18 minutes ago, Toastrel said:

I am in 100% agreement that the AD is at fault. The protocols were not followed and somebody died.

The fact that an experienced actor did not bother to open the gun to check the load (even if it has a blank, there are protocols for shooting them) is part of the problem.

Either the person handing him the gun SHOWS him it is not loaded, or he should check.

This is responsible adult behavior 101.

Until the day that the person who pulls the trigger is ALWAYS held accountable there will be continue to be idiotic and totally avoidable tragedies such as this 

1 hour ago, Dave Moss said:

That’s not really an actor’s job.  But you already knew that.

Yes it is. Being an Actor doesn't absolve them from responsibility with firearms. But you already knew that.

1 hour ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

yes. 

sorry, gun safety doesn't stop at a hollywood diva like baldwin. 

Nope. Baldwin is not required to open the barrel and check the rounds himself. That is the prop master/armorer's job not the actors.

2 hours ago, sameaglesfan said:

You're so dopey you must be twins.

Yeah right. Baldwin is not required to check each round individually, that is not his job. The armorer is responsible for that and failed at her job.

Just now, jsdarkstar said:

Yeah right. Baldwin is not required to check each round individually, that is not his job. The armorer is responsible for that and failed at her job.

Humans are RESPONSIBLE for their actions. You should learn this quickly.

18 hours ago, Toastrel said:

He did not know by his own choice.

He could have checked, but he CHOSE not to do so.

True, but he isn't required to check the rounds, because it's not his job.

1 minute ago, jsdarkstar said:

True, but he isn't required to check the rounds, because it's not his job.

Yes, it is. As a responsibly human, either YOU ARE SMART AND CHECK THE GUN or you are a Fing careless idiot who might kill somebody.

 

Again, I urge you to learn the lesson of personal responsibility.

 

18 hours ago, binkybink77 said:

Yeah that’s the problem - you aren’t supposed to rely on others. Even big hot shot actors are supposed to check themselves and are trained to do so. You rely on others to ensure the weapon you’re pulling the trigger on is safe and you deserve the criticism you get when you SHOOT SOMEONE IN THE FACE. Love all these gun control, anti-NRA libs coming to this dudes defense. Maybe if Alec had taken an NRA sponsored safety course this woman would still be alive. 

Uh huh, is that right. So then what law requires the actor to check? And who trained Baldwin to do so? 

Just now, jsdarkstar said:

 

Uh huh, is that right. So when what law requires the actor to check? And who trained Baldwin to do so? 

THE LAW OF NOT BEING A CARELESS A-HOLE PLAYING WITH A POSSIBLY LOADED GUN.

9 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said:

Yeah right. Baldwin is not required to check each round individually, that is not his job. The armorer is responsible for that and failed at her job.

You seem to be clueless as to human responsibility and decency - if it is not codified.

If you think every actor is checking the weapon before each use then you've never been on set.  There's a system of trust built into any production.  Everyone expects electrical to do their job to prevent electrical fires/other electrical malfunctions.  Everyone expects gaffers to do their job to prevent c-stands from falling on someone's head.  Everyone expects actors to learn their lines and carry the film on-screen.  They also expect the armorers to safely load the gun and make it clear that it's safe for use.  

2 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

If you think every actor is checking the weapon before each use then you've never been on set.  There's a system of trust built into any production.  Everyone expects electrical to do their job to prevent electrical fires/other electrical malfunctions.  Everyone expects gaffers to do their job to prevent c-stands from falling on someone's head.  Everyone expects actors to learn their lines and carry the film on-screen.  They also expect the armorers to safely load the gun and make it clear that it's safe for use.  

Wow, have you? Did you work on a movie with @dawkins4prez?

 

Ok. I am beginning to get it. 

This article makes a lot of sense to me. 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/actor-cws-roswell-mexico-says-193028983.html

An actor on the CW's 'Roswell, New Mexico' says he is always shown the inside of a gun right before filming a scene to confirm it's not loaded

• CW actor Michael Vlamis said he's always shown a gun's empty chamber before filming.

• His show has filmed near where someone died by gunfire on the set of the Alec Baldwin movie, "Rust."

• "On my show, Baldwin would've seen the inside of the gun," Vlamis said.

Michael Vlamis, who stars in the CW drama "Roswell, New Mexico," said on the set of his show he is always shown the inside of a gun's chamber to prove it's not loaded right before shooting a scene with it.

"Roswell" shoots in Santa Fe, New Mexico, including on occasion at the Bonanza Creek Ranch, the same location where actor Alec Baldwin discharged a Colt revolver, killing one person and injuring another, while filming the western movie "Rust" last week.

Vlamis, who is the brother of this reporter, told Insider he sometimes has to handle a revolver while portraying his "Roswell" character, Michael Guerin, a cowboy alien pretending to be human. He said every single time a gun is used on set, a multistep safety protocol is followed.

Max Bozeman, the assistant prop master for "Roswell" who has worked in the industry for more than 30 years, told Insider that live rounds or blanks are never used on the show, and that any gun-related sounds or effects are added in post-production. He emphasized that they "never, ever, ever" bring live rounds on set.

Before filming a scene that involves a gun, the prop master or assistant prop master brings the gun to the assistant director, opening and spinning the revolver chamber or dropping the clip or magazine to show the gun is not loaded.

• They also open up the side of the gun and shine a flashlight down the barrel to show there's light coming through the other end, confirming there is nothing in it.

• The assistant director then announces to everyone that there's a "cold weapon" on set, which signals the gun does not have live rounds.

• The prop master will then bring the gun over to the actors. Vlamis said they always open the chamber to show him the gun is not loaded, and that they will even let him turn the chamber around himself for additional confirmation.

"On my show, Baldwin would've seen the inside of the gun," Vlamis said, adding that if he was handed a gun without being shown the empty chamber, "1000% I wouldn't take it."

Bozeman said he also shows the empty chamber or magazine to other actors participating in the scene, even if they are not handling the gun, or any crew members that would like to check it. If the scene involves the gun being pointed toward the camera, he'll show it to the camera crew as well.

Another actor on "Roswell," Nathan Parsons, frequently handles a prop gun in his portrayal of Max Evans, a police officer who is also an alien. Parsons' pistol is actually an airsoft gun, and it's also never loaded. Still, when it's brought out on set the same protocol is followed as for Vlamis' revolver.

Bozeman said 99% of the time the guns used on the show are airsoft guns, but that it's the industry standard to treat them as real guns.

Vlamis said when he first held a gun on a set it felt "strange," but that he feels "very confident after that process that it's safe."

He called what happened on the "Rust" set "insane," and said it's "going make me triple check from now on even after everyone does protocol."

"It just goes to show there's so much human error. We just forget that when we're in a 'safe environment,'" Vlamis said. "This is work. Work is supposed to be safe."

Bozeman agreed, saying he takes "great offense" to what happened on "Rust" because "there are so many steps that should've been taken beforehand that clearly weren't."

"Nothing should be happening like this," he said. "We work for multibillion dollar companies every day and our safety should never be in question."

2 minutes ago, Kz! said:

Wow, have you? Did you work on a movie with @dawkins4prez?

I don't understand the reference, but yeah, I've been on set plenty.  I work in post-production.

 

28 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said:

Nope. Baldwin is not required to open the barrel and check the rounds himself. That is the prop master/armorer's job not the actors.

if you ever attended a gun safety course, you'd know how wrong this opinion is. 

 

 

23 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said:

True, but he isn't required to check the rounds, because it's not his job.

Again, He is culpable under the law for negligence no matter what an employment contract or job description might say. That's not my job is not a satisfactory defense. You take a firearm into your hand, you assume it's loaded with real ammo, and you CHECK IT because you are now in charge of that weapon.. It's more than gun safety 101, it's common sense. 

1 minute ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

 

if you ever attended a gun safety course, you'd know how wrong this opinion is. 

 

 

True. I get that. Now.

3 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

I don't understand the reference, but yeah, I've been on set plenty.  I work in post-production.

Oh. OK.

A lot of arguing generalities here.  I don’t think you can generalize and say anything is always someone’s fault.  Depends on the specific facts.  
 

for example, if you say it is never the actors fault.  Well we can never see into an actors mind, but the aforementioned ethical rule creates a situation where an actor with bad intent can just choose not to check the weapon even though sometimes he does anyway 

14 minutes ago, PoconoDon said:

Again, He is culpable under the law for negligence no matter what an employment contract or job description might say. That's not my job is not a satisfactory defense. You take a firearm into your hand, you assume it's loaded with real ammo, and you CHECK IT because you are now in charge of that weapon.. It's more than gun safety 101, it's common sense. 

Do we have any case law on this?  Is it negligence?

Gun control, gun control, gun control!!!

 

”well technically actors aren’t required to check by law”. 
 

 

why in the F would you exempt actors from this safety measure? Not to mention I’ve read several accounts stating actors ARE trained on gun safety and checking the weapon for live ammo anyway. Just because actors are accustomed to having people wipe their asses for them doesn’t mean they should also get a pass with safety protocols that everyone else follows with deadly weapons. 

8 minutes ago, binkybink77 said:

Gun control, gun control, gun control!!!

 

”well technically actors aren’t required to check by law”. 
 

 

why in the F would you exempt actors from this safety measure? Not to mention I’ve read several accounts stating actors ARE trained on gun safety and checking the weapon for live ammo anyway. Just because actors are accustomed to having people wipe their asses for them doesn’t mean they should also get a pass with safety protocols that everyone else follows with deadly weapons. 

When someone goes hunting, they don't have a team of people on staff checking and double checking the safety of the gun they use.  They also don't have the expectation that the gun, that again has been checked by multiple people, doesn't have live ammo in it.  Which is why they have a different amount of culpability in a situation like this than someone who was using a gun for sport.  

Let's not forget that Alec Baldwin has fired guns before, in the movies. So it's not like he is unfamiliar with the safety rules. Should he have checked the gun? Yes. Absolutely. My opinion has now changed, after reading more about it.

2 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said:

Let's not forget that Alec Baldwin has fired guns before, in the movies. So it's not like he is unfamiliar with the safety rules. Should he have checked the gun? Yes. Absolutely. My opinion has now changed, after reading more about it.

He absolutely has an amount of culpability here (and will lose his a** in a lawsuit for sure), but the question is how much.  It's a completely different situation than a person that's not on-set discharging their weapon and killing somebody, considering a line of people were supposed to check it along the way.  

Also, there's the biggest question mark here.  Who in the world would put a live round (or multiple live rounds) into a prop gun?  That's where you have to look at intent.

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

He absolutely has an amount of culpability here (and will lose his a** in a lawsuit for sure), but the question is how much.  It's a completely different situation than a person that's not on-set discharging their weapon and killing somebody, considering a line of people were supposed to check it along the way.  

Also, there's the biggest question mark here.  Who in the world would put a live round (or multiple live rounds) into a prop gun?  That's where you have to look at intent.

Agreed. He was also a Producer. That makes him even more liable, civilly. Her lost wages over her life time will be a huge number. The person who loaded the gun with a live round is definitely the ultimate question to answer. 

It's possible one could speculate that a disgruntled union worker who walked off the job may have done it, to see if the armorer would find it. I'd hate to think that's true, but they found boxes of live ammo on the set. How did the live rounds make onto the set? Who purchased it? etc. I'm sure the investigation will answer many of those questions.