JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Status
Also , as an actor it is not only NOT your responsibility to make sure you're gun is safe to handle and point at others you are NOT allowed to open up said weapon , take the mag out, look down the barrel etc. That is the armorers responsibility, job etc.
Ok, assuming this is all correct and legal is there a statute (federal or state) that exempts actors from certain criminal liability if they are in fact working on a movie? Is an official movie set a subculture, or an independent district or nation that is temporarily free from certain laws?

My point being AB obviously ignored at least three of the basic rules of gun safety so as a actor is he legally exempt from such egregious neglect?
 
RE : post #642

Yup. I can imagine that defense being used in court.

But.....perhaps this all needs to go to court? Like how some people demand court trials for every cop involved shooting(s).

But....that may cost millions that doesn't need to be spent (in some cases).

Yeah...wasted money. Just like with some of Biden's proposals to "Build Back Better"?

Oh wow......so, political.

YEAH........isn't it.

RE : the link in #659

Taken from the link....
"Number one, always treat all weapons as if they are loaded — don't treat them as props," explains Carpenter, who has worked on such gun-heavy productions as Queen of the South, Power, Jack Reacher: Never Go Back, NCIS: New Orleans and Cloak & Dagger in addition to serving for 11 years as a professional instructor training agencies and stunt performers in how to handle firearms. "Number two, never have your finger on the trigger or pull the trigger until you're ready to discharge the weapon. Number three, never point the weapon at anything that can be harmed or injured. And number four, always be aware of what's in front, behind and on all sides of what you're aiming for."
My bold.

ALWAYS......NEVER......ALL.
If this were 100% TRUE ALL OF THE TIME.....

Could I/Should I/Would I dare to ask : Has no one EVER done some "gun spinning"? Humm....finger on the trigger or in the trigger guard, swept an object or person you didn't intend to shoot or broken the 180 degree rule. Yeah.....and remember that bullets can go through some walls.

BUT, But, but......it's NOT loaded.

EXACTLY.
"Number one, always treat all weapons as if they are loaded — don't treat them as props,"
So, I'd contend that.......
A firearm is a weapon. However, an empty firearm is not a very effective weapon.

Huh?

An EMPTY WEAPON (in this case, firearm) is EMPTY. An EMPTY firearm is no longer capable of destroying property, hurting/injuring someone or killing someone in the traditional meaning of a weapon/firearm/gun being capable of causing DEATH or INJURY. It's EMPTY.

So then.......
Other than the fact that.....it has some weight. Well, maybe you'll drop it on your foot or you may lose a hold of it and it might go flying and hit someone.

Note that : It could also be intentionally thrown. But that is not what I'm really talking about at this point. Let's continue.

SO, MY POINT IS MOSTLY THAT.....
I contend that.....
The "4 Rules" (as so many of you like to point out and repeat) would not apply to an EMPTY weapon/firearm/gun.

ALWAYS, NEVER and ALL. Are not appropriate to this particular situation.

Or maybe I could/should just call it a "TECHNICAL VIOLATION" of the rules? Or maybe, it's time to CLARIFY (add some common sense) that the rules were referring to LOADED FIREARMS?

Perhaps, a revision is in order....like?

Old......."Always treat all weapons as if they are loaded."
New....."Treat firearms as loaded. Unless and until YOU have verified that they are NOT LOADED (aka: EMPTY/CLEAR)."

OK, Ok, ok.....some will/might say, that the revision is too long. Whatever.

Perhaps, my problem (well, some of my problems, LOL.) is with the usage of the words, ALWAYS, NEVER and ALL?

LOL.....isn't this situation similar to how people describe entire groups by a name and perhaps forget that there are/might be individuals within the group that may/do not share the same views/values? Yeah.....it's in the details. Example :

"Democrats want to ban Assault Weapons."

Do ALL democrats feel the same?
Ban or have some extra restrictions?
Or maybe, we should also define, what is an Assault Weapon?

DETAILS, Details, details.

Aloha, Mark

PS....I'll admit that : I have broken the 180 rule, swept objects I wasn't intending to destroy, had my finger on the trigger (or within the trigger guard) before I was absolutely sure of my target. Hummm....."gun spinning" with an EMPTY handgun does that.

Yeah though......mostly I was by myself (it's safer and less embarrassing). LOL.
 
Last Edited:
I did not say a thing about charges.

I was talking about responsibility.

That's probably why I lost ya! ;)

We're done.
Yes, it was the armorers responsibility to ensure the guns were in safe condition for the actors to wave them around. I am glad we have established that.
 
im.jpg
 
Ok, assuming this is all correct and legal is there a statute (federal or state) that exempts actors from certain criminal liability if they are in fact working on a movie? Is an official movie set a subculture, or an independent district or nation that is temporarily free from certain laws?

My point being AB obviously ignored at least three of the basic rules of gun safety so as a actor is he legally exempt from such egregious neglect?
How much time did Michael Massee do when he was convicted of shooting and killing Brandon Lee with a prop gun? None because he wasnt prosecuted? Yep, thats the right answer.

This may come as a surprise to you since the industry seems to claim actors dont point prop guns at people but...they do. Sometimes they shoot each other or people on the set. It happens. They hire people to prevent that from happening because actors point guns at each other and people on the set and pull triggers. Those people are called armorers. Those people are responsible for making sure guns are uunloaded before actors get them into their hands. Actors are not trained or qualified to check their own prop guns and it is a liability and safety issue for them to start fiddling with their prop guns beyond just pulling the trigger on one.

Baldwin as the shooter was not culpable in the shooting and was not criminally responsible. The Armorer was negligent perhaps even criminally negligent .There may be others on set who were also criminally negligent. The production headed by Baldwin will get sued and will lose a substantial civil judgement. That will be the end of the drama.
 
Last Edited:
AB the actor may skirt charges because Hollywood protects its own and past precedents have been set.

AB the producer was responsible for the set and for what happens/happened on the set. Hiring an unqualified/under qualified armorer is on him, his set, his crew, his responsibility…. Period.

He'll forever have Hannah's blood on his hands…
 
Well it has started, just saw on the news where they mentioned Brandon Lee and how he was shot and then they brought another young female member of the "Lee" family to speak to; the slow insidious slip into making it a gun control issue has begun... just you wait, the anti gunners will ramp it up real quick from here...
Training is always imperative but we know where the anti-gunners ultimately want to take this...


Alec Baldwin's new anti-2A rant.
Alec: People do you see what just happened? People can get killed by irresponsible gun handling, like I did just last week. This is why we need more stringent gun control and possibly ban all guns from existence so this never happens again.
Caveman: bubblegum you Alec Baldwin, you don't have any bubblegum sense to think for yourself and act accountable for your actions so we're going to treat you like our illustrious president. bubblegum Joe Biden bubblegum Alec Baldwin bubblegum Jay Inslee!!!

Rant over….. for now…
 
Last Edited:
Baldwin as the shooter was not culpable in the shooting and was not criminally responsible.
Thank you for the reply but you did not answer the following:

is there a statute (federal or state) that exempts actors from certain criminal liability if they are in fact working on a movie?

If so well OK - end of story. However if NOT then he is NO different than anyone of us and should be held responsible.
 
Last Edited:
I agree. What I was saying was in response to a previous post sayinging does he deserve the same leniency as the pilot that killed Vic Morrow and the two kids. I said a Helicopter was designed to fly but a gum made to kill!
The pilot was told the set was safe and A.B. was told the "prop" was "cold." That's the parallel to which I was alluding. I'm a firm believer that if this happened on the set of John Wick or Tombstone the tunes would be flipped. What's more amusing is some of ya'll didn't believe a past murder was committed despite nine+ minutes of footage, but in this case it must have been the lib's fault despite strong contrary evidence and zero evidence footage.
 
Last Edited:
Thank you for the reply but you did not answer the following:

is there a statute (federal or state) that exempts actors from certain criminal liability if they are in fact working on a movie?

If so well OK - end of story. However if NOT then he is NO different than anyone of us and should be held responsible.
This an accidental shooting caused by the armorers negligence. Broad precedent exists. No prosecutor in his right mind would press charges. Prosecutorial Discretion.
 
This an accidental shooting caused by the armorers negligence.
The armorers' negligence was NOT ensuring the gun was clear.

She did NOT hold or aim the gun, cock the hammer or pull the trigger - how therefore were these actions accidental? Were they NOT carried out by ABs own free will using his hand and fingers?
 
Status

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top