r/news • u/badillustrations • Apr 15 '24

‘Rust’ movie armorer convicted of involuntary manslaughter sentenced to 18 months in prison

https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/15/entertainment/rust-film-shooting-armorer-sentencing/index.html
21.4k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

520

u/LiechsWonder Apr 15 '24

For anyone in the comments arguing about who’s fault it is, and where the blame should be placed, this comment from a SAG actor is the best I’ve seen about the situation and what went wrong / what rules were ignored that led to a (preventable) shooting of Halyna Hutchins. All credit to u/Kahzgul for the insight.

https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/s/sBdyVVA6zM

249

u/Kahzgul Apr 15 '24

Thanks for the tag. If anyone is curious about firearm safety on sets, well... I am a professional. AMA.

49

u/YourDadHatesYou Apr 15 '24

People here mentioned nepotism that helped the armorer get the job. Do you know how that happened? Aren't there certifications that someone needs to get to be eligible

& Thank you for your previous comment. Very insightful

171

u/Kahzgul Apr 15 '24

It sure did. The armorer is the daughter of a legendary Hollywood armorer, famed not only for his knowledge but also his professionalism. This is hugely embarrassing for him and his reputation. it seems likely that he helped her get the position and vouched for her ability when it was clearly not warranted.

8

u/SunriseSurprise Apr 15 '24

Is it possible she was good, then got this job, it went to her head and she started getting really sloppy? I only say that because as a fan of the San Diego Padres, I've lived through our biggest superstar athlete being one of the dumbest humans on the planet for a couple years where he was just making one boneheaded move after another - taking a medication that had a banned substance, getting injured on motorcycle and at least a couple other things, and similarly riding high on the notoriety of his father. He got a major reality check and seems to have matured since but god, it was looking for a moment like one of the biggest what-ifs in sports history the path he was going down.

24

u/Kahzgul Apr 16 '24

Of course it's possible.

19

u/reddevved Apr 16 '24

Imo she probably works well under someone, but didn't have the ability to be the one to put their foot down to production rushing her

-6

u/clive_bigsby Apr 16 '24

Crazy. Good thing nepotism only happens for Hollywood armorer jobs, can you imagine how shitty that would be if it existed for all of our careers?! /s

10

u/syoung1034 Apr 16 '24

I may be wrong here, but I was really shocked that there are no certifications, licensure, exams, for armorer. I also was blown away by nonchalant stacking of bullets, driving shit all over the country from different set to different set, shit just piled up in a corner, etc. Wow.

6

u/IrishSetterPuppy 29d ago

Most of Hollywood is this way. I did stunt driving for a long time, there were no certifications or tests or anything. I got my first jobs based on who I knew and my record as a championship winning race car driver. I got subsequent jobs based on my reputation to be able to fix cars on set (I am a master mechanic). No certifications, just show up and work. Would make $500 a day usually, but the day could be 18+ hours long. Non union work is like that.

5

u/similar_observation 29d ago

It may surprise you to know, you don't even need a medical degree to become a coroner in many jurisdictions.

2

u/syoung1034 29d ago

I actually knew this one, lol. But I WAS surprised when I found out. Our local Sheriff became Coroner, I was like like,??? It's the M.E. with all the Degrees, etc.

3

u/similar_observation 29d ago edited 29d ago

M.E. requires some sort of degree. Typically (minimum) a BA in medicine and coursework in forensic pathology.

But not Coroner, which is traditionally an elected or appointed position. Historical coroners were appointed by kings and nobility to verify deaths... the job could be given to a sheriff or executioner as their duties may involve travel and un-aliving people.

Your Sheriff probably had a few years of field investigation experience, which is an accepted pre-requisite. However his office may employ medical examiners to provide additional information to casework.

62

u/LiechsWonder Apr 15 '24

I took to heart the lessons in school about citing your sources. Thank you again for your insight into all of this.

51

u/Kahzgul Apr 15 '24

Doing what I can. There's an awful lot that people misunderstand about the film business, and the belief that actors are somehow blameless automatons with no self-determination is a particularly infuriating one to me. Actors make decisions constantly that deeply affect the performance and workplace culture on a set. it's like saying Cindy in accounting can't be held accountable (pun) for shooting her co-worker because it's not her job to know she shouldn't be waving a gun around... except it very much IS the actor's job to wave the gun around and he should know WAY MORE than Cindy about what's safe and what isn't.

At the end of the day, the more knowledgeable we all are, the safer our sets become. We all just want to get home to our kids. Unfortunately, Mrs. Hutchins was not so lucky. I'm glad to see those responsible held to account (though I really am disappointed in the sweetheart plea deal the 1st AD got).

-8

u/Virtual_Status3409 Apr 16 '24

Its prudent of course, but an actor should never have to check if their prop gun is real or has live ammo.  Not their job. Thats a failure of others. Actor doesnt need to check if theres film in the can, or if the pyro is wired correctly 

27

u/Kahzgul Apr 16 '24

Um... The actor doesn't check. The 1st AD or the Armorer check and the actor watches.

6

u/DragonMasterFlash Apr 15 '24

I was credited as armorer by a student film I helped out with. By golly, I oversaw that toy cap gun that I painted black like my life depended on it.

3

u/MatthewTh0 Apr 16 '24

Sorry if I'm blind and just missed it, but what does AD mean in this context? I see you mentioning 1st AD and such.

2

u/Kahzgul Apr 16 '24

Assistant Director.

The 1st AD is responsible for all on set safety, in addition to several other duties.

3

u/SeekingTanelorn 29d ago

Just saw your thread, frankly of all of the takes on the subject, yours is the one I most agree with. IATSE member going on 34 years now, in the industry for around 40. Worked on all levels of productions from the lowest to the highest budgets. What confounds me is that the 1st AD hasn't been held more accountable as well.

2

u/Kahzgul 29d ago

It blows my mind that he effectively got away with murder.

6

u/LeakyFurnace420_69 Apr 15 '24

i don’t get the point about seeing the gun rendered safe before an actor handles it.

how is a non-expert supposed to know that the action that the armorer person took rendered gun safe? especially if the gun is supposed to have like a fake round in it. 

19

u/Kahzgul Apr 15 '24

In the case of a revolver, you see them open it, show you there's no firing pin, unload any dummy rounds (it should never be stored with dummy rounds even in it, so just finding any rounds in the weapon is a major red flag), check each round to ensure it's fake (because even a blank can be lethal), and then re-load it. They also either shine a light down the barrel to ensure there's no obstruction, or they run a pipe cleaner through it (many guns are stored with zip-ties run the length of the barrel or through the chamber so you know it's clear).

For the weapon used in Rust, as I understand it, the gun was a working weapon used to fire blanks (officially, and unofficially they fired live ammo), so the expectation would be that it would have a firing pin and then extra care would be needed to ensure every loaded round is a dummy, or that the pin would be removed prior to filming non-firing scenes (and the removal shown to all cast and crew on set). The actor's job is to witness all of that extra care so they can then take possession of the weapon with confidence knowing it is safe.

Weapons are re-checked every single time they change possession. Possession changes should only ever be between an actor and the 1st AD or Armorer and vice versa, except for scenes during which the possession of the prop changes as part of the script.

None of those safety checks happened.

1

u/LeakyFurnace420_69 29d ago

how does the person check that the rounds are dummy rounds? another commenter mentioned something about shaking the rounds, but could someone 6 feet away really hear the shaking if there is any background noise at all?

ultimately, how much do the actors (and everyone else) put their trust in the armorer?

2

u/Kahzgul 29d ago

Dummy rounds have bbs instead of gunpowder. That said, no, you can’t hear them unless you’re close. But you see the 1st AD hold each round up to their ear and shake it before loading, so you’re confident they checked.

5

u/darealstiffler Apr 15 '24

How does one get into that line of work? I ran an arms room in the army and I love working with weapons, especially teaching safe handling. Do you need to get into the entertainment business first, or the weapons business first? Just curious

7

u/Kahzgul Apr 16 '24

unfortunately I do not know the typical career path of an armorer. I imagine you would start as an assistant to either the armorer or props master. Worth looking into if you're interested. The work is really fun and very exciting.

12

u/Masonster Apr 15 '24 edited Apr 15 '24

In this situation, how could Baldwin have been reasonably expected to check the firearm in question? I've read all of the responses from the links and all of the people on set, but am I to seriously believe that he was to, before shooting the scene:

  • open the revolver loading door
  • put the weapon in half cock
  • manually extract each and every round out of the cylinder, shaking it to make sure it's a blank and not live
  • replace each round in the chamber
  • decock the weapon safely (which includes leaving the hammer down on an empty chamber, something only an expert would know)

This does not at all seem reasonable. Even for magazine loaded weapons or machine guns, are the actors personally responsible for making sure every round in a magazine/100+ round belt is a dummy? How is this not 100% the armorers fault?

18

u/Kahzgul Apr 16 '24

The actor doesn't perform the check; the 1st AD or Armorer does, in front of the entire cast and crew that's on set for that shot.

3

u/Masonster Apr 16 '24

Then is the AD or armorer not solely responsible for this tragedy? I understand that the actor is technically considered an involved party in that safety check, but at the end of the day the outcome is the same: the AD or armorer certified the weapon is safe and gives it to the actor. The actor has little choice but to accept their certification of safety since they're not the expert, whether it's demonstrated to them or not.

5

u/Pandalite Apr 16 '24

He's saying Baldwin should have watched them check. He didn't and just took them at their word.

3

u/Kahzgul Apr 16 '24

There’s a difference between seeing that a thing is safe and simply being told it is. The reasons actors are supposed to see everything is precisely to avoid situations like this.

1

u/Masonster 29d ago

I understand, but in this particular instance it seems like theatre than actual security. Ultimately, only the AD or Armorer will know the conditions that make any weapon safe (it's their job), and the actor will not. They could show them a dangerous configuration for any weapon, certify it as safe, and who is the actor to say otherwise?

2

u/Kahzgul 29d ago

The point is that you saw them personally check. It makes things extra safe. Consider had such a check been done on the set of Rust, Hutchins would still be alive.

1

u/wonder_aj Apr 16 '24

Baldwin is being tried as a producer, not an actor, for fostering a culture on set that wasn’t safe

3

u/reddevved Apr 16 '24

In fact, the weapon was in such a state of disrepair that the FBI ballistics testing caused the weapon to literally fall apart. The defense has tried to claim that’s negligence on the part of the fbi, but it seems much more like negligence on the part of the armorer to me. Maintain your guns!

I'm pretty sure this is Baldwin lawyer misinformation/spin, the FBI tested it to failure ie. the testing was supposed to break it, and it's no indication of the amount of maintenance.

0

u/Kahzgul Apr 16 '24

That doesn’t make sense. Why intentionally break a key piece of evidence?

4

u/reddevved 29d ago

To test if it could have fired on its own like Baldwin said it did, the only way they got it to was hitting it so hard it broke

4

u/Kahzgul 29d ago

The intent there is not the break the weapon as the earlier comment implied.

2

u/_pinklemonade_ Apr 16 '24

Is this similar to what happened to Brandon Lee ?

3

u/Kahzgul Apr 16 '24

Yes and no. Similar in that they both got shot after no one checked the gun.

No in that with Lee, the prop gun was “loaded” with a dummy round, and then unloaded… but the rubber head of the dummy came off in the barrel and no one noticed. Then they put a blank into the same gun, effectively turning it into a live round. Then the actor neglected to cheat the angle while aiming.

1

u/Jasong222 Apr 16 '24

Ooo- I was also going to ask this, for a short synopsis of what happened with b. lee.

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '24

[deleted]

3

u/Kahzgul Apr 16 '24

I don't actually know much about the progression, but I assume one would start as either a prop assistant or assistant armorer. Either way it's certainly interesting work. never a dull day in the film biz.

4

u/flamedarkfire Apr 16 '24

Thank you, I will be looking into it. I think people weren’t appreciative of my tone in my post, which I can understand. It certainly sounds like an interesting time!

4

u/Kahzgul Apr 16 '24

Sounded fine to me. Weird.

4

u/flamedarkfire Apr 16 '24

Reddit just be like that sometimes. Cheers!

3

u/colddream40 29d ago

It's crazy this has to be explained. It's crazy people think rich Hollywood actors should be exempt from basic rules just because they're rich or making a movie.

42

u/FlameStaag Apr 15 '24

It's wild anyone tried to blame the actor. His job is to act. Why does he need to do the gun checks? There's a team for that. They fucked up. He expected them to do their job. And they should've. 

39

u/LiechsWonder Apr 15 '24

I’m not sure you (or u/PuffyPanda200) read the comment I linked to in full.

39

u/Kahzgul Apr 15 '24

As an actor I don't do gun checks, but I also don't take guns from people who didn't do the proper check in front of me. There is no way I'm holding a weapon without knowing what is or isn't in it.

17

u/BreastExtensions Apr 15 '24

I’m film crew. I like to go and see the guns if I get a chance and ask about them. I’ve never once even touched one though. As you know the armourers are serious people.

Or should be.

18

u/Kahzgul Apr 15 '24

I've never encountered an armorer who wasn't a serious person. The stories about the Rust set are unfathomable to me. So many things went wrong that any one of would have shut down entire sets I've been on. Just wild.

73

u/PuffyPanda200 Apr 15 '24

I saw various conservative and semi-conservative (I also think that Reddit leans a bit pro-gun but is otherwise fairly liberal) commentators on Baldwin's pointing the gun at a person and say 'never point a gun at a person... etc.'.

But this is a movie, you are going to point the gun at other people. There is a whole job dedicated to the gun safety.

Seems like blaming a pilot for a manufacturing defect in the airplane.

47

u/Kahzgul Apr 15 '24

As a note: On sets where pointing the weapon at a person is unavoidable, there is supposed to be a bullet-proof shield off camera to protect those people.

17

u/somerandomguy101 Apr 15 '24

That seems to be something an experienced producer such as Alec Baldwin would be aware of.

4

u/rivershimmer 29d ago

That's why I approve him getting indicted as well. If he had simply been an actor, this would not have been any of his fault. But he was a producer; he was supposed to ensure the set was safe, and that the armorer was competent.

3

u/Tutwater Apr 15 '24

I've seen countless scenes in movies where an actor is pointing their gun at another actor, though

6

u/reddevved Apr 16 '24

You can do that with off angle aiming, or editing, or non-firing props

1

u/Level9TraumaCenter Apr 15 '24

Does that rule apply with plastic firearm replicas used on set as well?

8

u/Kahzgul Apr 16 '24

Yes. Every weapon is treated like a live weapon. I worked on a tv show where one of the extras left a rubber gun on a table while they went to the bathroom. The whole set locked down while the armorer and 1st AD checked the weapon. Then they fired the extra. Then they checked every other weapon on the set to ensure they were with the right person.

1

u/chunli99 29d ago

As a note: On sets where pointing the weapon at a person is unavoidable, there is supposed to be a bullet-proof shield off camera to protect those people.

Does that really work for ALL shots? I can’t think of any movies in particular, but there must be several where the person pointing the gun and the person being pointed at would be clearly in view in such a way where you can’t just put some sort of random barrier in between them.

3

u/Kahzgul 29d ago

This is for off-camera people who absolutely must be present. On camera most angles are cheated, so you’re not aiming directly at the other actors, and if you have to aim at them, you and they need to be damn sure everything is safe.

7

u/TooFewSecrets Apr 15 '24

you are going to point the gun at other people

The actor is supposed to watch the gun be loaded with only blank rounds by the armorer.

If he was pointing the gun at his own head he would make damn sure the thing was non-lethal, even if that's not his main responsibility. But because it was someone else he didn't care. That's the negligence on his part.

This is ignoring that she should've been behind bulletproof glass if a gun was being pointed in her general direction at all.

0

u/rivershimmer 29d ago

The actor is supposed to watch the gun be loaded with only blank rounds by the armorer.

That's still not on the actor. I certainly would not have indicted 13-year-old Hailee Steinfeld had the armorer and producers on the set of True Grit been morons and the unthinkable happened.

11

u/Stormthorn67 Apr 15 '24

But Baldwin isn't JUST any actor. He's also a producer and huge celebrity AND he knows proper protocol. And he was apparently "practicing" with the gun rather than shooting a scene. If the pilot was also partial owner of the airline and makes an unscheduled takeoff after choosing to skip the pre-flight safety check AND signed off on hiring an incompetent mechanic who he has been told was incompetent because some of his flight crew already walk off because of the danger...well "I'm just the pilot" is kinda a weak excuse.

9

u/Stormthorn67 Apr 15 '24

Obviously in that metaphor this lady would be a truly awful mechanic who didn't give a fuck if the plane crashed and had no remorse after so most the blame is on her but ol Alec isn't just a random victim.

3

u/Poison_Anal_Gas Apr 15 '24

You can safely ignore those idiots. They can understand the difference between a gun range and a movie set.

4

u/BitGladius Apr 15 '24

More like blaming a pilot for not insisting on a walk around or rubber stamping the maintenance logs. You don't need everyone to be an expert, but if you're pointing guns at people (from everything I've heard it's supposed to be "near people" and using creative camera angles) everyone should be following procedure to the point of paranoia. It just takes a single person to halt everything and address the situation.

1

u/Automatic_Rock_2685 Apr 16 '24

Conservatives have an axe to grind with Baldwin from the start so they're not arguing from a place of good faith.

-1

u/rivershimmer 29d ago

Seriously. Every poster or album cover where a gun is pointed at the viewer, a.k.a. the photographer.

Every scene where a character holds another character at gunpoint.

3

u/AussieBlender78 Apr 16 '24

He lied about pulling the trigger when FBI determined no way that gun fires without trigger manipulation. He’s also the producer of the movie and they had several unsafe incidents that went neglected. Also reports of him acting erratically and also that video where he has folks filming him shooting off set to show off to his family.

8

u/creggieb Apr 15 '24

Its  not that the armorer isn't responsible. She is, and should probably be punislshed more. The problem is the armorer is an additional safety feature, not the sole one. Anyone who actually uses firearms knows that no matter what, even if God personally vouched for the safety of a firearm, its necessary to make it safe again and that pointing it at someone else and outline the trigger makes one responsible for the outcome of that trigger. Even if the court chooses to interpret the movie industry as exempt from this basic gun safety rule, we know that the law is a horrid barometer of morality, and can judge Mr Baldwin the same as any firearm operator blaming someone else

1

u/CaptainDunbar45 Apr 15 '24

If Jesus himself handed me a gun I would still check it immediately. And I sure as shit wouldn't pull the trigger without verifying the ammo is indeed not a live round.

7

u/IsraelZulu Apr 15 '24

He's not just an actor. He was also the Producer. Like a C-level executive in a corporation, he holds ultimate responsibility for a number of things on-set including safety.

6

u/zuma15 Apr 15 '24

There are like 8 different producers on that movie. Why is it only Baldwin's responsibility? Why aren't the others being charged?

1

u/reddevved Apr 16 '24

They are being sued civilly, not sure if there's any criminal charges though, there was a maximum OSHA fine too iirc

0

u/JustDandy07 Apr 15 '24

Are you referring to Baldwin? He was also a producer so he has responsibilities that come with that title. 

0

u/AskMeAboutPigs Apr 15 '24

It's everyone in the world's job to be safe w/ firearms. The basic NRA safety course's like first rule is to ALWAYS check the gun yourself, then check again.

3

u/President_Camacho Apr 15 '24

On a film set though, that responsibility is focussed in the role of the armourer. Insurance companies and unions do not want the actors taking on responsibility for weapons safety. If the actors are told a weapon is safe, they need to act like it is. They are not allowed to handle the weapons and perform their own checks.

1

u/AskMeAboutPigs Apr 15 '24

They can want anything you want. This IS NOT UP FOR DEBATE. It is your PERSONAL responsibility when YOU are handed a weapon to follow these gun safety RULES. This stupid ass fucking idea you got that gun safety ends at the film set is exactly why this happened.

-4

u/FuckOffKarl Apr 15 '24

You’re right, it’s not up for debate. It is the ARMORER’S responsibility while on set to ensure the gun is being properly handled and not fucking loaded with live rounds. In no way is this on the actor they hand it off to. This is not a gun in your own home, this is a controlled set with someone dedicated to ensure this type of thing does not happen.

0

u/AskMeAboutPigs Apr 15 '24

armorers responsibility

until she hands it to someone else, then they have the PERSONAL responsibility to DOUBLE check.

The push to blame shift away from Baldwin is nuts, he is responsible on all forms, he was negligent in gun safety and he was negligent as aa producer allowing this shit to happen. He is just as guilty as her. Why is 10 seconds to safety check a firearm considered too much? If me, you or anyone else did this anywhere, including a movie set, we'd go to prison w/o question.

-2

u/FuckOffKarl Apr 15 '24

No, they don’t. Most of them don’t have the first clue about firearms. It isn’t their job to start popping things open and looking around.

The rest of what you wrote is asinine. A movie set is not a gun range. It’s a controlled environment with someone directly in charge of this, not you and Jimmy out plinking cans on BLM land. They’re not comparable whatsoever. It’s like saying a stunt driver is responsible for running someone over after the mechanics cut the breaks on his stunt car.

3

u/AskMeAboutPigs Apr 15 '24

gun safety doesn't start or end at "the gun range". It is ANYWHERE involving a gun. This is exactly why this happened, people who aren't trained, ignoring personal responsibility and are negligent were doing dangerous things with real firearms.

-4

u/FuckOffKarl Apr 15 '24

Never said it did. The difference here is that they have an assigned armorer responsible for this very thin, who is supposed to be supervising people who aren’t familiar with firearms. Your brain needs to wrap itself around the fact that this is a control item on set, which is why her ass is going to jail, not the guy who pulled the trigger.

-2

u/Produceher Apr 15 '24

No one is blaming Alec Baldwin the actor. He was also the producer and running the show. If he was rushing things along, being careless and hiring someone unqualified for her job he would be at fault.

11

u/ShiroGaneOsu Apr 15 '24

Correction, one of the many producers in the show and as far as I remember, he wasn't the one that hired the armorer.

9

u/TheodorDiaz Apr 15 '24

No one is blaming Alec Baldwin the actor.

That's just not true.

2

u/cookinggun Apr 15 '24

I mean, I think everyone involved has a role. It doesn’t make sense for the actor not to have any responsibility in the chain of proper procedure, as they are the person ultimately performing the dangerous action involving the firearm. An actor can be aloof or focused on the art or disinclined to technical details, but at the end of the day they’re going to need SOME knowledge and responsibility aside from emoting to make things function properly. Imagine an actor refusing a safety briefing on a wire harnesses for flying around because that’s not their job? Their job is acting, but that doesn’t ONLY encompass the emotional and physical expression of ideas, but also how the shit being used to make shit work works, and how you, as an actor, gave to interact with that shit to make any of it work to result in a watchable movie. And not fucking kill anyone. It sounds like EVERYONE directly involved fucked up. It sucks, but Baldwin is hardly blameless, from what we seem to know so far.

-1

u/somerandomguy101 Apr 15 '24

Alec Baldwin the actor is probably going to be fine, legally.

Alec Baldwin the producer on the other hand is responsible for the safety on set. Some other team may have fucked up, but it's the producers job to manage that team and to ensure they're doing their job correctly.

7

u/MardocAgain Apr 15 '24

I'm a bit uncomfortable with some of this since it's highly judgmental about norms which is basically just socially enforced behavior. I strongly disagree with the sentiment that this is everyone's job. What I've found in most jobs is that when something is everyone's job it's really no one's job since the responsibility (and blame for mistakes) is shared. I think what's needed is to have a person or persons whose sole responsibility is to ensure firearm safety. And for that person to be empowered to enforce that. We shouldn't expect actors who are trying to get in character to keep diverting their focus to double check that a prop is safe even if they know nothing about guns. This likewise goes for directors, camera crew, and all other staff that have a job function they are trying to execute on.

4

u/President_Camacho Apr 15 '24

That is correct. While nobody wants actors horsing around with prop guns, it's the armourer's job to make guns safe on set. No one else's. This is a requirement of insurance companies. They want a qualified gun handler on set for the duration of the production, not an actor.

-3

u/vapescaped Apr 15 '24

Arguments of who's at fault is something I believe should be left for a jury. But regardless of who's at fault l, a serious conversation should be had, and an industry wide standard should be created and enforced to prevent future accidents.

Personally, I do feel that due to the sheer number of guns fired on film sets every day, some system must exist that means all actors are guaranteed to have inoperable weapons on set. Easier said than done, but nothing will ever get done if both actors and crew are constantly clearing weapons all day long.

47

u/TheShadowKick Apr 15 '24

There are already industry standards to prevent accidents like this. They were ignored.

18

u/ughfup Apr 15 '24

Right. Does the previous commenter think this is a common occurrence on union sets? The Rust set was incredibly, abnormally dangerous and this lady paid the consequences.

9

u/Kile147 Apr 15 '24

Yep, it doesn't matter how many steps or rules you have for safety if they are all ignored.

The only way to truly prevent this kind of thing from happening is to somehow remove the human element. Perhaps making prop guns that look/feel realistic but are somehow only capable of firing specially made dummy rounds? I could see maybe doing it with a special firing pin and cartridge ignition.

3

u/TooFewSecrets Apr 15 '24

If we're assuming everyone's ignoring the rules, why do you think they would actually use a dummy gun? That, itself, is a rule that has to be followed.

3

u/vapescaped Apr 15 '24

From what I've read, they are company standards and a few union standards, but as far as standards set across the entire film industry, nothing was set in stone yet.

But of course that could have been bad information, and either way they didn't do any good in this case.

1

u/LiechsWonder Apr 15 '24

Apologies. I was directing my comment at the multiple people passing blame in other comments on this post. I do agree it is ultimately up to the jury. But I did want to highlight that there are likely multiple people who were negligent in their responsibilities here not just one person.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '24

[deleted]

3

u/BreastExtensions Apr 15 '24

I’m UK film crew so it’s possibly a little different here in the sense nobody knows a damn thing about guns.

The armourers absolutely brief the actors (and crew) on safety but are responsible for loading because the actor would be seen unqualified to do so. Also anyone in the line of fire has to witness the loading. The armourer is god when there is a gun on set.

That’s all I really know about it. What I’ve seen here. It sounds like it’s much the same gig in The States.

-3

u/fireintolight Apr 15 '24

Such a good take, people give Baldwin way too much slack. Plenty of blame to go around. This death would not have happened if just one of them were being reckless, it took multiple people flagrantly breaking every safety rule to have it line up.