Actors have no expertise in guns. Only an idiot would let an actor tamper with a prop that has been set up by a hired professional. Why would a company even insure a set wherein actors tamper with props? 100% of people here just hate the guy. That’s it. This is a case where people let their emotions cloud their judgement. AB will be found not guilty.
@@Unklable777 no. An actor should not “check it.” He should leave it exactly as the professional set it up. The last line of safety on a movie set is the expert, whose job it is to prepare the props. No insurance company wants the actors monkeying around with dangerous props. Actors “play” a part. “Play” as in “make-believe.” They actually pay someone on movie sets to “check” guns.
Work place accidents occur when multiple safety checks are ignored. Baldwin was handed a firearm and failed to check whether it was safe, he pointed it and pulled the trigger. The armourer was at fault but she is not the only one....
Similarly, in aviation, plane crashes usually have what's called an error chain, which is multiple mistakes that lead to the accident. If any one of those points of failure had been avoided, the accident itself would have been avoided.
If it was pointed at Alec how much do you think that gun would have been checked? A real gun means real responsibility no matter the situation. If you can’t be an adult when it comes to dangerous things, keep your hands off!
@@OneWildTurkey I watched a video with one expert. To me that doesn’t give me an idea of how all movies are made that use firearms. I know people who do stunts for a living and they’ve had firearms pointed in their directions during a filling. That is my point
As a 55 yo “gun guy” who’s papow taught me at 5 that every gun is loaded and every gun can kill. Don’t point it at anything you don’t intend to kill or shoot.
LOL real old western movies even more modern ones did in fact point guns at other people and in some cases did still use live rounds, this is nothing new
I think the man said never a reason to point a gun at anybody unless you mean it. That also means an empty gun to never point at someone. Empty guns have taken lives because somebody thought it was empty.
I liked the observation that if Alec Baldwins scene had been that he was committing suicide, he certainly would have made sure that there was not a live round in that gun.
@@1313greer13yt Thanks for your response. I think what they meant was that if it were his own head he was pointing at, he would have checked the round. So just a figure of speech.
how do you think they made western movies historically, believe it or not they used real guns with the same idea blank rounds or modified guns that could not shoot a real bullet. this is nothing new
Obviously you are not an actor on a set given a gun by an armor and told it was safe and then INSTRUCTED by the Director and Cinematographer to point the gun at them. For crying out loud dude, this is not the usual gun safety crap you practice around your house, this is a movie set where actors are told what to do, where to point the gun, at who to point the gun at and when to fire the gun. Your argument is like an actor driving really fast on a set for filming and saying "I was taught to never break the speed limit." Well, dUH!
the armorer. that's why she's in prison. She loaded the revolver with dummy AND real rounds, handed it to 1st AD who took it to set, declared it a "Cold Gun" (mistakenly), and handed it to Baldwin..
They didnt have video village because the camera crew quit in mass the day before due to firearm safety concerns after several incidents of "accidentsl" discharge occured. The crew knew it was unsafe
@@Highlander1432 Don't need to be. Are the jurors lawyers or judges? No. Yet they are tasked with determining guilt or innocence. We all are. It is our duty as members of this society and you will certainly be called for jury duty at some point in your life. Yet you clearly aren't a judge or a lawyer either.
@@ryanvenjoyerNot sad at all. Had this evidence been in the hands of the defence along with the other exculpatory evidence about the trigger and sear his defence would have easily created reasonable doubt. That is why the prosecutors CHOSE to be criminals themselves and withheld this evidence! Every prosecutor that withheld this exculpatory evidence should be disbarred!
Yeah, the one in charge failed. But after that it was in Baldwin’s hands to act appropriately. The armorer wasn’t the one to point a gun at anybody. That is all on Baldwin. Failure to do her job. Yes. He knew better.
@taurusx1000 😔 Hutchins was the cinematographer. The person behind the lense. Witness testimony right after the shooting stated that she instructed Baldwin to point the gun directly at the camera in order for her to get the result she was looking for. No one could have imagined that there was live ammo in the gun. Gutierrez handed it to Baldwin and said it was a "cold" gun. Meaning that Baldwin didn't have to worry about the prop and could get on with the business of acting.
When you have an egotistical actor who thinks he knows it all, AND is against the 2A, this is the type of "accident" waiting to happen. he deserves to have to answer for his actions, and maybe, just maybe, he will have to take responsibility for being so uneducated about something so important. With great reward comes great responsibility.
If his scene was to drive a stunt car around the corner at some moderate rate of speed, the brakes fail, and he kills a set extra ...would you have expected him to check the brake fluid? Check the brake pads? Check the brake lines? etc??? No. No. No. The pistol was a prop and should have been inspected by the woman in charge of the prop!?!?!
Why didn't dufus boy aim at the camera for the planned filming anyway, instead he aims at the person? If he had just followed the script, no one would have been hurt.
Apparently there has to be someone to blame, if there isn't one then they will create someone to blame. Because how much money is involved in this lawsuit? I would like it to be made clear who benefits financially within the legal system. What interest does this actor have in shooting her dead? It's just an accident, and in the smallest case perhaps a different person than the actor knowingly placed a real bullet in the gun.
The safety failure occurred when they allowed the whole after hours booze up "target shooting" shit show to happen. Then it was compounded by a reletively inexperienced armorer apprentice, unsupervised, in a hyper stressed sissy fit environment, again created by baldwin, that was in a rush and failed not notice the BBs werent' rattling. This is how accidents happen...on movie sets or any other environment...a bunch of small things go unnoticed and then suddenly combine into an incident.
The day this incident was reported, I posted a question as to how could something like this happen. A union crew member who had quit over dangerous conditions on set responded with exactly what you have stated.
Thnx so much. Did Alec Baldwin have a fight with the victim over the walk outs occurring during the filming? She had been supportive of crew who were being put up in cheap Albuquerque motels, having to drive all the way to the Santa Fe set, after long hours. Reckless and cheap behavior toward labor. He hired a teenager to handle weapons? And the lackadaisical LE could not be bothered to make the entire area a crime scene, so it would not be tampered with? Or does none of this come into focus in the trial? Really appreciate the reporting.
I have taught all my children not to point any gun at anybody. Even nerf and water guns I do not permit them to point at someone. I set targets for them to shoot at not people. Because if you let them with the toy guns they will do it with the real guns. I was also always taught do not pull a gun out unless you intend to use it. And what ever you shoot in the woods if you are hunting you will eat it. Even it is a skunk. I have very stringent rules when it comes to guns or any weapon bows sling shots you name it. Knowledge is power when it come to using guns the power to use them the right way. besides with CGI now days why do you even need any type of gun that fires at all a plain prop gun will work one that is either mad out of wood or plastic with no moving parts. Who says that Baldwin did not put a live round in the gun himself and commit murder. Baldwin is know for his quick temper and hard to deal with on movie sets. He is not great to work with from what I have heard. I do not buy it was an accident that the live round used in the gun. The last one to have the gun in their hand is responsible for that gun and what is in it. I do not care if it was load by a prop person. That gun should have been re checked by Baldwin himself. Even if I am going hunting if someone hands me a loaded gun I still check it myself to make sure it has the right round for what I am hunting for. Because you have small game or bird shot or you bot buck shot if your using a shotgun. But we have to remember to Baldwin is also anti second amendment. Which in my book he is a hypocrite he makes movies using guns and makes money off of the movies but yet he thinks we should not have the right to have guns. Typical hollywood hypocrite. Typical rules for us but not for them. They are above the law. Well if he is guilty he needs to be in jail. I will give them this everyone is innocent until proven guilty. But when you have a court system that is rigged to allow special people in our world do what they want but others who do the same a locked up. Like Trump is being charged and has to go to court over documents that he kept after he was president which by law he is allowed to keep. But a sitting president Biden has documents from even way back when he was not the president which is illegal nothing happens to him. He is just a old man and can not stand trial. Well if he cant stand trial what the heck is he doing as president and has nukes at his finder tips to use any time he want to. Thats not a just court system its a system set up for the elites to do as they want. Will the rest of us has to follow the law.
If his scene was to drive a stunt car around the corner at some moderate rate of speed, the brakes fail, and he kills a set extra ...would you have expected him to check the brake fluid? Check the brake pads? Check the brake lines? etc??? No. No. No. The pistol was a prop and should have been inspected by the woman in charge of the prop!?!?!
Why when did a nerf or water gun kill someone. Oh I forgot the shooting in NY between the gang members were with a 44 caliber water squirt and a 50 caliber nerf dart. Wonder if the DA withheld the evidence as well
I was a 1st AD in the 1990’s. Ashley is correct, guns are pointed at the camera and it is typically the DP at the camera instructing the Actor to point slightly right, left, up, down, etc… However, the guest is also correct that the DP doesn’t instruct the Actor to pull the trigger and shoot (blank or not) while the shot setup is happening. After the shot setup/rehearsal is complete, the gun is then loaded (made hot) and everyone moves from the area to video village and the grip dept put a piece of plexiglass in front of the full camera area to protect from any residue or particles that may fly that way when the camera is actually rolling for the take.
Plenty of videos shown from the set from the Armorers trial Go back and look at the 15 min of practice scenes when she was shot. Baldwin was arrogantly negligent. He pulled the pistol from inside his vest, with his finger on the trigger AND with the hammer cocked a couple of times! AND swung it in the direction of the director. No surprise it went off.
Prop v. weapon If his scene was to drive a stunt car around the corner at some moderate rate of speed, the brakes fail, and he kills a set extra ...would you have expected him to check the brake fluid? Check the brake pads? Check the brake lines? etc??? No. No. No. The pistol was a prop and should have been inspected by the woman in charge of the prop!?!?!
No. He's an industry expert. Armorer has a job, but the responsibility to ensure every firearm on-set is safe falls on each and every person handling those firearms, including the actors. That is SOP and proper procedure on any union set. Baldwin is a seasoned union actor and producer. He knows that any time a firearm changes hands, both parties MUST properly clear and demonstrate that they have checked the firearm and any ammo in front of the other parties present. Then the receiving party must do the same. It's a safety redundancy. And it's mandated by both common-sense gun safety procedures AND mandated by union practices. Baldwin acted negligently.
@@FourT6and22 Thanks for the reply! I believe the story here is the gun was lying there and Baldwin picked it up…so when it is lying there, who “owns” the gun at that time? If the last person to touch it, say, went to the bathroom, should he tell the armorer that he is abandoning it? Im not in the business, but to me every ‘hot’ gun needs a supervisor (armorer?) for actor (and only actor) handoffs so most of the time the supervisor has the gun and the ammo. Even blanks can kill. Anyway, thanks for the education!
@@rookie962 "...so when it is lying there, who "owns" the gun at that time?" Whoever picks it up and is holding it is ultimately responsible for it at that time. A firearm is never really unattended. If there is downtime on-set, the firearm can be returned to the armorer for safe keeping. At the end of the day, if someone hands you a firearm and tells you it's clear and the rounds loaded into it are "cold", blanks, or inert... you shouldn't just believe them. You need to verify for yourself. That is everybody's responsibility. Otherwise "accidents" can happen (read: negligence). Looks like this trial against Baldwin was just dismissed due to a technicality regarding evidence and discovery. That doesn't absolve Baldwin from his negligence.
I watched the hearing... nothing was mishandled... Someone with a motive to mislead in the case came to the police station (more than 2 years after the shooting) and turned in some ammunition supposedly related to the case and that was documented but not put in with the evidence in the shooting cases. The "evidence" is logged and still with the police. The problem with the police/prosecution using or investigating as part of this case is the amount of time that has passed, chain of custody issues, and the questionable source. That doesn't mean the defense couldn't get access and investigate. They didn't do that because they know it won't matter for an acquittal so they are try to make some sort of inference that the handling of these rounds were improper and therefore not disclosed.
These “rules” are not law. You had an actor without firearms training being handed a weapon with live ammo. It was the armorer’s fault that this happened. That was her one job. That was the whole point of her being there. Then she leaves the set with real guns in the hands of actors with live ammo mixed with dummy rounds. She should have had deactivated or replica guns for staging and rehearsal, and the real guns should have been checked in a locked before she left the set. She created a dangerous situation and this is what happens when you don’t do your job. And then the prosecutor and police screwed up Baldwin’s case. I would have preferred to see Baldwin get off by being found not guilty, instead of a technicality, but now the prosecution so screwed up Baldwin’s case due to deliberate evidence suppression that Hannah Gutierrez-Reed might go up for appeal, so now she might go free. I don’t think she should, but the prosecutor now has created a cluster f**k.
No reason to point the gun? That’s what the scene called for!!! 🤦♀️ It’s the job of the armorer and prop master to double check the gun before you hand it to the actor! What part of this do you not understand?
Um, the whole entire reason for prop firearms is to point them at people. That's how movies are made. These are not personal, police or military firearms where the only reason to point them at people is if you intend to use lethal force.
But they are real guns. What do you mean? Typically, the guns you see in movies that actors are pointing at each other are non-functioning replicas. They are incapable of firing a deadly projectile, and they tend to have clear indications that they are dummies. Those are okay to point those at each other. It's never okay to point a real gun at someone (outside of self-defense), even if you think it's unloaded, even on a movie set. This should be common sense.
@@-.._.-_...-_.._-..__..._.-.-.- Have you ever worked on a movie set? Well I have, as an extra on a movie starring Kurt Russell. One scene I was part of a group of security guards and had to shoot at the protagonists. The firearms were real and we pointed them at a car with stunt men in it that in the story was making a getaway. The props team instructed us in great detail, loaded the firearms with blanks and otherwise controlled every aspect of the handling of the firearms because, and this is key, they were the ones legally liable. We filmed the scene several times, I guess so they could pick and splice things to their exact preference later on. Each time we'd shoot the blanks at the car, as soon as the director called "cut" the props team swooped in to collect the firearms from us to get them out of our hands. Funny how Rust used real firearms too, isn't it? Actually no, it's not; it's totally standard and normal. Edit: And remember The Crow where Brandon Lee (Bruce Lee's son) was shot? Real guns in that one, too. So you're talking and not knowing. There's an old saying you'd do well to familiarize yourself with: "It's better to keep your mouth closed and have people think you're ignorant than to open it and remove all doubt."
@@-.._.-_...-_.._-..__..._.-.-.- I'm not here to submit myself to the interrogation of a more-on. You've been completely, utterly, thoroughly, embarrassingly debunked, ok? It's over. You got nuthin'.
First off! The actor is NOT in charge of gun safety. When blocking a scene, actors and directors constantly discuss and act out potential scene structure and camera moves. I've been on hundreds of sets where guns were pointed and rehearsed over and over again. Baldwin was under the impression they were dummy rounds. End of story. He's only responsible as a potentially negligent producer. Not manslaughter. Ridiculous.
In the military when a soldier hands a weapon over to an officer, the breach is opened on the weapon to show whether it is loaded or unloaded. Obviously, no gun discipline or gun safety was demonstrated on the set. Scary.
What is absolutely disgusting is that following the killing of Halyna Hutchins, Baldwin and Co. started filming "Rust" again. This shows a complete lack of respect for the memory of Hutchins and her family.
So... ...here is my two cents. I consider myself to be highly knowledgeable with firearms. I am lost as to why you would have live rounds on a set! And if live rounds for some reason are on set, there should be a known number of them, they should be accounted for ALWAYS! They should be secured where the Armourer is the only one with access. These items should be 100% controlled! How do you just have live ammo floating around mixed with dummy rounds! NO, NO... ...NO! That is totally unacceptable! 100% unacceptable!
Because obviously she handed him an empty gun and he put live rounds in it. That's why. Prior to the lunch break. They were shooting the same scene and it was empty. Now surprise surprise there's live rounds which appeared out of freaking nowhere.
Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is GUILTY beyond a reasonable doubt as she was the PRIMARY armorer basic responsibility to ensure all firearms were safe with no live rounds on the set. She showed gross negligence and should have received life in prison. She got very lucky with 18 months for the death of an innocent person. Her father needs to be charged with the retired police officer for tampering with evidence!
This day and age with all the technical gadgets that they have there’s no reason to use a real gun Alec Baldwin had a beef with this woman there is no other explanation🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬
You don’t even point a gun at an actor in a movie. 🎥 It never is allowed until Alec Baldwin decided to go against the standard protocols of gun safety by aiming the gun at an unintended target
they were practicing a scene. There are clips of practices. Alec had his finger on the trigger and the hammer cocked a few times. He also had it pointed at the camera and director as he drew his pistol from under his vest
@@avgejoeschmoe2027Don't need bullets for practicing a scene. There's no justification for Baldwin or the armorer for the events leading up to the shooting.
This was so interesting. Think about it like any other weapon for a second: there’s no reason why you wouldn’t treat a knife like a knife or a cross bow like a cross bow. So he’s right 100% when he said “there’s no reason you wouldn’t treat a live gun like a live gun on the set of a movie”.
I just watch a scene from “RUST” where two bandits, entered the church and pointed their Revolver’s at, actor Alec Baldwin. It’s a movie set, multiple guns get point at actors during every Fin movie
These bullets were altered with varnish to make them look old , Under this guys theory a pilot would be liable for a flat tire on the plane when it is someone else`s job to look at the tire.
we can't solve it without seeing the actual video evidence of the shooting taking place. The main question is did he have intention on actually wanting to shoot her does his eyes stare at her or are they looking down. We don't know and I'm sure you can probably agree with that there was no intention on wanting to actually shoot someone with a bullet.
The director and armorist decided to bring the gun to a rehearsal. Alec followed procedures. The armorist couldn't determine the difference between live and dummy rounds. Free Alex
#1 they destroyed the gun so we will never know if it was defective,#2 Alec couldn't hit anyone on purpose with that pistol,it's incredibly hard,just a fluke it hit#3 the round looked exactly like a blank,why?
I have reloaded thousands of rifle bullets and pistol bullets. it's a hobby. all you have to do is leave the primer out and you have a nice hole in the back and you can tell it will never fire. push the bullet in and you never have to worry. don't have to shake it you can see there's no primer just an empty hole.
Alec doesn't seem to give a damn about others Give him a couple years in jail Let him find JESUS and come to terms with his bullish demeanour 🧛♀🧛♀🧛♂🧛♂🖖🖖😋😋😊😊
I must have missed something. Is there any reason to have "Live Ammo" on a movie set? The only reason I can think of would be for a distance effect, as showing where a round hit a rock or tree/ground etc.
PROP. If his scene was to drive a stunt car around the corner at some moderate rate of speed, the brakes fail, and he kills a set extra ...would you have expected him to check the brake fluid? Check the brake pads? Check the brake lines? etc??? No. No. No. The pistol was a prop and should have been inspected by the woman in charge of the prop!?!?!
Just like being in Military ever time you go down range to fire our weapon always do a safety check before and after firing. period. These Actors and their Safety Personnel was in a rush to finsih this movies at an Actress Expense to loose her life.
