Rewulf Posted December 7, 2021 Report Share Posted December 7, 2021 12 minutes ago, Windswept said: That video doesn't explain much. Some makes of primers are far harder to set off than others, so a CCI primer may not go off on some guns at full cock whereas a Federal primer will. If the hammer spring is hard enough to set off the CCI then I would not be surprised to see the primer go off with a small amount of hammer fall. Well bearing in mind it wasnt supposed to have ammunition in it at all, its a little beside the point. He said he didnt touch the trigger, did it fire itself at half c o ck ? Which technically isnt possible ? Did he fully c o c k it , then it fired it self ? Or he pulled the trigger ? It does appear Baldwin was either A . Totally clueless about guns , which I find strange considering his previous roles. Or B. He is such a superstar , that he finds it demeaning to check his own props for safety, an action that would take a couple of seconds, and results in him shooting less people dead for real ? My moneys on B , as hes a proven prima donna, with an overinflated opinion of himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windswept Posted December 7, 2021 Report Share Posted December 7, 2021 I'm not defending what's happened at all, just pointing out that many of the 'explanations' given also don't stack up. I've seen revolvers not index correctly, sears wear and hammers get stuck so almost anything is possible. That's why we're taught in the UK not to point a gun at anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisjpainter Posted December 7, 2021 Report Share Posted December 7, 2021 4 minutes ago, Rewulf said: Well bearing in mind it wasnt supposed to have ammunition in it at all, its a little beside the point. He said he didnt touch the trigger, did it fire itself at half c o ck ? Which technically isnt possible ? Did he fully c o c k it , then it fired it self ? Or he pulled the trigger ? It does appear Baldwin was either A . Totally clueless about guns , which I find strange considering his previous roles. Or B. He is such a superstar , that he finds it demeaning to check his own props for safety, an action that would take a couple of seconds, and results in him shooting less people dead for real ? My moneys on B , as hes a proven prima donna, with an overinflated opinion of himself. Definitely B, but I'm not ruling out A too! These videos are all presupposing that the gun was working normally. They're great for showing how a gun is meant to work, but not so good for showing how it could work if it's poorly maintained or malfunctioning. We'll find out soon enough, I think. I'm not sure 5 minutes ago, Windswept said: I'm not defending what's happened at all, just pointing out that many of the 'explanations' given also don't stack up. I've seen revolvers not index correctly, sears wear and hammers get stuck so almost anything is possible. That's why we're taught in the UK not to point a gun at anyone. There is also a difference between pointing a gun at someone and a gun being pointed at someone. Deliberately pointing in the direction of the camera when it's unnecessary would be utterly reckless. But IF it went off randomly it could have been pointing anywhere, and just happened to be pointing in the direction that proved fatal. As you say, make certain it's pointing away from danger at all times Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted December 7, 2021 Report Share Posted December 7, 2021 23 minutes ago, chrisjpainter said: Definitely B, but I'm not ruling out A too! These videos are all presupposing that the gun was working normally. They're great for showing how a gun is meant to work, but not so good for showing how it could work if it's poorly maintained or malfunctioning. We'll find out soon enough, I think. I'm not sure There is also a difference between pointing a gun at someone and a gun being pointed at someone. Deliberately pointing in the direction of the camera when it's unnecessary would be utterly reckless. But IF it went off randomly it could have been pointing anywhere, and just happened to be pointing in the direction that proved fatal. As you say, make certain it's pointing away from danger at all times Not sure about the film industry, but normally a firearm should not be pointed in the direction of anyone. So if it when off randomly or not makes no difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted December 7, 2021 Report Share Posted December 7, 2021 Surely the actual gun involved will since have undergone rigorous testing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted December 8, 2021 Report Share Posted December 8, 2021 14 hours ago, Scully said: Surely the actual gun involved will since have undergone rigorous testing? Undoubtedly , seems strange how they let him go off and do a televised interview, knowing the facts of whether it was or not ? Heres another Youtube video And a rather annoying Canadian with some interesting theories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted April 27, 2022 Author Report Share Posted April 27, 2022 Not looking very good for Alec Baldwin and the production company, strangely nothing heard from the set Armourer! Lots of texts bouncing around on set at the time about live ammo on set, plinking, a very lax attitude to safety, all seem to be coming to the for. Looks like he is fighting 3 civil cases before the authorities decide how deep they go with a prosecution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted April 27, 2022 Report Share Posted April 27, 2022 1 minute ago, TIGHTCHOKE said: Not looking very good for Alec Baldwin and the production company, strangely nothing heard from the set Armourer! It seems to me that the person holding the gun at the time is near enough automatically 'guilty' - but since I'm not familiar with how studios organise gunshots (and related safety) in scenes as they are filmed - maybe the old absolutely fundamental "never point a gun at anything you don't intend to shoot" may not apply. The fact is - even when filming, anyone who picks up or is handed a gun should satisfy himself/herself of its loaded/empty and safe status. Again - my view and I have no experience in film/theatre etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted April 27, 2022 Author Report Share Posted April 27, 2022 Yes, but he still maintains his innocence and that he did NOT pull the trigger! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted April 27, 2022 Report Share Posted April 27, 2022 Just now, TIGHTCHOKE said: Yes, but he still maintains his innocence and that he did NOT pull the trigger! But he received a gun - presumably without checking if it was loaded - and pointed it at someone ........... I know of at least two instances where a gun has gone off without the trigger being pulled - and on both occasions since it was pointed in a safe direction - no one was hurt. One was an old Greener s/s that went off as the gun was closed. I only saw it from a distance and was told that the (non auto side mounted safety was at 'safe'. The other was a semi auto that went off as the breach block release was pressed and the breach closed. The trigger was not touched. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted April 27, 2022 Author Report Share Posted April 27, 2022 1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said: But he received a gun - presumably without checking if it was loaded - and pointed it at someone ........... I know of at least two instances where a gun has gone off without the trigger being pulled - and on both occasions since it was pointed in a safe direction - no one was hurt. One was an old Greener s/s that went off as the gun was closed. I only saw it from a distance and was told that the (non auto side mounted safety was at 'safe'. The other was a semi auto that went off as the breach block release was pressed and the breach closed. The trigger was not touched. Yes I take your point, but this was a classic "six gun" and the apparent general ignorance regarding safety, good practice and weapon discipline on the set leads me to my own conclusion that he and the Armourer and the Director are responsible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougy Posted April 27, 2022 Report Share Posted April 27, 2022 No reason at all to have live rounds on a film set. End of ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted April 27, 2022 Report Share Posted April 27, 2022 its america what do you expect........darwinisium........eventually the idiots and liars will die out lot of fuss made out of this.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted January 20 Author Report Share Posted January 20 Interesting to see that US actor Alec Baldwin has been indicted by a grand jury over the fatal shooting of a cinematographer on a film set in New Mexico two years ago. The 65-year-old will face a charge of involuntary manslaughter over the death of Halyna Hutchins, who died while filming Rust on the outskirts of Santa Fe. Baldwin, the lead actor and a co-producer of the movie, was pointing a gun at Ms Hutchins during a rehearsal in October 2021 when the weapon went off, killing her and wounding director Joel Souza. The trial of the movie’s armourer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, who has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter and evidence tampering in the case, is scheduled to begin on February 21. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.