Alec Baldwin: All criminal charges against actor over fatal shooting on Rust set are dropped

there are a lot of factors involved, and that means a lot of reasons for reasonable doubt in a criminal trial. All of that will come out in court if it went to trial. However, civilly, I do think Alec Baldin is liable for civil negligence to the family of the person who was killed in a wrongful death suit.

If we take conservative logic on this, then anyone who plays football should be arrested for assault because that is what basically happens on the football field when they tackle, block, or push another player to make a play. But we don't do that do we? And if there are training accidents with soldiers and they are using simunition, which can kill, then that soldier is not going to face UCMJ charges of murder, would they? No, they would not. Might be displaced, but no charges would be brought. And the same is with this movie set.

I know conservatives don't like Alec Baldwin, mostly because of his political stances, but the very same conservatives would be singing a different tune if it was James Wood who did this and it happened to his as he was the one who pulled the trigger. I will guarantee you that most of the conservatives would be saying accidents and such. I will still maintain the same stance whether it is Alec Baldwin or James Woods under the exact facts and circumstances.

This is really not based on name recognition, or politics, or anything else. I think politics is involved in charging Alec Baldwin to begin with, but it is not the primary reason why he was charged or why the case was dropped.

 

You’re probably right. Immediately after this shooting I saw where one movie company was going to add muzzle flashes in post production and have zero bullets on the set.

 

Of course, his arrest was political. Good to see you admit that. Now, how about DJT? When you're ready to go there, you could start another thread on indictments based on grimy politics. Oh wait, there's already enough threads on the left's grimy politics. Take it to whatever one you want.

 

Disagree it's that nobody wants to be the person that puts Baldwin in jail.

It's affluenza.

So it'll be his insurance that foots the bill.

It's just logic is not partisan.

This braindead stream of nonsense is your brainchild and it defies any logic. I'm not supposed you cooked it up

I'm not addressing it other than to mock it.

Not playing your petty little partisan game.

I think you only see the world bent though you're partisan lens. I'm sorry for you that must be exhausting.

 

There are plenty of guns that look very much like they are modeled after the real thing but are prop guns used in Hollywood. In other words accurate reproduction replica guns.

 

So now you believe that all actors that use a gun prop take a firearms safety course, be able to identify a mock weapon and be able to tell variations of ammo type even though it is the responsibility of designated personnel to do all of that. Individuals that are supposed to be highly trained.

Ok, we disagree (as usual)

And the courts also disagree
IMO the armorer is at fault

 

I think that Alec Baldwin depended on the professional guidance of the designated personnel that handles and manages said weapons. There were supposed to be no live guns on set. He had no reason to believe that it was not only a real gun but one that was loaded.

 

no I think actors who use real firearms on the set should know the absolute basics it wasn't the prop gun because someone died.

what makes you think that someone can kill someone with a mock gun?

no this time no it's not that we just disagree you keep thinking that Alec Baldwin shot and killed somebody with a prop it wasn't a prop it was a real firearm.

Well the courts disagree because they don't want to be the ones that sentence asked Baldwin.

And I agree with you in this case the armor is partially at fault. She didn't pull the trigger so she's not completely at fault again Baldwin should have checked.

 

Oh now the left doesn't believe in firearms training?

 

and now he has to live with having killed somebody.

I'm willing to put money on it if I talked to Alec Baldwin frankly he would say I wish I had checked.

And I'm willing to bet if you ever picks up a gun again and he doesn't want to kill somebody with it he'll check.

There's a reason why this is the first thing you learn when dealing with firearms.

and now he pays the consequences for his foolishness when you kill somebody I'm not speaking from experience thank God but when you kill somebody that stays with you. And every time he closes his eyes the .rest of his days he would see the person he killed and there are people out there that lost a sister or a mother daughter whatever because of his carelessness and he has to live with that not the armorer. He pulled the trigger.

But I do agree with you on one thing the armorer is responsible too.

 

He doesn't even realize it wasn't a prop gun. He thinks that they were using mock-ups or fake guns and that Baldwin was totally clueless on this.

From what I heard Baldwin was being a total ass on this set. Is apparently he's not a very pleasant person to be around I don't know I've never met the man. And I was wondering if this was done on purpose.

It wouldn't work on me because I'd be smart enough to check the gun take the cartridges out and look at them and make sure they're blanks cuz I don't want to kill anybody no matter how angry I am.

 

I haven't read anything about this but can the gun be cocked first by hand?

 

....

 

When I first heard about this story, I always felt like Baldwin should have gotten a little bit of punishment. I hoped he would not be given a lot of punishment, because that would be kind of pointless and unnecessarily harsh, but I thought he did deserve some punishment. Like maybe 5 to 14 months.

Very oftentimes the "justice" system views things with an all-or-nothing mentality. So if they don't want to punish a person all the way, they'll often decide not to punish them at all.

 

I personally don't view it that way. The armorer is about equally guilty to Baldwin, in my view.
The armorer could not have predicted that anyone would be stupid enough to point the gun at a person on the set and pull the trigger.
Furthermore it becomes hard to prove absolutely that the armorer knew the gun was loaded or that it was all their fault. It is possible someone else may have been to blame for loading real bullets into the gun.

 

Leftists in positions of power never get charged.

 

maybe we could require gun licenses like a car licenses to operate a gun in public

 

We've been doing that for years. Notice how many guns get shot in movies and there's no recoil. You can tell when its being done correctly or faked.

 

If the hammer is pulled back, and was inadvertently released, it could.
Take a revolver, load it, pull the hammer back, and then drop it on the floor. See what happens.

 

Oh hell no. It was the conservative talking point on Fox with all the opinionated programming, the social media apps, and even some pro 2a websites who opinioned that Alec Baldwin should go to jail for this. Second, it is not affluenza here. There was enough reasonable doubt once you put in all the factors that will come into play. In both charges, you have to prove intent. That gets extremely murky when on a movie set doesn't it. It is not like Alec Baldwin was in front of his home in New Mexico, pulled out a gun, and fired at the first person he sees. And it is those little details that make all the difference.

When a person is a respondent, your insurance company generally does not foot the bill. They will provide counsel, but you have to pay. Alec Baldwin probably has an attorney or a law firm on retainer for this sort of thing. It is part of normal business practice in Hollywood whether one is an actor, producer, director, or such. It is called professional liability insurance.

Finally, you are about as partisan as one can get. Logic is not your forte, neither is history, science and any other subject therein. So, stop projecting yourself onto others.

 

This particular model requires the hammer be cocked back by hand and won’t fire without the hammer being fully cocked.

 

It’s not so black and white. The question is whether it was reasonable for him to rely on the people who handed him the gun. Reasonable minds can disagree on that. That’s why I wasn’t surprised when they first announced they were charging him, nor am I surprised they are now dropping the charges.

I figure they decided to focus their prosecutorial efforts on the individual most responsible for this incident (the person who handed him a loaded gun with live ammo).

 

I think there’s a lot of blame to go around and questions that need to be asked. How did live rounds make it onto the set and into the gun? You would think the person who loaded the gun got all of the rounds out of the same box of blanks, right? So how did live rounds get into that box. Could the person who loaded the gun not tell the difference between a blank and a live round?

The stories I’ve seen claimed the producers were being extremely frugal and tried to keep costs down, so they hired an armorer who was pretty much a novice at her job and probably did it on the cheap. Also, why did they even use blanks for a rehearsal? Who knows, certainly not me.

In the end it was Baldwin who pulled the trigger while pointing the gun at someone. I don’t know what ultimate degree of accountability he should have, but he should have some.

 

I'm not interested in your partisan nonsense.

You can't win the argument so you blame what stops your thought process you think everyone else has the same disability.

You aren't talking about the subject anymore you're just talking about how much you hate Republicans.

I feel sorry for you that you can only see the world warped through your partisan prism.

 

Good, he has no case to answer, because;
1. In a million years no actor on a movie set ever expected to be handed a gun with a live round in it, even John Erik Hexum and Brandon Lee were killed by blank rounds.
2. People say "Oh he should have checked the gun". I say, for what? He expected the cylinders to be loaded with dummy prop rounds, unless he has x-ray vision how could he have known one was live?
3. He didn't pull the trigger, old style wild west pistols can fire if you thumb back the hammer whilst resting your finger on it. If you doubt it, there are a million vids on Youtube.
4. People say he should have rested his finger on the trigger guard as is good practice but he was playing a drunken Wild West gunfighter, not a SWAT team member, his character wouldn't have done that.
5. He pointed the gun at people because that was the shot they were trying to do, think Clint Eastwood in Dirty Harry.

So I'm glad this farce is over for him.