Baldwin Update

That was one of the more cringeworthy interviews I have seen in sometime. There were a couple of things I was taught at a young age about handling a gun one you never point a gun at another person unless you intend to use it two you treat any gun you are handling as if it's loaded rather it is or not.
 
When the hammer is down, it makes contact with the firing pin. A sharp bump on the hammer could cause it to fire.
The last notch is full cock. At any of these positions, if the trigger is pulled and the hammer released, the gun will fired. Which means that Baldwin is lying. He did pull the trigger.

Thank you, JG. The overlooked POINT in all of this is that GUNS CAN'T FIRE BY THEMSELVES. For any gun to fire, energy must be imparted into the firearm, either by squeezing the trigger or by pulling back, hitting, tripping, or releasing the trigger directly. Either way, energy is either added into the gun by a human before or during the discharge to make it go off. Whatever the case, Baldwin had no business even picking up a gun if he is too dense to even think to check it for loading and type (a real bullet is easily distinguished from a dummy round by design), much less either squeezing the trigger or mishandling a loaded gun that is in some stage of cocking.

Whatever the case, if the gun went off in Baldwin's hands, he affected it in some way to release the stored energy.

Then there is the matter of aiming it at another person when the scene did not even require it. Baldwin failed at every level of protocol designed into proper firearm handling which prevents firearm accidents, and I'm appalled that not only do some continue to argue in his defense but that no formal charges have been filed and he not arrested for manslaughter, particularly when the Left have been harping for ages the dangers of firearms, and now that they have a textbook case of firearm abuse to pounce on, they are not charging forward to prosecute.

But of course-- -- -- the guilty is one of their own. Had Trump accidentally shot someone at a gun demo, he would be a murderer to all in the media with calls for life in prison with the anti-gun lobby denouncing guns as too dangerous for society!

Where is the anti-gun lobby now?

Zzzzzz.
 
Not really. Like you say, for fanning to work the trigger is ALREADY pulled.

It's a semantical thing. Maybe subtle, but real. If you watch the interview, he clearly demonstrates that he was fanning the hammer. You can do that on a single action revolver with the trigger constantly pulled UNTIL you reach the right "russian roulette" chamber in which the live round was. He even demonstrates that he was DOING THIS before the director asked him to "do it again".

So -- since he's an arrogant dumbass that shouldn't be handling a weapon, it's quite possible he already "pulled the trigger" and HELD it while they were talking in between takes on the camera. TO HIS arrogant dumbass brain, "pulling the trigger" means simply that in his dumbass mind, that gun should not have gone off because for THAT ROUND -- he didn't MOVE the trigger.

Makes NOT a lot of diff -- but what it does do is illustrate the neccessity for giving a fuck about knowing safety on every gun you intend to pick up. He shouldn't ASKED somebody about that before DOING the interview.
 
Bottom line...there never should have been a live round for that gun on the set...no less in the gun.

If Baldwin is somehow implicated in that round being on set...then he has a problem.

Otherwise...nope

Just a bunch of internet knowitalls mouthing off
 
Bottom line...there never should have been a live round for that gun on the set...no less in the gun.

If Baldwin is somehow implicated in that round being on set...then he has a problem.

Otherwise...nope

Just a bunch of internet knowitalls mouthing off
Baldwin was handed a gun. It was his responsibility to follow these rules:

  1. Treat all guns as if they are always loaded.
  2. Never let the muzzle point at anything that you are not willing to destroy.
  3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target and you have made the decision to shoot.
  4. Be sure of your target and what is behind it.
He violated all 4 rules, and that killed one person and wounded another.
 
Charged as an individual criminalty - maybe you're right. But he was the FREAKING PRODUCER and ultimately responsible for the safety of the crew. We STILL dont know about walk-offs that happened that day and WHY..
His exposure is as a producer. That's it
 
Baldwin was handed a gun. It was his responsibility to follow these rules:

  1. Treat all guns as if they are always loaded.
  2. Never let the muzzle point at anything that you are not willing to destroy.
  3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target and you have made the decision to shoot.
  4. Be sure of your target and what is behind it.
He violated all 4 rules, and that killed one person and wounded another.
Yada yada yada.

Thanks for your opinion. It don't work that way on a movie set
 
Charged as an individual criminalty - maybe you're right. But he was the FREAKING PRODUCER and ultimately responsible for the safety of the crew. We STILL dont know about walk-offs that happened that day and WHY..
It is not as if Hollywood is new to gun fights and scenes. They have been shooting westerns and stuff since the 1920s. That today such a callous mistake could be made bypassing so many safety checks that by now should be IRON-CLAD is almost unthinkable w/o the most callous of gun safety violations.
 
His exposure is as a producer. That's it

If he violated his own production rules by conducting gun exercises without the proper personnel on the set -- I'm sure the UNIONS could hold him personally responsible in a CIVIL case. Even if SOMEONE ELSE was firing the gun this would be true. He's CIVILLILY libel from here to Timbuktu.

Edited: Let me take that back. I have no opinion on any of that -- until WE know who brought live rounds to the set and WHY the "armorer" and others WALKED OFF. Dont think that StephanPuss asked about any of that in the interview.
 
Last edited:
It is not as if Hollywood is new to gun fights and scenes. They have been shooting westerns and stuff since the 1920s. That today such a callous mistake could be made bypassing so many safety checks that by now should be IRON-CLAD is almost unthinkable w/o the most callous of gun safety violations.

It's lower budgets and less professionalism of some kind. I think the old Studio system where everything was produced with VETERAN directors/producers, probably would never make ALL the mistakes we saw here.
 
Bottom line...there never should have been a live round for that gun on the set...no less in the gun.

If Baldwin is somehow implicated in that round being on set...then he has a problem.

Otherwise...nope

Just a bunch of internet knowitalls mouthing off



No, the bottom line is the dumbass shouldn't have pointed the gun at the woman.
 

It seems the firearm Baldwin used on the set of Rust was a 'smart' gun.

(smart enough to be able to pull it's own trigger.)

"Alec Baldwin says he "didn't pull the trigger" on the gun that killed Halyna Hutchins on the set of his movie Rust."

"When asked if he pulled the trigger on the gun that killed Hutchins, the cinematographer who worked on Rust, Baldwin said, "The trigger wasn't pulled. I didn't pull the trigger. I would never point a gun at someone and pull the trigger on them, never.""

WORST excuse I've ever heard.
But his weeping - THAT was real!

His acting coach?

Jussie Smollet.

Take THAT, Trumpsters!

:thewave:
 

Forum List

Back
Top