Did Alec Baldwin Commit Involuntary Manslaughter? | "Rust" Shooting Update and Analysis 

It was a predictable accident

Yes didn’t a camera crew walk off set too bc of safety concerns? Idk when u look at the whole pic I think AB is guilty it’s only 18 months sentence which I’m sure they would reduce to probation anyway.

@@2wheelsforever174 In what sense? Provide proof or prepare yourself to get skinned alive in public right here

IDK how aware AB would have been about the 'staff problems'. I could see him being kind of stuck up and out of the loop. He is still the one who pulled the trigger... but I'm wondering why the director isn't being charged along with the production coordinator who would have known and should have insisted on safety protocols being followed, especially after the other mishaps.

@@2wheelsforever174 tick tock... Still nothing

Agreed!

Agreed. I think Alec would not be guilty of manslaughter if he was only an actor on this film. But his behavior as a producer makes him guilty IMO.

How do you know this? (Asking OP)

There were lots of detailed newspaper stories that came out immediately after the accident. The Los Angeles Times was especially good at covering the story, history, etc.​@@ShannonsJourney

@@porkbeans854 ok, thank you! I kept up with this story and I absolutely missed that fact. Thanks again! ☺

Alec Baldwin's father taught a rifle class at his high school on Long Island. He was taught how to use guns safely.

LOL

I’m sorry about your friend who died while deer hunting

To clarify, never point a firearm at a person you are not willing to shoot. I know I'm being technical, but sometimes firearms are supposed to be pointed at people - in case of people who might need to be shot, like your dad's enemies during WW2. Sorry to be picky, but it's a bone of contention that I have since the world's first firearms were indeed invented for the sole purpose of being aimed and shot at people. I think that remembering this fact is actually beneficial to people handling firearms. They weren't invented for fun. They were invented to effectively kill and maim the people they are aimed and fired at. When people think about this, they tend to have more respect for and adherence to firearms safety. It's fine to use guns for recreation, but never forget why they were invented in the first place and what they are capable of. (And for all the hunters out there, sorry, but hunting animals with firearms was merely an afterthought. The original purpose behind the invention (by the Chinese in the 12th century) was to kill your enemy in combat more far more effectively than you could do with swords, arrows or blunt objects.) It is a sobering thought, but an important one that should never be forgotten. If you think about this whenever you handle a gun, you're a lot more likely to not do stupid and dangerous things with one, like pointing it at your friend as a joke. But don't suggest that a firearm should NEVER be pointed at someone. A firearm should certainly be pointed at anyone who maliciously threatens your life or the lives of any other innocent person who needs to be immediately defended from the threat of death or great bodily injury. Guns can be fun (and I certainly have had fun with them at the range), but first and foremost, they are deadly weapons intended to take out a human enemy threat.

When I was 11 I had just moved in a new town with my mom. Well the next door had become friends with me pretty quick. One day I was with my friend Mike in the basement and right there on the wall was a 12 guage pumped shotgun and I had no understanding about the gun and it's purpose. I just picked it up, looked right at him and clicked it! There was no shell thank god and after his face was pink again he beat the hell out of me and I had every one coming for what I could have done in just a split second! I learned an ok lesson that day and thank god, like I said, life didn't loose somebody that moment!

Will the real bullet wielder please stand up

I remember at the time, it was reported that during breaks in filming, some of the crew members would often use the gun(s) for target practice or "plinking" in the desert near the set. I think it's most likely that was why the revolver had live ammo in it. Someone was using it for recreation and failed to unload it after, and the armorer also failed to check it prior to it being taken back onto the set. The director also failed to check it, and so did Baldwin. (That was at least one explanation given at the time, but only a trial will tell.)

@@skyhawk_4526 I read the same thing and that several crew members had walked off set due to safety concerns.

That's why 2 of the 3 are being charged & are having the book thrown at them. Here's the lesson; You can lie to your psychiatrist, counselor & lawyer & not face any consequences, but you should NEVER lie to the police, detectives, investigators or prosecutor. If one is so foolish to lie & get easily caught, don't cry victim and being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Now let's see how arrogant, narcissistic & foolish these 2 people really are & see of they try getting away with lying to the judge under oath!

There was live ammo all over the set. The crew were target practicing with it in the days before. The safety was so bad some of the crew walked off the set over it. This whole production, with Baldwin at the top, was a shit show.

your 'joke' cost someone their life

@@daskritterhaus5491 no it didn't, moron. Someone lost their life way before the joke. You clearly have no sense of humor.

​@@daskritterhaus5491 that's not how causality works, kiddo

Nice one, Catness!👏

@@dredknots Anytime I’ve heard of a boxer dying in the ring it was someone’s fault, usually the refs and/or doctors.

I'm sure that the next time he's in a movie, he'll have people behind him.

Heehee

*behind him, by him is still a risky move

Plenty of investigations end inconclusively. It doesn't mean they don't end. You end an investigation when your leads are exhausted, not necessarily when you solve every aspect of it.

I agree. Whoever put the bullet there is responsible. However, I donot respect Baldwin. He is not a good person.

That fact points to someone being targeted and I believe it was Baldwin.

@@vernonfrance2974 Then he is a tool, and his predictable industry carelessness and bad professional habits, made him vulnerable to being exploited. How did they manipulate him into aiming the gun straight at a human being? Actors don't aim right at their fellow humans on the set.

@@whereisyourhumanity7557 What I understand to have happened is that the victim was trying to adjust some camera shot and she was directing him as to where to aim when he apparently inadvertently pulled the trigger. I believe that the armorer, the director, the producers and Baldwin should all be sued by the survivors and the other wounded victim. They should go to jail too or be fined with some of the funds to go towards safe gun habits...

The number of people that are in here without the (most) basic understanding of this, is frightening.

@@dredknots It's gotten far more rare. Brandon Lee's death was a major moment for the industry. It set the current regulations. These weren't followed by anyone on that set.

Had Alec Baldman not had a loaded gun and a lust for blood, none of this would have happened.

@@schrodingersgat4344 The Brandon Lee incident was truly tragic and genuinely an accident for all intents and purposes. Comparing these two situations would be like comparing a car accident that happened at midnight on an icy road during a blizzard vs. someone who just pounded a fifth of vodka and tried to see how fast their car could go.

@@schrodingersgat4344 This even was rare, extremely rare; just like Brandon Lee's event. Literally millions of "shots fired" on movies in the last 2 or 3 years, and not a single incident remotely close to this as far as we know. The person that pulls the trigger is responsible, personally. This isn't Alex Baldwin's first rodeo in a shoot'em up movie. The only way charging the armorer makes sense is if there is probably cause, or evidence of intentional foul play.

he didnt have pink hair and a nose ring i bet.

@@stvstreett 💯 his uncle was a professional.

I bet your uncle is a member of the IATSE local in New Mexico. Master craftsmen

My father was an armorer on 5,000 movies and it was his job to make sure no one got killed and no one got killed on any of those 5,000 movies Please insert your comment that cannot be proven here

Maybe he just got lucky that no one set him up like they did Baldwin.

I was so sad when Brandon Lee was accidentally shot. So devastating for his mother.

What laws?

@Jezzie O Do you think Baldwin aimed to kill?

Do you think someone knowingly planted a live bullet in the box of cartridges?

I'll go ahead and answer the question about what laws were created for you: None. Zero. Zip. No laws, rules, or changes to procedure were made as a result of Lee's death. The relevant rules were already in place before The Crow, and little has changed since. The rules work if they are followed.

I ❤ NJ

Lol. His communication, aka, lie about not pulling the trigger will certainly not be helpful to him in front of the judge.

True, however, he is not being tried for his crappy personality.

The public are a lost cause, half the nation can't wrap their head around the concept that a prop gun, is different than a real gun. They want the actor who played Othello in their local public junior high brought up on murder charges for the stabbing. "Othello should know better, when I was in the scouts, first thing they taught me, never unsheathe a knife lest though intends to stabeth thee". I cannot tell you how many people have repeated that, with complete confidence as if it was coherent and applied. Even in this comment section, countless examples, 0 self awareness. As for the cops, never speak to the cops. It's so easy to get someone to misstate something, and once you do it can be used against you, you have to correct it which is an admittance of guilt, or continue to lie which is just as bad for your case. The secondary tragedy here is what media is putting the victims loved ones through, so some people can use it for political gain. People get hurt on stage all the time, the reason this is such a big deal is Baldwin is anti second amendment, and the people who are very pro 2nd amendment also happen to hate Hollywood at the moment too, so people want to politicize this and drag the victims through the mud.

His interviews did give the impression of he simply wanted to convey "it ain't my fault" which felt a bit callous. I don't doubt he didn't mean to hurt her, but doing the interviews was stupid and short-sighted.

The stories coming out about all the times talent and/or armorers have walked off unsafe sets or taken guns away from certain characters is kinda telling. It seems the industry as a whole does understand how to use guns safely and the potential risk if they don’t. This set just seems wholly incompetent, but the three people charged were the most involved with the most evidence. To me it doesn’t matter how the live rounds got on set, live rounds and dummy rounds look and feel fundamentally different, even to people who have never handled them before.

@@MotJ949 the fact that as you pointed out live and dummy rounds look and feel different is all the more strange for a live round to have been cleared by at least two people prior to someone getting shot dead.

@@dixgun I suspect the reality is that nobody was actually clearing the guns. Baldwin also had live rounds on his costume. They’d had 2 or 3 previous unexpected discharges so everyone knew there were live rounds on set. Why they didn’t shut down and inspect every single round the first time is beyond me.

@@MotJ949 good points. Didn’t know there were live rounds on Baldwin’s costume. Seems like adult supervision might’ve been lacking.

Well Nicolas claims a lot of things, but what he says under oath is often different.

WRONG. He treated the gun as if it were loaded--that was the f-ing point of the scene. He was supposed to aim and fire it at the camera. The problem is the gun turned out to be loaded with real bullets not dummies. Do you understand this is a f-ing movie set. Not your back yard with you and your buddies shooting cats or bottles or something.

@@cejannuzi that's pretty dumb

What a very relevant point!

I didn’t think of that but you are right!

Perfect line for the prosecuting attorneys to use.

Probably not.They don't use dummy rounds in suicide scenes since the actor George Reeves accidently killed himself goofing off with a dummy round way back in the 50's.

Bullshit. He’s had guns held to his head before, he’s been shot at in movies. He would trust the people whose job it is to handle guns to do their job.

he knows, but is too important to have rules apply to him.

He was careless, and he thinks it's not important.

@@peetky8645 He was told it was cold, and he believed it. It was not because he thinks he is too important. If you watch his interrogation you can see he was deeply saddened by the tragedy.

@Where is Your Humanity He was told it was cold, and he believed it. It was not because he thinks he is too important. If you watch his interrogation you can see he was deeply saddened by the tragedy.

@@vernonfrance2974i saw no sadness, just nervousness, instead, he is lying already in the initial interview, saying that hannah gave him the gun. notice as he mimics cocking the hammer, his trigger finger is curling against the trigger. he pointed an unchecked weapon at a woman and pulled the trigger. safety regulations state if a weapon is to be pointed at a manned camera, a plexiglass shield should be in place. he had better hope he has no emails they find from before the incident calling her troublesome or a bitch. that would introduce a motive for murder. give him 5 years and the armorer 6 months. hollywood needs to pay attention to its safety rules and to the law

When this story first broke; my assumption was: It's a Western. Guns get dropped, thrown, blown up, etc. Probably a rock down a muzzle or into a chamber. That's all it'd take.

Take how many magicians who have died performing the bullet catch. Even experts using blanks get killed.

Exactly! He was point blank range..

It was supposed to be a dummy, not a blank

@TheRasteri His father was a rifle range teacher at his own high school for twenty years. I guarantee he knows not to point any gun loaded or unloaded at anyone. Claiming personal ignorance of basic gun safety rules is impossible. Loaded or unloaded, hot gun or cold gun, the rule is never. Since high school, he knows the rules. When they show he's had gun safety knowledge from an early age and ignored it, the games people are playing will be over.

They could be computerized......

Because it doesn't look the same without them, and everything that is real helps the actors act more naturally. I got no issue with them having live rounds either as long as they are careful on set, in some ways that would be safer because everybody would know the danger of them if handled wrongly (assuming they are educated), and not treat them as "half guns". It's not the firearm that is dangerous, it's the negligence and lack of knowledge, and that often stems from a culture that is against firearms which in turn results in actors and crew members not having basic knowledge about how to operate them.

@@YeeLeeHaw Rust was going to have dummies, blanks, and live rounds. But the particular set where the shooting occurred, on that one, there should never have been anything but dummies there.

And it looked like garbage because of it.

@@YeeLeeHaw lmao

There is Zer0 excuse for actual firing guns on set in this day and age 🤦‍♀️ A close up? Sure. But to point real weapons at people while "playing pretend?" Lmfao Give a f* break

@@2Bad4YOUuu The guns don't just go off on themselves and hit people. It's the negligent safety attitude from people that live in a state that have very limited firearm culture,that causes this. You need as much real stuff as possible for it to look good, and for the actors to feel they handle real guns when acting.

It was way too cheap a movie to do that I'm sure.

He and the production company deny the previous discharges.

The part where he didn't check the gun, aimed at a person, and pulled the trigger is bit concerning too. I'm not saying he's the only one responsible, but I'm also not saying he's clueless and blameless, either.

@@cejannuzi Yeah, and he also denies he did anything wrong in the death of the cinematographer. No one cares what he denies. He has no credibility.

@@skyhawk_4526 He has credibility with me and he did not deny he did anything wrong. He explained what he did and leaves it up to the court to decide.

The Producer is the Capt of the ship so to speak, he deserves to be Charged, I heard they way he spoke to his 15 yr old daughter hes got issues

Isn’t he being charged because he killed someone?

He pointed the gun, no matter which hat he was wearing.

@@deemen7132 There were eight or nine captains then.

@T Z What does Trump have to do with it? Are you saying everything bad that happens to someone is from Karma? There are plenty of specifics about bad things Trump has done. I guess his Karma must be on hold because he deserves some negative repercussions too.

O way I would have had a gun near my head in that setting. Makes you think!

Great point

Very good Scarba. I had not thought about that. Today, I was at a high school track meet. The hundred meter sprint was setting up. There were 10 athletes. There was a starter who lined up the runners. He directed the athletes to the line and raised the starters gun. Did not aim at anybody. Despite knowing that the gun fired blanks only. Raised the weapon. Aimed to the sky. Then fired the “blanks” firing starters gun. Why do you think he did that?

great point

He had real bullets in his gun belt. Don't bet he couldn't have loaded that gun himself with a live round.

Those attorneys were full of shit, or had NO idea what they were talking about.

@@sharontyler6248 Bullsh#t. That's a conspiracy and no proof. He has no idea how to use a gun and they would have seen him load it. Come on. No critical thinking there.

As a producer he is responsible. Nevertheless I believe he will eventually make a deal to be guilty of the lesser misdemeanor charge and serve zero time.

@@schrodingersgat4344 Really? You need to read up. They're pretty powerful attorneys. You are not. Truth hurts I know.

Alec believed there are no live rounds on the set, but then there are reports that some time they fired the guns for fun, so someone must at one point have brought live rounds.

@@kurtilein3 Whoa. Hadn't heard that.

@@kurtilein3 he claims he didn't know. but he was the producer who fired the previous armorer and got the new one. i'm sure he knew they had been shooting live rounds from the guns, but to save his own ass from any blame he is trying to put it all on the armorer. he is certainly partially at fault

@@johnnyboro9558 It seems reasonable that they did the goofy and stupid stuff, like shooting live rounds from guns they are not supposed to mess with on a set that is not supposed to have live rounds, when the people in charge are not around. She, the armorer, is described as utterly unskilled but she is the daughter of a famous, skilled armorer. Her track record is that she worked on two movie sets, and in both cases there were complaints about safety and in both cases someone got shot from an accidental discharge from a prop gun. So her track record is 100%, two out of two, she works as an armorer, someone gets shot by a prop gun.

An actual live round should never have been in the gun in the first place, at least once that gun was on set.

@TMA62 If he has responsibility as a producer so do the other producers. I think there were eight or nine more.

@@vernonfrance2974 Did any of them aim the gun and pull the trigger?

That's the reason why he was charged for this horrible crime. As producer he has ultimate responsibility for what goes on the set.

Agree. Very arrogant.

Absolutely right. There may have been contributing factors, but if Baldwin hadn't disregarded the first and very most basic rule of gun safety - to never point any weapon at something unless you want to kill it - the other poor safety practices wouldn't have mattered.

@@juliemorrison5447 Prop. Gun. Not real gun. prop gun. Do you people even watch the videos? You know how many times I've sat through expert explanations of this, just hoping to hear something that makes this insanity make sense? I want you to be right, I want it to make sense that half the country keeps dogmatically reciting gun safety course intros like it was religious scripture, despite it not being church, or a real gun. I would give an analogy, like how if Darth Vader's lightsaber actually cut a man in half it wouldn't be entirely, if at all, James Earl Jones's fault; but I know it's not getting through. I literally want Baldwin to be guilty, just so this country feels less like Idiocracy, and not a single video, even Fox News can deliver a realistic argument besides just calling it a real gun. Yeah, you win. Everyone was on set just watching Baldwin wave around a real, loaded gun. That's how movies are made. No nuance at all. The lady agreed to stand in front of a loaded gun and let him pull the trigger. Keanue Reeves brings his own firearms to the set of John Wick and just unloads them before a scene. Okay, this is real life now... just going along with it for sake of my headache. Baldwin needs ta be in jail, furst thing we learnt as a child, grandpappy sat us down and toll us never point a gun at any critter we don't want for supper!

💯💯💯

So would you. You're no better..

🎯

Very well said!

Yes, he is responsible for what he "produced". Thank you.

Suppose you explain to us cowpoke what best practice is then. He was supposed to take the gun, unload it and check each round to make sure it was a dummy, and then hand it back to the armorer to re-load. But wait, then once she did that, unload it again and do it all over again?

Alicia L You have no way to know what Baldwin thinks.

@@vernonfrance2974 We know that he likes drama. It's his life.

Of course he is criminally responsible. You check a firearm evrytime you handle it anything else makes you liable

@@ganndeber1621 Not on a movie set. How you handle a gun in your own free time is one thing, but on a movie set the actors are not allowed to fiddle around with the prop guns. If they do, the gun should go straight back to the armourer to check it for safe use again. Any time an actor messes around with a prop gun on set they waste time and money because all that happens is that the armourer has to check it again. Granted, given what happened maybe that wouldn't be so bad in this case. But in no way is it the actors responsibility to make sure that the firearm is empty.

Alec does not need to check the gun. Infact as an amorer it would be a massive REG flag if an actor starting playing with a gun you just rendered safe.

Since he is a producer he knowingly put his workers at risk that makes him complicit

@@nathanmitchell7961I agree. Baldwin shouldn’t have hired the idiot in the first place, I unfortunately. He put lives in the hands of the wrong person

@@bellakatherman1477 We will find out to the extent of which Baldwin played a role in the hiring process, he claims he didn't so we will see in court.

He's guilty. You can't point a gun at someone, pull the trigger, kill them...and then blame someone else.

A true sociopath

Absolutely

would you stop with that nonsense. Holding a knife to someone's throat is also negligent, but they do it in movies all the time.

@@Milkmans_Son It's probably a rubber bladed knife that's held to another actor's skin.

@@cjc363636 A rubber switchblade? Huh? Huh? What about that?

Los Angeles entertainment attorney Tre Lovell described movie sets as "different from the real world,' saying in an email that the "rules and protocols" in Hollywood are extremely specific in ascribing responsibility at every stage of production. Actors are not in charge of ensuring prop safety, and the idea that they might be tasked with inspecting their own equipment will never fly with the Screen Actors Guild, he said.

So the criminal defense is that Hollywood is above the law? Let the screen actors guild be against this charge, it’s not going to prevent a conviction it’s just going to show a sense of entitlement and an expectation of special circumstances.

@@beckstemple No, Hollywood's not "above the law." Hollywood has different procedures, and for good reason.

You would be contradicting basic gun safety that is universally accepted. Everyone who handles a firearm must practice basic safety for human beings to avoid being shot accidentally. Let’s not rewrite the laws

@@charlesterrizzi8311 The basic tenants of gun safety are not law. There is no crime for being an idiot at a gun range, only for what might result from being an idiot. Making a movie already violates basic gun safety because you have to point guns at people, at people behind cameras, etc. This is why the studio hires expensive gun experts. If I were the set armorer, my policy would be that no actor loads or unloads a gun. I hand them the gun, they shoot the scene, then they hand it back. Like I am going to trust Alec Baldwin with a gun...yeah right. I agree that Baldwin should have verified, and followed proper procedure. But he's also a dumbass actor and the studio paid good money for an expert who utterly failed to do her job. That is exactly what I would argue in court. He is paid to act and the studio hired a gun safety expert who should have never brought live ammo to the set. There shouldn't have been a live round to kill anyone- and the person responsible for that is the armorer.

Agreed and I’m the interview with the police 👮‍♂️ he mentioned his long experience with guns on movie sets. So he had the knowledge

it is NOT Alec's responsibility to check the gun, it's the armorers. The armorer plans safety cehcks for the shots, checks guns are clear, checks ammunation and then give Alec the gun and saying "cold gun". Alec just did what he was told to do, rehearse the shot that he was told to do. Also even *if* Alec was required to check the gun, this would of still happened as the ammo was repurposed with a real bullet, it looks identical to a proper round, and the shot required the gun to have a blank round in there anyway so what would checking do?

@@nathanmitchell7961 Good analysis but it was supposed to be dummy rounds and not blank rounds. The only thing Baldwin probably could have done would be point the revolver in a safe direction and dry fire it six times. His other option would have been actually removing the rounds and ensuring they are dummies (not sure he could trust his ability to tell a primed live round from a dummy by holding the gate open and looking at each round as he advanced the cylinder).

@@exhaustguy Yea true my mistake. I also heard they were reloaded ammunition aswell to save money meaning it was even more prone to failure.

@@nathanmitchell7961 I am real curious to see how different the dummy rounds looked from the live rounds that were found (both the expended cartridge as well as the other live rounds they found). Doesn't sound like there are absolute standards on how to distinguish a dummy from a live round.

You do not check if a gun is loaded by test-firing it. LOL.

I like Todd G, celanacasciani. But Dr G is far from informed on this subject (sorry Todd but it is true). You are nuts!!! Read firearm manuals to inform yourself. They all say the same thing. It is always up to the user of the firearm to ensure it’s safe use. Never take the word of another that it is safe. Absolutely never. Period. Had Alec followed that most basic rule, a mom would not have been killed. Her young children left with no mom to raise them.

But his "checking" was the verification from Halls that it was cold. Why should it be required to be checked again if the gun is given to a second person? How is the risk any higher logically?

@@sarayoung9395 How is the risk any higher logically? Someone died!!! Reason enough for the rules that were not followed. Rules that Alec Baldwin knew well & still did not follow. The rules are there for a reason. And the reason happened & someone died. If someone hands me a gun & assures me that it is safe that gun is now in my hands & I am responsible for it. I'm not taking ANYONE'S word for it. I'm checking it myself to be certain.

@@SuzanneMarcella you're not following what I'm saying. Because the accident happened doesn't mean the risk went up.

@@SuzanneMarcella actors union came out and said it's not true that actors are responsible for checking guns or other dangerous things used on sets. It's the weapons experts job.

Twenty years of breaking giant boulders into tiny pebbles with a little bitty rock hammer à la Andy Dufresne in Shawshank.

If it had happened to Mel Gibson, would you think HE would deserve 20 years of hard labor?

Well if NM was so worried about that, why would they say it was everyone's constitutional right to carry their own gun and real bullets everywhere, including on the set?

@@cejannuzi there’s this thing called gun safety. Obviously that was practiced by Alec.

The charges were brought because they applied to criminal negligence. Plain and simple. The sentencing is where we will see this horrible awful crime be made an example of wider systemic negligence in TV & film industry

It is irreleavnt it is a movie set or a workplace. Guns are a well known risk like drink driving and it is the same standards for everyone. The US has many deaths due to negligence with firewarms and tight laws were put in for a reason. Baldwin himself was in favour of tight gun controls, it is curious if he now wants to say the laws are too strict.

@@cejannuzi They say it is their consititional right but also have laws that impose a high level of responsibility because the dangers of guns are so well known. The law is saying "We recognise your right, you need to recognise your responsibilty". That is not a contradiction.

@@carollynt I think it's more likely Alec Baldwin failed than the revolver.

Alex said himself he wasn’t supposed to pull the trigger at that time when he was in conversation with the director taking directions from her before they filmed the scene.

No he was going to pull the trigger to practice the scene anyway. And he would have pulled the trigger when they filmed the scene. But by that time the scene would have been blocked out properly, and the camera would have been downrange of the gun but remotely operated. The problem is the gun was loaded with real bullets and not dummies (at least one live bullet), and the cinematographer was behind the camera for the set-up and practice.

They’re supposed to. They’re handling a deadly weapon and responsible for their own actions

I concur, the word negligent comes to mind.

Question: Why did he aim the gun at a person?

@@yellowjacket5995 He didn’t mind breaking basic gun safety rules since it wasn’t his life on the line

Actors come in all types, ages and abilities. To expect every actor who might handle a gun in a movie to become a firearms expert, and check the chamber for themselves prior to every scene involving shooting, is not only ridiculous but dangerous. Several comments below, there's an expert on this who explains exactly that: ONE person, the armorer, is responsible for checking.

Yes, I really liked that part. Although I disagree sometimes with his conclusions (often not by much), I think he is very insightful. He has swayed me to change my mind a few times.

Baldwin showed up for Reed's 1 hour safety meeting. He spent much of the time talking on his phone, then left after 30 minutes. He made no response to earlier complaints about poor safety.

@@GeoffreyGuenther The armorer knew there were live rounds and the assistant director told Baldwin it was a 'cold' gun, meaning it had no live ammunition. I agree that one should never point a gun at anyone and Baldwin should be punished but so should the armorer, the director and the other producers.

someone who claims to have worked on the set (who knows, right? ) says the target practice stuff never actually happened. But both the real and fake ammo was stored in a van or something and easy to confuse. Shouldn't have been easy for the armourer to confuse it, that's for sure. And there's no way to know if that poster is legit.

@@dianevanderlinden3480 .... Yeah I wouldn't trust anybody from the set reporting anything after the fact. As soon as the incident occurred they reported on live ammo being used on the property shooting cans this was reported in numerous videos and on the news. Alec Baldwin's defense would have been useless if this was the case, It would have definitely answered the question of where the ammo came from, and it wasn't like it was reported by one source. If there was live ammo inside the same van with blank rounds he should still be held guilty for having it on the property at all. In my opinion whether there was target shooting going on or not Alec Baldwin was still ultimately responsible. He was the co-producer He's responsible for everything on the set. Also if he had followed even just the most basic gun safety rules none of this would have happened. I also find it laughable that in previous interviews with Alec Baldwin when he was bitching about gun control he says he grew up shooting with his father and knows all about the dangers of firearms since he was a child. Now all of a sudden he can't be held accountable cuz he's no expert and there's nothing about firearms even though he's used dozens in films.

@@fullcontact5732 I definitely believe the live was mixed up with the dummies, likely after their target practice escapade. Probably just threw everything back together.

@@dianevanderlinden3480 ... I agree with you completely. Would be interesting to see a drug test for those who have any firearm handling duties. Casual crystal use in pot smoking are certainly commonplace on the set

He was expressly told to point it at the camera to block the scene. They were going to film a scene where the camera zooms on him firing the pistol, zooms on the gun itself while it is being fired. Please think a little about the situation. I'm sure if you pucker up a bit you can get it.

That's what I've been wondering. The gun didn't load itself.

Some of the crew were target practicing during set downtime. Totally illegal. They got mixed in. Baldwin would have known the target shooting was going on but ignored it

It's an open-carry state. As it turns out, anyone allowed on the set has the god-given state constitutional right to carry bullets onto the set. I would suggest they lost control of the security on the set. And the person or people who contaminated the set with real bullets know goddamned good and well how it happened and are now mute on the subject.

@@jonesingforprosperity1964 Duh, the armorer loaded the gun. The gun was supposed to be loaded--but with dummy rounds, not blanks and not real bullets.

@@2wheelsforever174 The production company denies this. No police report or affidavit has ever alleged it.

There is so much nuance going on it's almost pointless to try to figure it out unless you weren't there. And even then...Especially with how untrustworthy our government is. I watched a guy, not even going to try to remember what his title was, but on NewsNation he gave an explanation of what it's like, stating that actors commonly pull the trigger in the heat of the moment while acting, and that it was his responsibility to ensure the prop is completely safe. I can't say what's true, obviously, but he seemed well informed and straightforward. Furthermore it was NewsNation, which is a rightwing media outlet that has repeatedly called for Baldwins arrest without any real evidence. Which to me adds credence when even they are acknowledging this.

Open carry state, for sure they were plinking having a good time. Most likely someone forgot to clear the cylinder before returning the pistols.unfortuate negligence/accident.

In his defense it is harder to check when there are blanks in and you don't know enough about what to look for, and the fact that it's harder to safety check in an old single action revolver. I still think he's responsible as he was the producer, and must have known that he hired hacks and that they played around with live rounds, and with this knowledge pointed at the cinematographer and had his bugger finger on the trigger.

​@@YeeLeeHaw Yes mostly I agree with you, I guess I come from a world of discipline. If you do not know to check the rounds to know what you are looking for then you haven't been trained therefore you should not touch a firearm, job and status are irrelevant .​

And you know nothing about making films.

@@cejannuzi How would you know churl

If she loaded the gun properly, it wouldn't matter, so long as the gun was secured and not tampered with. If you can trust your directors to hand off a gun that has been certified as safe on a set that should have no live bullets, then something is really wrong. There have been people claiming that earlier there was an accidental discharge, but none of this has been substantiated in a court of law. The producers of the film say it is a fabrication and that no such thing happened. They also deny that there were labor disputes.

This doesn't explain how the gun got loaded with a real bullet. It never should have happened. Either the armorer didn't do her job, or someone changed bullets.

@@cejannuzi I remember at the time, it was reported that during breaks in filming, crew members would often use the gun(s) for target practice or "plinking." I think it's most likely that that was why the revolver had live ammo in it. Someone was using it for recreation and failed to unload it after, and the armorer also failed to check it prior to it being taken back onto the set. (That was at least one explanation given at the time, but only a trial will tell.)

Yes. We’ll see what the New Mexico jury thinks about this brazen disregard for basic gun safety

Actually it's the armourers responsibility first and foremost, the ultimate blame rests on her as while an actor can check if something is loaded or not and observe basic safety their ability to discern between different rounds is lacking.

​@@Marconi121 I've worked for a major petrol chemical company for decades as a contractor. We are trained that job safety is the responsibility of everyone on the job site and if you do not know or are confused you are encouraged to ask a qualified person and that anyone on the job site can shut it down if unsafe practices are observed. If a humble fence contractor has those expectations placed on him then anyone waving a gun around in a work environment has no excuses.

@@member5488 THIS!

@@Marconi121 You’re wrong. A gun is a fundamentally dangerous object, it is ALWAYS the handlers ultimate responsibility to treat it as such. That’s why actors need to follow specific rules when using them, including NOT POINTING THEM DIRECTLY AT ANYONE AND PULLING THE TRIGGER. There was absolutely no reason for Baldwin to point the gun at the cinematographer, his training would have dictated contrarily (in fact he admitted this in his police interview). The armorer has secondary responsibility, but the last one in charge of the gun before it fired was Baldwin.

That's what George Clooney does - he was pretty vocal about it.

Los Angeles entertainment attorney Tre Lovell described movie sets as "different from the real world,'" saying in an email that the "rules and protocols" in Hollywood are extremely specific in ascribing responsibility at every stage of production. Actors are not in charge of ensuring prop safety, and the idea that they might be tasked with inspecting their own equipment will never fly with the Screen Actors Guild, he said.

YES!!! That is a rule for firearms on a movie set & he knew the rules & he did not follow them. Complete negligence on his part in this tragic incident. Personally, movie set or not, I would never allow a gun to be handed to me by ANYONE & take their word for it without checking it for myself. It has been handed to me & I am now responsible for it. Movie set or not, a gun is not a toy. Not to mention never pointing a gun at anyone whether loaded or not. NEVER point a gun at anyone unless you fully intend to fire it.

@@SuzanneMarcella so what was the purpose of the armourer and the assistant director in the process, if the actor has the total responsibility. If an actor was pointed towards a car and instructed to drive it down the street on camera, would he be committing a crime if the brakes were faulty and a bystander was injured?

Alec should have asked the person handing him the gun to check it again in Alec’s presence.

She wasn't on set, Asst Producer I believe handed Baldwin the gun. Not saying armoror Not bare some responsibility But they had her doing stage/prop set up & complained she didn't spend enough time doing it. Producers & financers of the film Cheap & didn't want to follow safety protocol. That is not the fault of armoror in her early 20's. The got what they paid for, sadly Alana paid the price for their carelessness.

It’s Baldwin’s responsibility first. The last person who had control over whether Halyna Hutchins lived or died was him. Therefore his actions most directly lead to her death.

@@AuntClara0911 She was responsible for the weapons. Why were there live rounds on a movie set...that was her job.

@@theuprising4847 yes but just because something is your job on set doesn’t mean you’ll always be able to do it. I work in movies and actors who are also an executive producer control the set. I bet Alec told her to go somewhere else so they could rehearse without having to spend time on safety. I’d put my $ that it’s more Alec’s responsibility than her’s even though that is “her job”

A professional armorer should have taken the guns with her when she left. Even SAG released a statement saying that direct supervision of the guns were the responsibility of the armorer… so no armorer=no guns. Now… we can argue about how she may have been influenced by star power to neglect her duties… but that’s also a bad look for Baldwin. Baldwin should have refused to touch the gun without the armorer present to verify with him that the loaded cartridges were in fact dummies.

Seems almost like sabotage, how could there be such a sequence of failures? Who put those bullets in the gun.? I doubt it was Alex. Epic failure on multiple levels and very sad.

@@canterburytail2294 "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." Hanlon's Razor

She wore the same outfit to work everyday part of that was combat pants, multiple pockets which she loved for storage purposes, she carried multiple types of rounds in those pockets and there were reports of the gun being used to shoot cans pre scene.

@@Patriottoo2 I do agree it was most likely a mistake, it never ceases to amaze me how stupid people can be. In this case it seems like just one diligent person would have stopped this, the Swiss cheese theory didn't work on preventing tragedy here unfortunately .

My take is that a “bored” PA or multiple PA’s where using the gun for target practice, with live ammunition, and retuned the gun back to the prop station with the live ammunition still in it. However, why would anyone bring live ammunition to a film set. That person knows who they are and may never be revealed. Rust, is a Rashomon, Agatha Christy, “who do it” story.

That whole set was run like a sh*t show

There is, as far as I know, no evidence that the crew were the source of the live rounds. But, regardless of the source, it appears that Reed didn't inspect the guns before returning them to the storage cabinet.

That’s just not true. Gun accidents happen every day in America, often killing kids. Charging is extremely rare.

Yeah. I think his hand grenade analogy was good but not the bulldozer one. A bulldozer operator requires a lot of training (I would think)

What if the driver was told there was no one in the path of the dozer? It's probably a good idea to check for one's self. A few minutes of checking vs a lifetime of regrets. I prefer the former.

It was not a random colleague. It was the armorer and director acting as props director. The gun was supposed to be loaded--with dummy bullets.

It’s a cesspool of immaturity and the boys club protecting the boys club

So, out of respect for victims, we should never blame anyone when people die? I want you on the jury if I get charged.

Good point..and why arnt the blanks glaringly different from live rounds at just a glance..bright orange for instance...it wouldnt be seen on screen

Why would live ammo even be permitted on the set? How did live rounds get mixed in with blanks? This whole thing is a mess.

It wasn't blanks. It was dummy bullets. They look like real bullets, but have no firing charge or propellant. A blank has a firing charge. The fewer people who handle the guns and bullets, the better--so long as that person is competent.

@@cliveedwards2958 The dummies have to look like real bullets for gun closeups like what they were practicing. The front of each chamber is open. You can see the bullets. They have to look real.

Apparently you have to shake the bullet itself to determine if it's real or a blank. This is what was said on Meghan Kelly's show.

The victim, also, should have insisted the gun be checked before she asked to have it pointed at her. Hindsight is 20/20 and it is a tragedy but if you go to the car races you don't stand on the track. I think Baldwin should have to pay the family money and pay society money to help fund gun safety classes. So should the armorer and the director and the other producers.

@@vernonfrance2974 No he had the sole responsility of checking the firearm

Some of the film crew were target shooting in the sets downtime. There had been an accidental discharge on set earlier. Dr Grande missed some key points setting the stage for dangerously lax safety standards as a producer, let alone actually pulling the trigger without inspecting the gun

@@2wheelsforever174 But why would you inspect the gun if the armorer told you it was safe? That's her job, and the reason she was hired. It's not the job of an actor playing a role.

@@jdd3786 They’re all supposed to check. Built in redundancy

@@jdd3786 It’s common sense that any normal person would want to know for themselves if the gun was loaded.

@@2wheelsforever174 Not according to what I've read. In fact, just the opposite: In Hollywood, ONE person is supposed to check, the armorer. They don't WANT every actor (who come in all types, ages and abilities) to be checking the chamber dozens of times each day. That makes a movie set MORE dangerous, not less. Every actor who might handle a gun should not be expected to become a firearms expert, any more than every actor who drives a car should become a mechanic.

yes, these comments are because they do not like his political stance. no way for the actor to know after its handed to you by the armorer and deemed cold.

BALDWIN took the gun from someone other than the armorer and still didn't check it himself, Hall could have put the live round in there, anyone that is required to handle a weapon must check the gun themselves, you can't trust these jabronises elst some beautiful woman will get laid in her grave from a piece of Garbage like Alec Baldwin, good thing for Baldwin that wasn't a relative of mine because me and my four brothers wouldn't give a turd about what the corrupt American justice system did about it. What do you think the Goldman and Brown families think about the American justice system?

@@tankthearc9875 exactly!! It's all bout politics.

Hello lovely! ❤ My guess is AB will take a plea deal to a lesser offense. Though, being a narcissist person, he might want to fight it, tooth and nail. He'll fail if he does that. Great comment. Much love, prayers & sisterly hugs to you. Always. ❤🧡💛💚💙💜💜🖤🤍💔

@@LDiamondz. Thank you beautiful. How are you and your daughter. ?. I can now let you know know on the day our daughter was taken Steve was the admitting trauma Dr in er. The ambulance rang too say they had a deceased young girl and critical young man. When he saw the man's face he pulled the sheet off and looking at him was our lifeless daughter can't say anymore hurts too much. Steve is not doing so well. Love you thanks for being here 💔💔💔💔💔My eyes are so sore 😢😢😢--

@@cottontails9003 ❤ My daughter and I are doing OK, thanks for asking. Oh, my God, how horrible for Steve! I'm so sorry he had to go through that. I can't even imagine. Please give Steve my love & hugs. I am thinking about, and praying for you all. Please, lovely one, please, take care of yourself, as best you can. We love you, sister! Shout out, if you need me. I'll be around. Hugs & love to you all.❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤

@@LDiamondz Thank you beautiful. Two days after our daughters death we found out their are two heart beats. At the moment I don't care. Thank you beautiful for being here. Steve said too say hello to my beautiful friend and his favourite American. Love you back ❤💙💙💙💙

@@cottontails9003 You don't have to thank me, my friend. ❤ Two heartbeats? OK. I didn't even know! You feel whatever way you want, lovely, there's no wrong way to grieve. Ah, Steve is such a wonderful guy. Give him a hug for me, when you can. You guys are my favorite Aussies! What a coincidence. ❤ Much love & hugs. ❤🧡💛💚💙

He is one of 12 producers, and it is a production company out of Georgia that made the hiring decisions. The director also has some of responsibility for the activities on the set.

He also pointed the gun at somebody and fired!

@@Joelswinger34 He is going to be found less culpable as an actor than potentially as a producer. There will be a long line of actors called that will testify that the production team gives them guns that are supposedly safe. I appreciate what Clooney does with dry firing or witnessing the dry firing of any revolver he is given, but that is not what actors normally do. Realistically that was the only way an actor can actually check to see that this replica antique revolver was loaded with dummy rounds and not live rounds.