arrest or confined space entry certification. This should become a boom industry for firearms trainers.

[Big Grey Wolf]

Latest twist in the saga is Baldwin was practicing 'quick draw' when accident occurred. (With a loaded gun)

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by Big Grey Wolf

Latest twist in the saga is Baldwin was practicing 'quick draw' when accident occurred. (With a loaded gun)

So basically he could of been using a lampshade or NDP poster as a target but chose a real person instead…..
I think even lower of him now.

[CaberTosser]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

So basically he could of been using a lampshade or NDP poster as a target but chose a real person instead…..
I think even lower of him now.

You misspelled 'voter'

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by CaberTosser

You misspelled 'voter'

Zing!

[jetboat175]

Baldwin is totally at fault along with his crew of incompetent people. It's very unfortunate that someone has to die over Baldwins stupidity. Regardless the gun apparently needed to be checked by more than one or two people. Baldwin should be held accountable for murder. Never liked the guy in the first place....

[Looper]

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.

I hope I am never at the same range as you. Ever.

He had a gun in his hand and fired it at another human. He is 100% responsible.


Looper

[urban rednek]

Looks like plenty of members are unaware of the changes made to the U.S. OSHA rules in 2012, and how they impact personal responsibility/liability for safety infractions. Penalties that used to be assessed against the "company" can now be assessed against the direct supervisory chain of command all the way up to the CEO.
As the Producer of the film, Baldwin was the equivalent of the senior manager on site. He should see jail time for the safety infractions he allowed his employees to commit, and he actively participated in.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/...h-causes-death

Title 29 U.S.C. § 666(e) provides criminal penalties for any employer who willfully violates a safety standard prescribed pursuant to the Occupational Safety and Health Act, where that violation causes the death of any employee. Four elements must be proved in order to establish a criminal violation of 29 U.S.C. § 666(e). The government must prove that: (1) the defendant is an employer engaged in a business affecting commerce; (2) the employer violated a "standard, rule or order" promulgated pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 665, or any regulation prescribed under the Act; (3) the violation was willful, and (4) the violation caused the death of an employee.

The term "employer" is defined in 29 U.S.C. § 652(5) as "a person engaged in a business affecting commerce who has employees." The term "employer" for civil OSHA purposes generally encompasses only the employing business entity, whether it be a corporation, a partnership or sole proprietorship. See Skidmore v. Travelers Insurance Co., 356 F. Supp, 670, 672 (E.D. La), aff'd, 483 F.2d 67 (5th Cir. 1973).

For purposes of criminal enforcement, however, an individual who is a corporate officer or director, may be an "employer" within the meaning of the Act. United States v. Doig, 950 F.2d 411, 415 (7th Cir. 1991) (dicta). This is particularly the case where the officer's role in operating the company is pervasive as in the case of United States v. Cusack, 806 F.Supp 47 (D.N.J. 1992), where the company's officer ran the corporation as if it were a sole proprietorship. Although corporate officers or directors may be charged as principals, they cannot be charged as aiders and abettors under 18 U.S.C. § 2(a)(1991). See United States v. Doig, 950 F.2d at 415; United States v. Shear, 962 F.2d 488, 493-96 (5th Cir. 1992).

PS We have the same regulations in Canada. Never allow your employees to bypass written safety procedures.

[CaberTosser]

If famous actresses like Lori Loughlin & Felicity Huffman did time for cheating on their children's college admission applications, then Baldwin can do lots more time than they did for his horrible crime.

[Reddin]

Originally Posted by CaberTosser

If famous actresses like Lori Loughlin & Felicity Huffman did time for cheating on their children's college admission applications, then Baldwin can do lots more time than they did for his horrible crime.

The circumstances are almost identical.

[flydude]

Originally Posted by urban rednek

As the Producer of the film, Baldwin was the equivalent of the senior manager on site. He should see jail time for the safety infractions he allowed his employees to commit, and he actively participated in.

Bingo! He better hope Donald Trump isn't voted back in as President before his sentencing.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by urban rednek

Looks like plenty of members are unaware of the changes made to the U.S. OSHA rules in 2012, and how they impact personal responsibility/liability for safety infractions. Penalties that used to be assessed against the "company" can now be assessed against the direct supervisory chain of command all the way up to the CEO.
As the Producer of the film, Baldwin was the equivalent of the senior manager on site. He should see jail time for the safety infractions he allowed his employees to commit, and he actively participated in.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/...h-causes-death



PS We have the same regulations in Canada. Never allow your employees to bypass written safety procedures.

As I have maintained all along, he is the producer, he is ultimately responsible for allowing the safety violations to occur, and instead of stopping the unsafe behaviour, he participated in it.

[North40Rules]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

as i have maintained all along, he is the producer, he is ultimately responsible for allowing the safety violations to occur, and instead of stopping the unsafe behaviour, he participated in it.

big time!

[Grizzly Adams1]

The winners in this are going to be the tabloids , like the National Enquirer, they stand to make a fortune and won't hesitate to exploit it.

Grizz

[58thecat]

The line of responsibility for health and safety issues runs from the Producer to the Production Manager and First Assistant Director and finally on to all crew members who have a duty of care which is recognized by law. If someone can see the potential for an accident and does nothing to try to prevent it, they and their senior colleagues can be held responsible. Safety Supervisors are in charge of preparing a risk assessment which is a detailed document that needs to be done for every film shoot, no matter how small. It lists the possible health and safety risks and hazards that may occur on any film set. It also includes the severity of injury that could occur and the practical control measures to be implemented in order to minimize the risk of injury…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fishnguy]

Originally Posted by Looper

I hope I am never at the same range as you. Ever.

Lol. Ok.

[DiabeticKripple]

Hollywood needs to cast a movie starring Alec Baldwin and Justin Trudeau

[270person]

Originally Posted by Looper

I hope I am never at the same range as you. Ever.

He had a gun in his hand and fired it at another human. He is 100% responsible.


Looper

Except, he really isn't. Doubtful he was aiming what he'd been told was a cold gun at her so it's an accident.

The production company will likely be found negligent but thats a whole different legal process.

[CaberTosser]

Originally Posted by Reddin

The circumstances are almost identical.

I'm only saying that celebrities do get sent to jail. The college admissions scandal crimes, while vastly more intentional and taking much more perseverance to accomplish, still pale in comparison to Baldwin killing that woman. They served time, so he should serve vastly more.

[barsik]

some of the members here don't seem to understand that a firearm is an inanimate object, only a tool for a given task. the moment one holds a firearm is the moment you are responsible. is it his fault that someone was "accidentally" killed? absolutely yes.

[glen moa]

Why live round on the set???

[guysmiley]

Originally Posted by glen moa

Why live round on the set???

The crew was reportedly plinking hours earlier....

[Big Grey Wolf]

Yes, the crew using the same guns for target practice with live ammuntion definitly adds another dimention to this saga.

[Stinky Buffalo]

Originally Posted by Big Grey Wolf

Yes, the crew using the same guns for target practice with live ammuntion definitly adds another dimention to this saga.

Oh wow...

You know, although this is an awful tragedy, there is some good that is coming out of it. I'm having good discussions about firearm safety, handling, and the responsibility of the handler(s).

Even for my kids, although it's been drilled into them to check and double-check, it's a reminder to go over those processes and habits so that we don't get complacent with how we handle our firearms and ammunition.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Big Grey Wolf

Yes, the crew using the same guns for target practice with live ammuntion definitly adds another dimention to this saga.

And as stupid as it was to allow that to happen, the standard protocol of the armorer checking each firearm in front the cast, before anyone else was allowed to handle it, would have prevented the tragedy. Unfortunately, the crew didn't follow the protocol, and the producer didn't force them to, he ignored the protocols himself.

[Okotok]

A bit of a long read but a great explanation from an actual "armorer". (minus the pictures).

On a set you have props.

People think that because the press reported there was a live round in the weapon on the set of Rust it was a lead and copper bullet ready to use, but it was likely not. A live round in film and television production is a chemical, electrical, or mechanical device designed to simulate the use of a weapon. The most common type is a blank. Blanks have killed. At the end of this I will discuss Brandon Lee and the little known cause of his death.


This is a real pistol. It can be a prop when special care is used. If it is on set, it is considered hot both because it can use real ammunition, and because it has not been modified to make it basically able to function as nothing more than a paperweight.


This is a prop barrel for the pistol above. I have three in different colors. One is solid and cannot chamber a round. One is solid and can chamber heroic rounds that look real when the actor jacks the side, but are completely different than real rounds, plus there is a lock that is inserted in front of the striker. The third barrel can fire blanks that are not the same size as 40 cal or 9mm and can cause the action to function - but no flame from the front. Finally the real barrel can chamber and load 40 cal blanks.

An actor cannot just know how all these different devices work. That is why they do not “check the gun.” That is also why people who say they have 40 years of experience with guns and are unwilling to listen and learn are never hired as armorers. Thick heads have no place on set.

When I serve as armorer, rare now days, I configure the weapon using these and many other barrels for each scene and each shot. Unless barrel A, the solid metal one is used, the gun is hot. The solid metal barrel allows the gun to be cold.

That is important. Cold, Hot.


Some shots cannot be captured with hot guns. This would have to be a cold gun both for the people behind the camera, and the camera itself which is expensive. Thus if I hand a weapon to the actor, I would call cold gun.

The actor is not allowed to freelance with the gun, play with it, cock it, pull the trigger, unless the script calls for it and the safety chart says it can be used thus. I hand the actor the gun. The actor does what they are told. In practice for a scene they are often handed cold guns even when a hit gun will be used so the and the camera team can explore how the shot will be made.

If you ever visit a set, people spend a lot of time sitting around. That is both set up time, but also because the director, talent, and producers cannot call live set until the safety issues are worked out. Happens a lot.


See these bullets. All dummy heroic bullets pulled from things like belt loops. If a character is “loading a clip,” they are doing so with dummies they are handed, then removed. Notice the different bullets. If a character is supposed to have a belt full of 7.62mm I clip them a belt of 7.5mm. If their prop gun uses 357/38 blanks then their belt will have 41 special. Besides, an actor can get thrown off of set if they remove a bullet from a prop belt and fool with it. I and most prop masters often include prop bullets on their belts that will actually jam in their prop guns. We learned with Brandon Lee that details are important and that the process must be followed, and the process does not include the talent messing with things unless we give them something they can mess with.


Real barrel, solid heroic barrel. If they have a weapon that chambers 9mm blanks, they will have a magazine filled with 40 cal dummies. Get the idea? If they need to work with the shots they get a cold gun and they are not allowed to open it up because they may be the one who messes it up. I give them the weapon if I am the armorer or the person who hands off the tool. During safety drill they are taught a lot of things, but in the end it is my responsibility.


This is a hot barrel that fires flames out the front without blanks and is fitted to a modified Glock. The barrel is a real Glock barrel and is fitted into a printed body. If I hand this to an actor, it is a “hot gun.” It is hot even though it is not able to even chamber a bullet. if some idiot brass checks the thing they can mess up the mechanism that produces flame and burn their hand. That is not good.


A so called Blue Gun. Painted and dressed up a lot of extras will have these. It is a cold gun.

So, the use of prop weapons in complicated and requires professional attention. You cannot just tell an actor to check the chamber. And that last think you need on set is an know-it-all gun expert who throws shade around and tells everyone how it is done, unless they really know how it is done.

Likely we will find that the incident with Mr. Baldwin comes down to an issue with an inexperienced property person, or a failure to follow rules on set. However, if a cold gun is handed to a talent and they are told cold gun, then the talent is the last person who would be blamed.


By the way, this is what a prop gun read for set looks like. It is the same frame shown before but has its barrel and trigger replaced with a gas action. Brass checking this is a mistake. Most gun “enthusiasts: who proclaim their special ninja bard operations fighter magic user 20th level gun knowledge will have no idea how this thing works. They wont know how to check it for safety. They wont know that they do not know this. They will think as gods gifts to the gun world they are all encompassing experts. If I hand this to you and you brass check it you make it got from “safe in holster / safe in hand” to “dangerous in holster / dangerous in hand” because you wont know the first thing of how it works. This is the prop as it sits on the table. As the gun bubba what are the 19 steps to take this device from cold to hot. As them the steps needed to return it to cold. Maybe a hundred people in the world will know what to do with this. Perhaps a thousand., (And I expect one smart ass to know and post it, but that is ok, if they know they deserve to glory in the knowledge.)


This is Michael Massee. All the people celebrating the death of the shooter on the set of Rust and laughing at Baldwin, taking advantage of a tragedy, seem to be selective in their immoral code of hate. This man is in the same camp as Baldwin. He pulled the trigger of the prop gun that killed Brandon Lee.

Now if I hear one more time some gun expert saying blanks cannot kill and that they have mathematically determined that the bullet was live and Baldwin was in a conspiracy to murder, I will hire someone to push a pie in their face.

When the police inspected the set of the Crow, they found a 44 magnum revolver. The revolver had two brass cartridges in it. One was a standard high power blank. The other was a dummy cartridge with part of a lead 44 calibre bullet, no powder, and no primer.

The remains off the bullet was in Brandon Lee, and was the cause of his death.

Michael Massee was handled the revolver with a dummy for one scene. He did the scene, and kept the weapon. The weapon was after a while taken back and set up for the shooting scene with a blank. The armorer checked the bullet in the dummy to confirm it was dead, and put it back to allow the round to be seen in a tight shot.

At the time the 15 degree rule was not in place, so Massee aimed at Lee but as it turned out it might have gone wrong even if he had followed the new rules. He was well out of the range of the the blank’s normal pattern of fire. Cowboy shooters stand at similar ranges from their audience and each other using blanks to simulate gunfights and pop balloons.

Only this time the problem was the bullet. It was a lead frangible bullet which was formed on a press and inserted into a shot casing. The casing did not have enough grip on the bullet, and the bullet was not sound. It broke off in a very deceptive way that made it look whole, but compared to another round might have been caught.

The broken part stayed in the barrel. The barrel was not checked as it would be today for obstruction.

When the prop fired it propelled the lead fragment at around 400 fps in a tumbling path out of the barrel with no way of predicting its movement as it had no spin from the rifling. It could have chipped paint as it tumbled away. Instead it penetrated Lee in the stomach and tore through his insides - the bullet fragment turned out to be way deadlier then even a normal bullet because it caused massive internal damage before lodging near its spine.

Very few people know this story because the asshats had their day with conspiracy theories of secretly loaded bullets and tongs and satan worshippers, but it was a series of errors and issues with how safety worked in set that killed Lee, and Mr. Massee felt responsible and for years has carried the guilt.

I hope there is an education both in morales and in how sets use weapons here for people.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Okotok

A bit of a long read but a great explanation from an actual "armorer". (minus the pictures).

On a set you have props.

People think that because the press reported there was a live round in the weapon on the set of Rust it was a lead and copper bullet ready to use, but it was likely not. A live round in film and television production is a chemical, electrical, or mechanical device designed to simulate the use of a weapon. The most common type is a blank. Blanks have killed. At the end of this I will discuss Brandon Lee and the little known cause of his death.


This is a real pistol. It can be a prop when special care is used. If it is on set, it is considered hot both because it can use real ammunition, and because it has not been modified to make it basically able to function as nothing more than a paperweight.


This is a prop barrel for the pistol above. I have three in different colors. One is solid and cannot chamber a round. One is solid and can chamber heroic rounds that look real when the actor jacks the side, but are completely different than real rounds, plus there is a lock that is inserted in front of the striker. The third barrel can fire blanks that are not the same size as 40 cal or 9mm and can cause the action to function - but no flame from the front. Finally the real barrel can chamber and load 40 cal blanks.

An actor cannot just know how all these different devices work. That is why they do not “check the gun.” That is also why people who say they have 40 years of experience with guns and are unwilling to listen and learn are never hired as armorers. Thick heads have no place on set.

When I serve as armorer, rare now days, I configure the weapon using these and many other barrels for each scene and each shot. Unless barrel A, the solid metal one is used, the gun is hot. The solid metal barrel allows the gun to be cold.

That is important. Cold, Hot.


Some shots cannot be captured with hot guns. This would have to be a cold gun both for the people behind the camera, and the camera itself which is expensive. Thus if I hand a weapon to the actor, I would call cold gun.

The actor is not allowed to freelance with the gun, play with it, cock it, pull the trigger, unless the script calls for it and the safety chart says it can be used thus. I hand the actor the gun. The actor does what they are told. In practice for a scene they are often handed cold guns even when a hit gun will be used so the and the camera team can explore how the shot will be made.

If you ever visit a set, people spend a lot of time sitting around. That is both set up time, but also because the director, talent, and producers cannot call live set until the safety issues are worked out. Happens a lot.


See these bullets. All dummy heroic bullets pulled from things like belt loops. If a character is “loading a clip,” they are doing so with dummies they are handed, then removed. Notice the different bullets. If a character is supposed to have a belt full of 7.62mm I clip them a belt of 7.5mm. If their prop gun uses 357/38 blanks then their belt will have 41 special. Besides, an actor can get thrown off of set if they remove a bullet from a prop belt and fool with it. I and most prop masters often include prop bullets on their belts that will actually jam in their prop guns. We learned with Brandon Lee that details are important and that the process must be followed, and the process does not include the talent messing with things unless we give them something they can mess with.


Real barrel, solid heroic barrel. If they have a weapon that chambers 9mm blanks, they will have a magazine filled with 40 cal dummies. Get the idea? If they need to work with the shots they get a cold gun and they are not allowed to open it up because they may be the one who messes it up. I give them the weapon if I am the armorer or the person who hands off the tool. During safety drill they are taught a lot of things, but in the end it is my responsibility.


This is a hot barrel that fires flames out the front without blanks and is fitted to a modified Glock. The barrel is a real Glock barrel and is fitted into a printed body. If I hand this to an actor, it is a “hot gun.” It is hot even though it is not able to even chamber a bullet. if some idiot brass checks the thing they can mess up the mechanism that produces flame and burn their hand. That is not good.


A so called Blue Gun. Painted and dressed up a lot of extras will have these. It is a cold gun.

So, the use of prop weapons in complicated and requires professional attention. You cannot just tell an actor to check the chamber. And that last think you need on set is an know-it-all gun expert who throws shade around and tells everyone how it is done, unless they really know how it is done.

Likely we will find that the incident with Mr. Baldwin comes down to an issue with an inexperienced property person, or a failure to follow rules on set. However, if a cold gun is handed to a talent and they are told cold gun, then the talent is the last person who would be blamed.


By the way, this is what a prop gun read for set looks like. It is the same frame shown before but has its barrel and trigger replaced with a gas action. Brass checking this is a mistake. Most gun “enthusiasts: who proclaim their special ninja bard operations fighter magic user 20th level gun knowledge will have no idea how this thing works. They wont know how to check it for safety. They wont know that they do not know this. They will think as gods gifts to the gun world they are all encompassing experts. If I hand this to you and you brass check it you make it got from “safe in holster / safe in hand” to “dangerous in holster / dangerous in hand” because you wont know the first thing of how it works. This is the prop as it sits on the table. As the gun bubba what are the 19 steps to take this device from cold to hot. As them the steps needed to return it to cold. Maybe a hundred people in the world will know what to do with this. Perhaps a thousand., (And I expect one smart ass to know and post it, but that is ok, if they know they deserve to glory in the knowledge.)


This is Michael Massee. All the people celebrating the death of the shooter on the set of Rust and laughing at Baldwin, taking advantage of a tragedy, seem to be selective in their immoral code of hate. This man is in the same camp as Baldwin. He pulled the trigger of the prop gun that killed Brandon Lee.

Now if I hear one more time some gun expert saying blanks cannot kill and that they have mathematically determined that the bullet was live and Baldwin was in a conspiracy to murder, I will hire someone to push a pie in their face.

When the police inspected the set of the Crow, they found a 44 magnum revolver. The revolver had two brass cartridges in it. One was a standard high power blank. The other was a dummy cartridge with part of a lead 44 calibre bullet, no powder, and no primer.

The remains off the bullet was in Brandon Lee, and was the cause of his death.

Michael Massee was handled the revolver with a dummy for one scene. He did the scene, and kept the weapon. The weapon was after a while taken back and set up for the shooting scene with a blank. The armorer checked the bullet in the dummy to confirm it was dead, and put it back to allow the round to be seen in a tight shot.

At the time the 15 degree rule was not in place, so Massee aimed at Lee but as it turned out it might have gone wrong even if he had followed the new rules. He was well out of the range of the the blank’s normal pattern of fire. Cowboy shooters stand at similar ranges from their audience and each other using blanks to simulate gunfights and pop balloons.

Only this time the problem was the bullet. It was a lead frangible bullet which was formed on a press and inserted into a shot casing. The casing did not have enough grip on the bullet, and the bullet was not sound. It broke off in a very deceptive way that made it look whole, but compared to another round might have been caught.

The broken part stayed in the barrel. The barrel was not checked as it would be today for obstruction.

When the prop fired it propelled the lead fragment at around 400 fps in a tumbling path out of the barrel with no way of predicting its movement as it had no spin from the rifling. It could have chipped paint as it tumbled away. Instead it penetrated Lee in the stomach and tore through his insides - the bullet fragment turned out to be way deadlier then even a normal bullet because it caused massive internal damage before lodging near its spine.

Very few people know this story because the asshats had their day with conspiracy theories of secretly loaded bullets and tongs and satan worshippers, but it was a series of errors and issues with how safety worked in set that killed Lee, and Mr. Massee felt responsible and for years has carried the guilt.

I hope there is an education both in morales and in how sets use weapons here for people.

That's all fine and good, unless the firearm was an actual firearm, that someone from the crew had been using actual live rounds in for target practise. And the armorer did not check the firearm immediately before it was handed to Baldwin. This was not a case of a freak accident in spite of following the standard protocols, this was a case of not following the standard protocols at all.