Alec Baldwin Will Be Charged With Involuntary Manslaughter in Rust Shooting

[struth]

ok, Kyle Rittenhouse would have been a better comparison.

was baldwin being chased down the street by a mob trying to kill him? I guess he could raise the defense of self defense…how do you think that will play out here?

 

[Foxfyre]

It's official now


The movie’s prop armorer faces the same charges. The assistant director, responsible for on-set safety, pleads guilty to negligent use of a deadly weapon.

Alec Baldwin Will Be Charged With Involuntary Manslaughter in âRustâ Shooting

The movie’s prop armorer faces the same charges. The assistant director, responsible for on-set safety, pleads guilty to negligent use of a deadly weapon.

www.vanityfair.com

I am not going to rehash the facts of the case which most of us have memorized now. Yes there was negligence. Yes three different people should have checked the gun and apparently did not. Yes there was a tragic shooting and death.

But there was no intent to do harm, no gross negligence above and beyond what any of us might inadvertently do in a moment of absent mindedness. They no doubt live with the guilt of the harm done in every waking moment as we all would. Should there be consequences? Yes. Maybe not allow these people to work on sets with guns. Certainly pay restitution to the family of the victim.

I don't know anything about the other two charged, but I find Alec Baldwin to be an unpleasant person given to nasty and unfair behavior, accusations and slanderous rhetoric, i.e. he is neither a person I admire nor respect.

But I do not think he or the others were negligent to the point of criminality. There are dangerous, deadly, sociopathic people who are running free in this country and nobody is making much if any effort to track them down and get them off the streets.

I cannot think the country will be a more fair or secure or safe place by putting three people in prison for a crime none intended to commit and that the likelihood of them doing anything else to break the law or putting anybody in unreasonable danger is slim to none.

 

[dudmuck]

did either of those folks kill anyone?

 

[marvin martian]

Alec Baldwin has killed more people than 99.999% of legal gun owners in America. He's a menace and needs to be put away for a long, long time.

 

[Ringel05]

Not a fan of him but it’s the armorer’s fault.

It doesn't matter, he was the one who pulled the trigger. Because he was the last one to handle it it was his responsibility to insure the firearm only had blanks in it. He will have his day in court and be judged guilty or innocent. This is the way the law is supposed to work in this type of situation.

I'm actually rather surprised that the NM legal system after having initially declared no charges were to be filed changed direction and are now filing charges. Typically they don't do that. Personally I think he and all involved should have been charged from the get go and let the legal system determine guilt or innocence. That's now going to happen.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Obviously, you have no idea what a "slam dunk" case is?
If it was, charges would have been filed the first week.
Not over 2 years later. ..

Um, how long it takes to charge someone plays absolutely no part in the strength of the case. If anything, it shows that the DA did their due diligence before charging, so they KNOW they can win. They wanted to make sure that Baldwin couldn't claim his right to a speedy trial and the DA not have their ducks in a row. She's ready now.

Hastily charging people before investigations are completed are how people who are guilty of one crime are found not guilty of another in court.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Hastily charging people before investigations are completed are how people who are guilty of one crime are found not guilty of another in court.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Except he wasn't guilty of anything.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Sunni Man said:
Obviously, you have no idea what a "slam dunk" case is?
If it was, charges would have been filed the first week.
Not over 2 years later. ..

It wasn't 2 years later. This happened at the end of Oct '21. That's a little over a year.

 

[basquebromance]

 

[Batcat]

Not a fan of him but it’s the armorer’s fault.

No. Someone hands you a firearm, you check it. If you don’t know how you ask the person who handed you the weapon to show you.

You also never point an unloaded weapon at a person.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Alec Baldwin's denials of pulling trigger in 'Rust' tragedy 'a load of crap,' film weapons expert says​

Steve Wolf, who was involved in investigations into previous accidental movie set shootings including that of Bruce Lee's son Brandon in 1993, told Fox News there is no way the particular gun Baldwin was handling could have fired without him putting pressure on the trigger.

Alec Baldwin's denials of pulling trigger in 'Rust' tragedy 'a load of crap,' film weapons expert says

 

[Chillicothe]

I'm quite OK with a charge against the armorer and Baldwin.
The courts will figure out culpability and punishment.

I am a supporter of 'strict liability' for any harm a firearm does.
The responsible parties here are: Baldwin, the Armorer, and the owner-of-record of that firearm.

While you can benefit from the good a firearm you own does.....you are also on the hook for any harm it causes. If you are the 'owner-of-record' you carry a burden of responsibility and liability. Regardless, who pulls the trigger. If your gun is stolen and then is used to kill the 7/11 clerk.....you share in the liability, along with whoever stole it, along with whoever pulled the trigger.

Owning a firearm is a H-U-G-E.....responsibility. And our society and our laws need to catch up with that reality.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Alec Baldwin ‘most likely’ will ‘settle’ before a trial; if not, there will be ‘a battle’ in court: experts​

MSN

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

No. Someone hands you a firearm, you check it. If you don’t know how you ask the person who handed you the weapon to show you.

You also never point an unloaded weapon at a person.

But I thought those "prop" guns are not supposed to be actual firearms. Am I mistaken?

 

[DudleySmith]

Not a fan of him but it’s the armorer’s fault.

Yes. Jail time would serve no purpose and address nothing. If people are so hot to send somebody to jail for their politics go get Hunter Biden and the rest of Joe's family helping to launder money from their extortion rackets. Nail the Clintons for theirs while they're at it. Baldwin just does dope and makes movies; the others run giant criminal enterprises.

 

[DudleySmith]

But I thought those "prop" guns are not supposed to be actual firearms. Am I mistaken?

Yes you are , as always.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Yes you are , as always.

As always? When else was I mistaken?

 

[Batcat]

But I thought those "prop" guns are not supposed to be actual firearms. Am I mistaken?

I have never worked on a movie set. I believe they do use real firearms in many movies, For example Dirty Harry’s .44 magnum was a real gun. It is onl display in the NRA Museum.

https://www.nramuseum.org/guns/the-galleries/modern-firearms-1950-to-present/case-53-arms-of-law-enforcement/dirty-harry's-smith-wesson-44-magnum.aspx

 

[DudleySmith]

As always? When else was I mistaken?

When were you never mistaken? Well, you deliberately lie a lot, which aren't technically 'mistakes', so there's that.