Alec Baldwin to be charged with involuntary manslaughter in ‘Rust’ movie set shooting

if the gun went off right after he pulled the hammer back then this is reasonable.

Given they should have all the evidence they need to know exactly what happened, it should all come out eventually.

 

Combat weapons should never have been on the set at all. If it somehow appeared there, then this is the mistake of the prop, not the actor.

 

Agreed but that's not down to him, that's down to the armourer

 

But Baldwin is also the producer thus responsible to hire competent armourer and apparently he did not.

 

yes, in a civil trial he will lose imo, criminally though, I doubt it, due to the fact he did hire an armorer - did he have a reasonable expectation that the gun was not loaded, that it was just a prop, I think so

 

The simplest suggestion: Baldwin decided to save money and hired an incompetent person.
The second assumption is that someone wanted to frame Baldwin and bribed the armorer to load the gun with live ammunition.

 

An inexperienced one and there are allegations of cutting corners. We will just have to wait and see.

 

According to Baldwin himself, the only person an actor should ever accept a weapon from is the armorer - which Baldwin failed to do. He took the gun from someone who was neither trained nor qualified to verify its safety. Had he simply followed that basic protocol, Mrs. Hutchins would be alive. Here is some relevant legal analysis from a practicing attorney attorney. At approximately 16:50, It's interesting to hear George Clooney throw Baldwin under the bus.

 

Bring on the memes...

 

What if they were having an affair and she threatened to go public?

 

Or he was having an affair with her husband and just wanted her out of the way.

 

And the inept prosecutors concede they stuffed up. Charges properly reduced.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-21/alec-baldwin-charges-downgraded-for-rust-shooting/102001560

 

Frankly I don't think anyone should be charged in this. It was an accident.

 

I think dumping the enhancement charge is fair.

 

I think there was a lack of clear responsibility in this situation. It's not entirely clear who should have been responsible.
What the actor Baldwin did was a stupid type of thing to do, and everyone would agree it would have been reckless in any other type of situation.

The person who was assigned duty as the armorer on set also has an explanation why what happened could have been an understandable accident. So all the blame is not on the armorer. Unlike other actors on set, the person who was shot had never consented to be a shot at, which I think should be considered. Baldwin has some responsibility for putting the victim in that situation. It wasn't like Baldwin was just shooting another actor as part of the script.

We also cannot prove that there was not some other person who might have put real ammunition into the gun, either recklessly or for some malevolent reason. It's not impossible that the armorer might not have been to blame at all, although he probably was.

A have a lot of sympathy for Baldwin, and do not see any reason why he should be excessively punished, but I do think he should be sent to prison for 6 to 9 months to send a message (especially to the rest of Hollywood type liberals) that what he did was reckless and stupid, and it ended up resulting in someone dying.
How would the victim's family feel if the man who pointed a gun at and shot the victim, stupidly and without any real justifiable reason, got absolutely no time in prison?

 

"Fair??????"

It is the LAW!

 

So....how'd I go Folks? Have events proven me correct and the same events proven so many so utterly wrong?

Huh?

 

Audiences want authenticity, or at least the appearance of authenticity. That's why.

 

No, not at all.

You don't get how this works do you?

It is indisputable that Baldwin violated one of the staples of gun safety. That the charges have been dropped does not, in any way, disprove that fact.

Rich democrat gets charges dropped isn't exactly shocking news.

 

If you want to ignore context sure. But you can't ignore context ( that is ~ reality,) and that is why this charge was never going to stick. I have posted many relevant example up there^^^^^. Baldwin was entitled to rely on the armourer doing the very job...the ONLY ONE job...they had.

 

100% false.

There is no situation in which this staple of gun safety can be ignored. You will never see any gun safety rule list, gun safety instructor, etc EVER say there's a situation where it can be ignored. If you want to know why....THIS CASE is why.

Sorry, you are wrong....again.

 

This 'staple of gun safety' seems to ignore what actually happens in real life. A person whose very JOB it is, the only job they have, the sole reason they exist on set, is to ensure all weapons are safe...hands to an actor what is supposed to be a blank shooter, and somehow you expect the actor to make the armourer redundant, and foist an onus on him to assume the armourer is incompetent cannot do his job.

Bullshit.

 

Yes, it's exactly what I expect as do all gun safety experts.

You want to know why?

THIS STORY IS WHY!!!!

Someone is dead because baldwin did what you're saying is ok to do. Maybe if what you think is ok gets someone killed...just maybe you're wrong and it's not actually ok. Just a thought.

 

No, someone is dead because a paid professional failed to do THE very job they were being paid to do, the ONLY job they had.