It’s good to see someone in show business, a seasoned member, calling out the nonsense that most of Hollywood wants to push as truth. God bless you Mr. Schneider.
@BayMac If you’ve never really heard of him then he’s well known from the TV show “The Dukes of Hazard” from the early 1980’s and “Smallville” from the early 2000’s.
The problem is John is extremely partisan. If Alec was a republican this video would never be made. I lean right, love the Dukes, and I'm not a fan of Alex's politics but this just reeks of kicking someone when they are down because they don't subscribe to your politics.
@@christopherflynn Bull, George Clooney said basically the same thing. I know many experienced and responsible gun owners, all are livid over this, no matter the party. Same when Republican Dick Chaney shot his hunting partner. My very conservative father never stopped saying he should have been charged!!
When Alec Baldwin said that he felt no guilt, he lost me. I thought to myself, even if I had taken every precaution, done everything right, I would still feel guilty for the rest of my life.
Every cowboy movie I've ever seen.They're constantly pointing guns at each other and pulling the trigger with Blanks... But alec baldwin removed his blank and put a live round in it 🤔.. 😂
@@xtraflo They military runs a pretty tight ship when it comes to firearms safety for the most part. I've had a few small ranges where there were a few logistical issues and the only real accident was from our combat engineer platoon. Every now and then you get the occasional trigger happy idiot that shoots too soon They were doing bounding drills and someone slipped and ended up hitting his buddy in the back of the head just under the helmet. Accidents do happen even if everything was done right but I wouldn't even remotely equate that to the negligence of Alec Baldwins fuck up. I'll never forget sitting in church and seeing all his close friends crying, a real tragedy.
The usual tenants of firearm safety don't apply at all on a movie set. Completely different world. All firearms handling and safety should be conducted by the armorer and the AD. When you start handing out responsibility for these things to actors or people with other jobs, you fuck with something called LIABILITY
Thanks John for standing up and speaking the truth when “other” Celebrities won’t! What’s even more disgusting was in the Interview on ABC Alec Baldwin stated he did NOT feel responsible for the shooting. Very disturbing to me that he feels NOTHING was his fault.
Has an autopsy been preformed? Was that poor lady pregnant? Do you see where I'm going with this? Pure speculation on my part, but I remember what Ted Kennedy did.🤔
What I love about this is that it shows VERY clearly EXACTLY how the firing mechanism on that model of gun works, you can be vague or make up something all you want but that is a hands on demonstration that shows what is what, its hard to really argue with that. It's a shame Alec is so deluded about what really happened, imagine if all these years and all this energy he spent being anti gun, he had just taken 1 gun safety course from a qualified instructor...someone would still be alive today.
The usual tenants of firearm safety don't apply at all on a movie set. Completely different world. All firearms handling and safety should be conducted by the armorer and the AD. When you start handing out responsibility for these things to actors or people with other jobs, you fuck with something called LIABILITY
@Doug Upah anti gun, then why did they order over 500 rounds to just shoot while on set? Nowadays, everyone says whatever won't get them canceled or attacked. If you think being gay is wrong, do you think any famous person would ld have the balls to say it🤔🤣 NOPE .... he probably has a gun in his home for protection. And remember you better agree with the group you surround yourself with because if not you will get blk listed. I don't believe a word famous people say because 99% of them are fake and could give two shits about you.... Hence, he why he says he doesn't feel any guilt. Stright scumbag rich pompous ass that should and would be in jail if they were a regular citizen.
I've shot single action revolvers for over 50 years and everything you have stated John is 100 percent correct. Sadly it is apparent Alec failed to double check his weapon. If a firearm is passed around a room and 12 people handle the weapon there should be 12 separate inspections.
What Baldwin is going to go for is a defective product angle, and his narrative the other day was coached by his lawyers. And actually what he's going to say is feasible, if you remember from day one it was established that he was practicing quick draws, if his finger was off the trigger and the pistol had a defective trigger mechanism than it is feasible that it could have happened the way he said, if he drew it and "fanned" the trigger, or cocked it any other style associated with a quick draw, expecting it to stay cocked then it could very well have gone off, a defective trigger mechanism could even bypass the half cock safety feature of an exposed hammer type firearm like a single action revolver or even a lever action rifle. Now as we all know that's not what happened which brings me to the next point, and that has to do with everyone through all the comments sections of all these videos addressing this tragedy from day one, the subject of firearms safety, everyone keeps ragging on Baldwin as if he was a shooter at a range or even handling a firearm at home, those rules don't apply here, this is a Hollywood movie set and the people handling these firearms are not shooters, collectors or someone at the range, they're actors, there's armorers on these sets that are responsible for these firearms and their safety, ie there never should have been live ammo on the set much less in a firearm that was handed to an actor who was assured it was safe, ie a "cold gun". Actor's are not by their nature people who are into firearms, that's exactly why they have people to coach them on how to handle them in a realistic fashion, and sitting around on a movie set practicing quick draws is something that's even expected of an actor so they give a realistic performance, just the other night I watched a Gregory Peck movie where the premise is he's the fastest gun in the west and has a reputation that causes him problems everywhere he goes from some young punks always wanted to challenge him, you can bet that in between takes Mr Peck was sitting around practicing quick draws for the sake of not looking stupid on screen, you can even bet John Wayne did it in between takes on the movies he starred in. As far as checking to see if it's loaded that's also a mute point, once again we're not at the range or at home, this is a movie set and inert "dummy" bullets are loaded in movie guns all the time for the sake of realism, the same exact people who are ragging on Baldwin for not checking to see if it was loaded are the same people that would rag all over the movie for someone brandishing a revolver that is obviously unloaded, once again that's why these armorers are on these movie sets, one of their responsibilities is to make sure that the ammo in a firearm is inert dummy ammo and not live ammunition, how exactly would the actor know the difference? Which brings things full circle here, Baldwin has to play the defective product angle, because even though it's not his responsibility as an actor to make sure that firearm was safe but it was his responsibility as a producer to make sure it was a safe movie set via having hired a competent armorer to make 100% sure that when a firearm is placed in an actors hand and they're told it's a "cold gun" (meaning it's safe) that it is indeed safe. Now I want to be clear on something, I'm in no way shape or form an Alec Baldwin fan, the fact is I can't stand him, nor am I defending him but I'm just being realistic about how things are run on a movie set concerning firearms safety, you can't realistically expect an anti gun leftist Hollywood flake to know basic firearms safety, and once again these firearms aren't on a shooting range nor are they being handled in someone's home which are both environments that basic firearms safety rules are meant for, a movie set is an entirely different story. All that being said yes, Alec Baldwin is responsible for her death, but not because he himself was handling that firearm, he's responsible because as the producer it was on him to make sure that a competent armorer was hired to run the show with those firearms, he'd be just as responsible as if it was another actor who shot her under the same circumstances and he was the producer.
@@tonytorres8062 That's exactly the point, there never should have been live ammo on that set, think about it, how can you as the actor handling the firearm tell if it's live ammo or the inert dummy ammo that's loaded in guns in movies for the sake of realism? Which is what makes it so stupid when all these people are saying "He didn't follow basic firearms safety and check to see if the gun was loaded". And here's another news flash for everyone who's saying "He pointed it at her, why'd he do that?" Watch any movie that has a lot of gun action in it, it's very common for actors to point a firearm at the camera, it's called dramatic effect, and the director and camera man are standing right there. John Wayne did it, Clint Eastwood has done it, Keanu Reeves has done it, it's called cinematography, pointing the gun at the camera for getting that dramatic shot on film, it's a common practice in the movies to do it.
I hear people taking Alec Baldwin's side in this matter, speaking about how _"he didn't, or couldn't know"_ that there was a live round in the chamber, or how it's the responsibility of the Armorer on-set to ensure that the _"prop gun is safe."_ What John just demonstrated perfectly is what every gun safety course teaches as one of the (if not THE) most important things that you can teach someone who purchases a firearm: *_"When you're given a weapon, your first responsibility is to CLEAR THE WEAPON!"_* That means, you need to make certain that there are no rounds of any sort that are chambered, or loaded for use in the magazine/cylinder. That includes dummy rounds, blanks, live rounds, or anything else that could obstruct the chamber and/or barrel. Nevermind the fact that live rounds should never be on the set! That's an entirely separate matter, which is likely the responsibility of the Armorer; and she should face her day in court for her neglect of duty. What matters is that it's obvious that Alec *DID NOT* clear the weapon, because had he done so, he wouldn't have killed someone with that weapon. The responsibility for clearing the weapon lay 100% on the shoulders of the person to whom the weapon is being handed. That was Alec; and *HE DIDN'T CLEAR THE WEAPON!* Regardless of anything else that people want to say, someone is dead, because someone grossly neglected his safety responsibilities. As for the notion that it was a _"prop gun:"_ Folks, an actual _"prop gun"_ is something that may look and/or sound like a gun, but it can't fire live rounds. It isn't an actual gun. It lacks either a proper firing mechanism, barrel, or even a proper working chambering mechanism. What Alec had in his hands was an actual single action revolver, which was built to fire live rounds. Even had he confirmed that there were blanks in the weapon, he should *NEVER* have pointed the weapon at someone, while fooling around on the set like some comic book hero. Baldwin has been acting like an immature teenager. Even if he isn't found guilty of manslaughter, he should never be allowed to go near a firearm, replica, or prop gun for the rest of his life. He has demonstrated no accountability for his actions, which means that he's a high risk for this happening to some other unsuspecting victims.
Actually the term "prop" is for ANYTHING and EVERYTHING on set, ie "property". It does NOT mean it isn't a real one. A real gun used on set IS properly called a prop gun.
John, I truly appreciate you not letting this go. Especially with your decades of experience and perspective being in the film industry. Alec needs to be held accountable for the tragic death of Halyna Hutchins. Not only as the person who shot her, but as it was his production company that was responsible as well for the gross negligence of firearms use on the set and chain of custody of the firearm in question. Thank you!!!
The gun that John used looks like a Taylor's 45 Colt stage coach pistol. However a real traditional Colt 45 made by Colt does not have a transfer bar safety and to carry one safe only 5 rounds are loaded with the hammer down on an empty chamber. Once the hammer is cocked or even fanned the cylinder is going to turn to a loaded chamber...... Bang!!
It sounds like the prop people were out playing with guns the weekend before, Alec and nobody checked gun before scene. Are you thinking something else. Like what? Intentional murder.. maybe a secret government setup? C'mon. It was just a parade of irresponsible actions.
I can't wait for the moment in court when the prosecutor hands Baldwin THE ACTUAL REVOLVER AND SAYS....ok....show us what you did to make this gun fire without pulling the trigger.....THAT will be a CLASSIC moment!
@@carrollsanders9376 And if it was in perfect mechanical condition? I am sure the prosecutor will want to put him on the spot....whether he is stupid enough to take the stand is another question.....but considering he was dumb enough to give that interview....I wouldn't put it past him....would you?
@@bobbygzzz7116 ummmm.....no. As you start pulling back the hammer on a revolver the cylinder starts to rotate.....even in the unlikely event that the hammer was pulled back a small amount before it went into half cock position....and slipped.....and assuming again that the hammer had enough inertia to detonate a primer....the primer would not be under the hammer any more as the cylinder has rotated a partial cycle.
Thank you , John Schneider for teaching the non firearms people how a single action Colt works..I am so happy you, sir, are knowledgeable in firearms safety. Stay safe and don't go near Alec. lol
Excellent advice -- don't go near someone who demonstrates ignorance or disdain for the most basic safety measures. But...how does someone who's also ignorant know that the person holding the gun is an accident waiting to happen? If for no other reason than to protect yourself from the Baldwins of the world, EVERYONE should have a basic understanding of what is safe and what is unsafe. Apparently, the camera crew that walked off the set knew enough to realize that their workplace was hazardous to their health...and that knowledge may have saved their lives.
next witness for the prosecution in the trial of ........ and watch the view and MSN rally round their boy - the justice for thee but not for me crowd - wonder how many prisoners have had sex with a hollywood star - standby we might find out - rough house no lube
It is already (well-documented), but a certain (very) well known actor, once called his daughter “a *#%cow”. Very sad, as in pathetic, that Baldwin refuses to admit the truth.
Mr. Schneider I'm so glad you are a true American! I grew up watching you and I always looked up to you and Tom Wopat. And so many other's I watched growing up I found out later in life are really terrible people. Happy knowing that you are genuine and hope I get to meet you someday and thank you for all the great childhood memories.
Perfect description and explanation, down to why there would be a reason to point the weapon. It all plays out to the same reasoning as when you ask a child with chocolate all over their face "Did you eat the chocolate", and they answer "No I didn't eat the chocolate". They don't want to be responsible or admit what they have done.
@@kristopherbeer5422 I in no way say that a loss of life is even comparable to chocolate, more the situation him trying to avoid his roll in it. If that's what you drew from it you are sadly mistaken.
Alex needs to admit he screwed up big time and mishandled the weapon, I’m with you John in that gun can’t discharge by itself unless there was a huge malfunction. The bottom line is the chain of responsibility and safety was severely broken, God bless the Families of the victims and I hope they get a true honest outcome.
Baldwin is a malignant narcissist, and is thus unable to accept responsibility for nearly anything he does. Furthermore he will continue to talk about the incident against his attorneys express orders to his own detriment. He literally can't help himself.
John this is an excellent demonstration of how the gun operates and why gun safety is paramount. When you have people walking off the set because of safety concerns you know there’s serious issues. A gun doesn’t just shoot by itself. The trigger was pulled by Alec and he needs to answer why the gun was loaded, why wasn’t it sufficiently checked and why there wasn’t proper gun safety on set.
Much respect to you sir. I couldn't stomach watching Baldwin's entire interview, but from the bits and pieces I caught on youtube, he shifted the blame to every other person even Halyna herself, yet never once accepted ANY responsibility or apologized. He is a narcissistic egomaniac without an ounce of humility or grace. I pray he answers for this crime despite his wealth and fame. She had her whole life ahead of her, and a 9 y/o child is left without a mother.
Baldwin is a Socialpath and never feels guilt for anything much less this shooting. People like him never take responsibility for anything, always blaming someone else.
Hey John, long time no see; I worked with you on Dukes at the Burbank Studios ages ago. You are displaying common sense gun handling that we are lacking in modern filmmaking when producers hire none professional, none union personnel. As a union propman I have handed hundreds of weapons to actors without one incident, not one injury. The plain and simple truth is she died because of extremely unprofessional gun handling on so many levels. Nobody but the gun handlers, prop people, and actors should ever touch any weapon on a set and there should never be any live (real) ammunition anywhere near the set. Thanks for posting this video.
Are you people nuts real guns have no place on a movie set it's make believe not real so why would you need to check a gun that's being used for make believe on a movie set? the person in charged of the PLAY GUNS IS RESPONSIBLE NOT THE ACTOR! I'M A GUNSMITH and if I was on a movie set play acting in a movie the last thing I would do would be to check to see if a play gun on a movie set was loaded ! Do you check your child's gun before you give it to them OF COURSE NOT BECAUSE IT'S A NONE LETHAL GUN ON A MOVIE SET and how many people knew that real firearms were used in movies not me I was shocked I was a block from the movie set in Wilmington NC when Brandon Lee was killed by a movie prop gun So I guess Hollywood has not learned from past mistakes
@@kennethlong2280 I’ve handled weapons on sets for thirty-five years and the vast majority of them were real guns. The only time we used fake replicas on set was for background actors who didn’t need to fire a weapon on camera. As I see it the main issues are unqualified people handling guns and the lack of safety training. Anyone who touches the weapons has a responsibility to make sure they are safe. The only people who should ever touch the weapons are the armorer, the prop master and prop assistants, and the actors/ stunt people. All guns, at all times should be handled as if they are real and loaded until proven otherwise. As I said, the vast majority of weapons on sets are real; there are some that have had baffles put in the barrels in order to create enough back pressure to chamber the next round. As far as being NUTS; if being nuts means never having anyone hurt by one of my prop weapons in three decades because I followed strict safety rules, than I’m as nuts as it gets.
@@kennethlong2280 I understand what you're saying, especially with the technology we have today it's easy to make a toy gun look authentic enough for the movies there is no need for real guns on sets anymore. But in saying that many movie sets have used real guns before and through their own safety measures no one was hurt. This is not an argument for or against, it's a plea to those who wish to use real guns apply the correct safety measures every other movie that has used real guns without any fatalities used. The simple fact of the matter is that an incredible lack of gun safety was missing on that set. Why? We could argue about if they only used toys, it would never happen, but as was said before countless movies have been made with real guns without fatalities. At the end of the day those in charge choose real guns but failed to ensure proper safety measures were being used, the end result being the loss of lives.
Well done, John. There are a whole lot of responsible shooters who are also lovers of film, who appreciate your efforts to expose the lack of firearm safety on the 'Rust' set. The anti-gun crowd needs to understand that it wasn't the gun that caused this tragedy. It was simple disregard for safety protocols. Thank you for using your platform to spread the word.
I’m pretty sure that this is where this tragedy is going.. It’s the guns fault and therefor they are going to try and push gun control. It’s coming you watch🙄AnyOne with slight knowledge of guns know that Mr. Baldwin’s story just does NOT Add up or make sense whatsoever... Definitely missing pieces
@@since1876 it’s not murder. It was negligence!!! His negligence will get him a manslaughter charge. Please educate yourself what that means and understand the difference
I'm from the UK but have handled live weapons in the past, short time in the RAF, it was great to watch someone who knows how to handle a firearm. There are no excuses.
Mic the primer. The depth of strike tells the tail. Even if hindered by a thumb but even half cock will change the strike force. Gee people be smart and figure the facts.
And yall really got no guns over there no defense???...what happens pre say if your government went completely insane tyrannical and authoritarian on yall how would you guys stop them???..no trying to be a prick either like I'm genuinely interested..do you guys even plan for such an issue??? Would it be like the great English knife or ball bat war or like hows it break down over there...I'm sure you could see why Americans keep them and want them around if put in perspective...of course look at our current president dude can hardly form a sentence in the pocket of China and is insanely dangerous for our nation here and on the world scale..but theres a line american Democrats are dying to cross but know they cant...or they atleast should know we coming off these guns and our 2nd amendment and the constitution in general over our dead bodies...idk America maybe on it way there now...but what about England and the other nations over there...do ppl even try to game plan for such a situation..they all think it's not possible but I agrue this bullshit is some evil human instinct
That was my initial response to hearing about the whole thing. And I thought the same thing Wayyyy back in the day when Brandon Lee got shot on the set of the crow.. There's absolutely positively no excuse for that happening ....ever. The only excuse would be murder.
Great demonstration. As far as being a “pain in the butt” goes, people in all kinds of fields (including myself) have to go through time consuming safety protocol everyday and that’s without firearms being present. Thanks John for not letting this blow over. It needs to be addressed.
The issue is that actors are not firearm experts and they don't have any control over most of the process. Physically checking at that point just serves to increase the likelihood of an accident happening. The Crow was a great example, an actor would not have found that bit of material lodged in the revolver as an actor wouldn't expect to look for it there. Similarly, there wasn't supposed to be a live round on the set and they're still trying to figure out where it came from. It's not about being a "pain in the butt" it's about the fact that entertainment productions like this have different needs from what typical use of a firearm would permit, and it's not fair to hold them to the same set of rules. It would literally make filming impossible.
@@SmallSpoonBrigade First off, how does physically verifying that a gun is empty/safe after it’s been cleared and handed to you increase the likelihood of an accident.?? That idea goes against logic. Second, if the gun used on the Crow set had been physically checked/ cleared (as John just demonstrated) then the barrel blockage most definitely would have been found and Brandon Lee would not have died that day. Third, your idea that movie sets shouldn’t be held to the same safety standards that any other situation/job involving firearms would be held to is insane. I quote you “it’s not fair to hold them to the same set of rules” Also, just so you know, it has been standard practice/protocol on movie sets for decades to have every hand that touches a firearm confirm it’s condition ie loaded/unloaded, prop-gun/real-firearm etc. In this situation Alec Baldwin had over 30 years experience and training using firearms on set in movies and television. The safety protocols have been drilled into his head for years. He did not follow protocol, period. This is the reason for this accident, which killed one person and wounded another. He is at fault. There’s no way around it. It’s not murder, as many are calling it, but it is definitely manslaughter, probably “Criminally negligent manslaughter” or “Involuntary manslaughter “. He is guilty. This doesn’t mean that he should or will go to prison. I don’t believe he should. It does however mean that he will face consequences both monetary and other. Your statement sounds as if you’re trying to wash away responsibility because they are movie makers/actors. Laws and regulations do not work that way. There’s not a different set for “special people” ie actors & celebrities. Bottom line is, He fucked-up. He fucked-up bad and he’s going to have to pay for it. So will anyone else that touched and cleared that weapon that day. Anyone who cleared that weapon on that day failed at their job and contributed to the situation including Alec. Alec was the last link in the safety chain ( the most important one because it’s your last chance to get it right)and he failed. Now someone is dead and there must be consequences.
@@SmallSpoonBrigade I don't understand how you can make this claim when even George Clooney said that he checks EVERY gun he's handed EVERY time it's handed to him. Not only that, but Baldwin was also one of the producers of this western (a genre that is obviously going to involve a firearm in many scenes) on top of being an actor, therefore I would argue that his need for knowledge on proper gun safety procedure would be even greater than it would be if he was just an actor for the film in question. Also I don't understand how an actor checking a gun increases the likelihood of an accident occurring. Guns aren't complicated, and proper gun safety for any specific firearm could be taught to literally anybody, yet you make it sound like it's some complicated process that would go over an actor's head.
@@SmallSpoonBrigade you are wrong about everything you just said. But it doesn’t matter now, because John just proved Alec lied. Just like he said. A single action revolver will not fire. Unless you pull the trigger. He killed her. Then lied about his being responsible for it.
Hi John, I just gotta say,, "Book'em Dano!". LOL...Thank you for an interesting and candid video involving firearm functionality, etiquette, and responsible firearm ownership. As an owner of a true 1873 Colt Single Action Army (thank you Great Grand-Dad Charlee) and some earlier Italian Made Replicas, which used the original patented design, got me to thinking about this issue. "There's gonna be a hang'n!". These models had "fixed" firing pins, held in place with the "firing pin rivet". Both original patented and replica actions operate with the pulling back of a serrated hammer with a "fixed in-place" firing pin; the hammer's 1st click position WAS the safety feature "of the day", preventing the firing pin from resting on a live cylinder, but only if the handler of the gun utilized this feature. From the 2nd click position, the loading gate is operable; if you were to load six rounds, you'd end up resting the firing pin on the primer of one cartridge in the cylinder, if the hammer did not rest in the 1st click/safety position. Danger, Danger Mr. Ranger there, for all the city slickers. And it wouldn't have been so uncommon for a careless hand or gun owner to somehow drop, bump, smack or strike the hammer somehow, resulting in an accidental discharge. Instead of being stupid is as stupid does, and with the hammer in the 2nd position, with the loading gate open, is the practice of loading 1 cylinder, skip the 2nd cylinder, then load the rest of 4 more, close the loading gate, then complete the cocking action from the 1/2 cocked position, still readily holding the hammer, as the cylinder rotates to the empty one you skipped and slowly depress the trigger, which allows for the gunman to gently release the hammer, resulting in the firing pin at rest on the empty cylinder that was skipped over, during the loading process. The Spring loaded firing pins of today were more recently introduced and designed as an additional safety feature, preventing accidental discharges of the firearm without the hammer being fully cocked, in the 4th click position. The reason for this updated feature is that it didn't take much at all to discharge a cartridge, if the hammer had the firing pin resting on a live chamber. Getting bumped or snagged we will say, while riding, sitting in a chair, in a saloon brawl or the snagging of the hammer on a piece of clothing or a shrub, as you rode by on your horse was and is probable, but still, not very likely. If a single action firearm with a fixed firing pin is partially cocked, right up to the point "before" the hammer engages the 1st click of 4, and/or the "safety" position, and the hammer is suddenly released on a loaded cylinder, there most certainly is enough spring tension on the hammer, that when released or flicked in such a way along with having a fixed/riveted firing pin, a cartridge can, most likely would not, but there is an undeniable risk of a discharge. Another related feature of these Single Action Colts is the off-set of the trigger, as to its position within the trigger guard. The trigger location favors the left side of guard well in such a way, that a left-handed shooter wearing gloves or with fat fingers could unknowingly/accidentally depress the trigger with the fat of the forward left index finger, while gripping around the guns guard and cocking it using the thumb. The same type of firing could be induced when fanning the gun, but the depression of the trigger in fanning cannot ever be seen as unintentional. Lastly, even with a worn or broken hammer spring/sear, this model firearm doesn't usually discharge without depression of the trigger. Anyway, I wanted to share my experience with and thoughts about the patented Colt 1873 Single Action Revolver and the Replicas of yester-year and today. At the very least, I call "Manslaughter". Merry Christmas and I wish you a great upcoming year in 2022. Respectfully, JP
Most modern SAAs today are called "three click" actions. I have never been 100% sure why the action should change because of the receding pin. Certainly there was some fear of liability that made them switch to the receding pin though but I've never had a direct answer why the three clicks instead of four. The last one I bought from Uberti came with a three-click receding pin so I purchased an aftermarket hammer/trigger/latch kit that comes with a fixed pin and a classic four-click action. Also on classic four-click actions if you watch and listen very closely there is actually a "fifth" click at the very top of the action again idk why. I think it is the trigger sear falling into the notch and then pressing upward against it, I don't really know. At any rate, none of this should impact the gun going off unless it was dropped or something. The only way the gun could fire without pulling the trigger is if the notch on the hammer or the trigger latch literally broke off in that exact moment he was holding it. Which is not technically impossible in my opinion but so unlikely as to be basically impossible.
Love John Schneider! And really appreciate this detailed explanation & look at how to check a pistol. Also really nice that you gave us a valid reason for how the gun could have been pointed at the director. I agree 100% that there is so much about this that doesn’t add up. A woman is dead & a little boy is without his mom. This could have absolutely been avoided.
Thank you for being a responsible firearm owner, knowing what you are doing while handling it and telling the TRUTH yet again. Your channel is awesome!
I once handed a rifle to my then 14 yr old son. The first thing he did was to open the bolt to check if it was empty. Gun safety 101! It was a proud moment for me.
I watched my son put one down in front of my then THREE YEAR OLD grandson and he knew at that age; don't touch. He's almost 15 now and knows his stuff.
A few years ago of two men videoed their session at a shooting range. The 10-year-old daughter of one was also at the shooting range. The other man handed the girl's father a pistol without locking the slide back and ensuring it was not loaded. The ten year-old girl immediately scolded the man for handing her father a gun without ensuring it was not loaded. The other man humbly apologized to the girl, told her she was correct, and promised to never do that again. The look of pride on the girl's father's face was obvious. (The video might still be on RU-vid.)
John, I grew during the 80’s watching Dukes of Hazard , and I am so proud of the person your are. Very profesional and your videos are great ! We are enjoying a time where a communication like this can happen! Thanks for your contribution and As a 48 year old man that grew watching the series I admire you very much !
Same here! Daisy Duke ( Catherine Bach ) was my first crush... My second, unfortunately, was Samantha Micelli ( Alyssa Milano ) from "Who's the Boss"... But, John Schneider is completely wonderful in allowing himself to think things through with logic and purpose...
@@ghostcityshelton9378 We know he can sing... He can also act... He knows his Constitusional rights, so he is highly intelligent... What can't the guy do? LOL
That is the most important thing that people who don't understand the subject get a very solid understanding of the core subject. Certainly a great video.
@@gmathis4829 the great thing about tv interviews is there are no consequences for lying. In fact its highly encouraged as long as your politics are their politics.
Great job John! You covered every angle on how the gun can be fired and why it can't be accidently fired unless you actually pull the trigger. I imagine the only possibility of the gun going off accidently, without the trigger being pulled, is if it is dropped and lands on the end of the hammer, and there is a round in that chamber but since the gun wasn't dropped that disqualifies that possibility. Baldwin had to have squeezed the trigger for that gun to fire. There are no two ways about it. Thanks for the demonstration.
Gun use and safety needs to be taught in grade school. I grew up with loaded guns behind every door and was taught gun use/safety by the time I could walk and it was also taught in Jr. High School. A completely safe environment.
I know many older folk who say that many of the students pickup trucks parked at school had rifle racks wifh weapons on them and there was never a thought of a school shooting. The times haven't changed, the general level of public idiocy has.
@@ant88310 I am Canadian, and even though our firearms laws are tighter than the USA, there was a time in the late ‘70s when I had a gun rack in my truck rear window with a couple of rifles and a shotgun. Unloaded of course. Never locked the truck, parked at high school. Me and my buddies would hunt or go drink beer and plink after school. Times sure have changed.
there were loaded weapons all over my house growing up. my dad took us to the range at 5 yrs old. responsibility and respect is 100% needed at all times.
@@user-ic9qm8mb4t I am going to take a guess here - you are a libtard aren't you. John is doing a great job in explaining the facts about the gun. Kind of retorting what Libtard Alec rehearsed and did an interview with another Libard Georgie Stepaluphugus. John is a bigger and better man and movie star than Alec ever was.
Beautiful piece. A buddy of mine is a collector and has every colt revolver made from 1865-1900. His gun collection is worth more than the 2 houses he owns. Addendum: My apologies to the people who couldn’t infer that I obviously didn’t mean every, single revolver manufactured by Colt in the late 19th century, but rather “one of each model”.
I've been impressed with John Schneider ever since the 70's when he starred in "The Dukes of Hazzard". Imo He's always been a down to earth kind of guy. Loved him in Smallville too. Knowledgeable, humble, and I'd like to think, honest. His demonstration here just shows how someone with training, vs someone who is obviously untrained, would use a firearm or prop. Nice work sir.
Most of the general public, and specifically, non-gun owners that have never handled a firearm, let alone a single action revolver, would never know how to manipulate the action. The interview appeared to be a clear attempt by Alec Baldwin and his legal team to shift blame from him to an inanimate object in the hopes of influencing any potential jury members in future litigation. What a tragic event that could have been completely avoided by basic firearm safety measures. Mr. Baldwin and multiple others inability to keep live ammunition off a movie set and to practice basic firearm safety resulted is loss of life and injury. Mr. Baldwin, take responsibility for your part and own up to your mistake as well as the Armorer and other members of that crew.
alec's interview was for city idiots like me who never fired a gun. thing is, I have common sense and I know better than to assume a gun is unloaded, I also know never to point a gun at anyone unless I want to shoot em, and never rest your trigger finger on the trigger. But, if I know this is because my dad taught me. I also know a gun is NOT a toy. Alec saw the gun as a prop and not a real gun, so he thought he could do anything without consequences.
@@shouygui4955 Call and get an accidental shooting with a prop gun on the 911 call. You’ve got to wonder how long did they think with their statement should be before they picked up the phone and actually made that call.
I love seeing Pa Kent teaching me about gun safety! What a Good Ole' Boy! Great seeing John again, you are like a long lost friend showing up in my RU-vid feed.
Awesome john great job explaining how a single action revolver works and verifying that there is no way it would fire by hitting the hammer thank you john keep spreading common sense
My double action revolver hangs on the wall loaded and in all these years has yet to fire itself. Same with my semi autos, my rifles, and my shotguns. Not once in 40+ years have they jumped down or out and fired a single shot by them self.
I had a friend let us stay with him for a while and he would tell us stories of him and his army buddies loading every ordinance they could get their hands on and throw them over a high wall to see if they could get them to fire. Not a one went off by itself.
THANK YOU! Every American citizen who wants to own weapons (other than those who have rendered owning them illegal) should own as many as they want and “Congress shall not infringe”. The responsibility of EVERY owner is to ALWAYS consider a gun to be loaded and to NEVER point a gun at another human. Alec is guilty. Appreciate your example, John. Thanks again.
Thanks John for the demo. I didn’t know there were those safety catches on the hammer. I was under the impression the hammer could be fanned and could spring back and fire the round without pulling the trigger. I’m a little smarter today.
Single action colts have 4 “catches” it can be remembered because the first catch = C second catch = O third catch = L and fourth catch = T so all together it has four catches which equal COLT.
Typical on all 1873 Colts and clones. Uberti , Pietta, and many, many others. 1st click “safety” notch, second is half cock or loading position, third is bolt release, and fourth is full cock. Properly timed they are 4 distinct clicks. Many copies have early , late, or mushy clicks .
Having owned firearms my whole life and taught by my father how to use them, and now owning his own Colt revolver - what you said is 100% accurate. If they showed this video, John, in court there would be zero doubt from the jury either.
@@sladetheblade9349 John told it tottally correctly!!! None of what he said was wrong. I spent 26 yrs in the U.S. Army, am a Combat Vet Hon.retired and some of my jobs was: ammo and explosives and taught bio-weapons and nuke warfare and was a Drill Sargent for seven years.
@@colecole3352 Oh ...I guess you'er a big fan of Balwin, eh? Balwin could have placed live rounds mixed in with the other rounds so he could place blame on others. I spent 26 yrs in the U.S. Army, a Combat Vet Hon.retired and was a Drill Sargent for seven years. Some of my jobs was ammo and explosives and taught bio-weapons and nuke warfare.
the person who made this video does not have access to the revolver that was involved in the fatal accident on the movie set. He can play around with the one he has in the video, and take it apart and pull the hammer back all he wants to impress people like you But he does not know what the revolver that went off on the movie set would do, because HE DOESNT HAVE IT - and HE HAS NEVER TOUCHED IT the revolver on the movie set was not suppose to have live rounds in it - it was not suppose to have blanks in it at the time - it was suppose to have been rendered safe by a gun expert and was then handed to an ACTOR what part of this do you not understand - the actor was never going to fire it with live rounds, he is not trained to handle live weapons - that is why they are called ACTORS get over yourself and your self righteousness
@@carrollsanders9376 There was nothing accidental about what happened nor a phantom notch! He’s guilty of negligent homicide and isn’t man enough to own up to murdering her! Good job schilling for a murderer!
yea, me too ! crazy ! ive never ever searched for john schneider or dukes of hazard EVER ! & i get recommended this. im Not even a Gun guy. i don't search for guns on the net. crazy weird i get this in my recommended.
The sad thing is, is that even after watching this extraordinary demonstration, people who support Alec will completely ignore the facts solely based on his political leanings. That is sick imo.
He claimed in the interview that he was slowly cocking it back with no finger on the trigger...and apparently the hammer slipped from his thumb and moved forward on its own, causing the firing pin to strike the bullet. However, when the director was interviewed by police, he said Baldwin was practicing a cross draw.
Sheered lead in the trigger mechanism, could have caused the trigger to jam back, when he released the hammer at full draw he experienced the Phenomenon Notch effect and the hammer did not contact any of the Catches on the trigger.
Except it's impossible for the hammer to "slip". There are stopping points (as John clearly demonstrated) that prevent the hammer from accidentally striking the round. The first position would have stopped it. And Alec has claimed he never pulled the trigger...which is actually impossible given that the hammer DID engage the round. Alec lied. Period. To be fair, although he absolutely did NOT practice ANY weapon safety, someone else was responsible for there even being a live round in the weapon. Personal opinion: Negligent homicide on the part of the armorer, the person who handed Alec the weapon and Alec himself.
If he was pulling back the hammer and letting it go it would stop and lock at the first catch on the hammer. It wont go all the way forward unless u have the trigger pulled.
This is so important to hear from someone with real life experience on sets with guns, all the safety precautions, all the ways a gun would or would not fire. In today's courts of public opinion, if one side is getting information out, it is extremely important to get as much information as possible from all angles. Thank you for sharing from your unique perspective and experiences.
@@airwolf36 That's why the usual (and competition) way of loading a Colt is with 5 bullets. Put one in, skip a chamber and load the other 4. When you're done you'll be over an empty chamber.
There's a hole in his story John. Those that have knowledge know logistically is not plausible for a revolver to go off unless you pull the trigger. Thank you for sharing this video with us. God Bless you.
God bless you gurl. May you bear many fruits. God knows: we need more like you!!! And bless you again: God bless you gurl and all the fruit you bear. SCOTUS will keep you fruitful and out of the workforce; where men belong! And may God bless you with a man that will never ask to divorce or you become wayward to ask him. May God bless.
Yes it could have gone off if it had a defective trigger mechanism, one that's defective could even bypass the half cock safety feature of an exposed hammer weapon like a single action revolver, a lever action rifle or even a Model 97 Winchester pump shotgun. And the narrative that he should have checked to see if it was loaded makes no sense, inert dummy ammo is used in movies all the time for the sake of realism, the very same gun experts who are claiming he was irresponsible for not checking to see if it was loaded are the same exact people who will rag all over a movie where someone pulls a revolver out and points it at the camera and it's obviously unloaded, that's exactly why they have dummy ammo on movie sets, because of all the gun experts that'll rag on the movie makers over that detail, everyone keeps saying he should have checked to see if it was loaded but how could he have been able to tell it was live ammo? The subject with this tragedy isn't basic firearms safety, this is a movie set not the shooting range or someone's home, that's exactly why there's armorers on the sets, to make 100% sure that when an actor is handed a firearm and they're told it's a "cold gun" that it's not something that'll shoot someone. I can't stand Alec Baldwin, he's your typical anti gun leftist Hollywood flake, and he's responsible for her death but not because he was handling that firearm, it's because as the producer it's his responsibility to make sure the production has hired a competent armorer that's going to be 100% certain that a firearm on a set isn't capable of killing someone. But basic firearms safety doesn't apply on a movie set like it does at a shooting range or at someone's house where you can bet there's live ammo and a very slim chance there's inert dummy ammunition around to get mixed up. And here's a news flash for everyone, drawing a firearm and pointing it at a camera that has a director and a cinematographer standing right there is a common practice when shooting a movie, John Wayne did it, Clint Eastwood has done it, Keanu Reeves has done it and so on and so forth, all your favorite stars have, that's exactly why an armorer is on the set, to make sure a firearm isn't capable of shooting the director or the cameraman. Alec Baldwin is going after a defective product angle because even though it's not his fault for being the one that was handling the firearm it's his fault as the producer for not having a competent armorer running the firearms end of things on that set, a defective product is his only out.
@@dukecraig2402 After Brandon Lee's death basic gun safety, as John demonstrated, was the procedure to be followed. John even said it in a previous video. Alec could have easily looked in the open end of the chamber to see if a round was present, and if there was a bullet attached to it. Many things will come out of this trial to hopefully prevent another tragedy like this. I believe there will be a lot of blame to go around. Very sad for everyone involved.
1:40 into this vid......I am so IMPRESSED with his thorough, knowledgeable handling of this gun......the man knows what he's doing. This demonstration of how a gun is supposed to be handled and checked is so amazing..... leaves no doubt and speaks so much of the carelessness upon the set of "Rust". Well done, Schneider. I appreciate, so much, how you speak your mind!
@user2849 I'm not talking about Baldwin. Obviously he had no trigger discipline either. I'm talking about the dude in the video booger hooking the shit out of the trigger the entire time he's handling the firearm. Sure if you're pulling the trigger no shit your finger needs to be on it. But having your finger on the trigger while you're flipping it around and doing other shit, especially while trying to demonstrate the safety of a firearm even if it is unloaded, is bad practice.
@@bakedandsteaked Yes, after reading the California Firearm Safety Certificate guidelines, I am of the same conclusion, as it recommends to rest the finger on the outside of the trigger guard, or along the side of the gun until you are ready to shoot. Thank you for your attention to detail. I am sure this applies to when checking the gun, as well. Took me all of five minutes to learn that. What the hell is Baldwin's excuse, or John's. Guess no one on the set of "Rust" knows the difference of a live, or " dummie "(?) blank(?) round. Going to look that up now.
It’s really nice to know that you’re not a fake person like most of these actors and that you actually know about firearms nothing but love for you Mr. John a.k.a. Mr. Kent 🤙🤙🤙🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
He kind of does, except like most newbies, he calls the rounds or cartridges, "bullets", they are not. The bullet is what comes out of the cartridge. He should also know that dry firing that type of gun that has a firing pin on the hammer could cause damage to the frame. He should have never dry fired it in this video. It should also be referred to as a "gun" or a "firearm". "Weapon" is a generic term that is over used by the left that could be anything- even a ball point pen. When you're at work and your pen runs out of ink, do you ask a coworker for a "close quarters combat weapon"? We need to stop using wrong terminology and making guns sound like they're just used for killing like the main stream media does. I like John, but he needs more firearms education.
He doesn’t appear to be trained. If he was trained he would not be pointing at the camera man and he would be keeping his finger off the trigger. Trigger discipline is the most basic of all handgun safety.
@@ericpalmer3588 1.- He asked permission/inform the cameraman BEFORE do it, and show him the empty weapon, even after he have cleaned it first in front of his own eyes/camera. 2.- He is a veteran actor trained to PULL THE TRIGGER OF A PREVIOUSLY EMPTY GUN, WHILE AIMING SOMEONE. 3.- Cameramen are veteran pros, trained to RECORD A PREVIOUSLY EMPTY GUN AIMING DIRECTLY AT THEM. Give to God what is God's, and to Caesar what is Caesar's. Cameraman's word.
I don't know about the specific weapon that was used on the set of the film, but certain early examples of single action revolvers lacked the safety mechanism that prevented someone from accidentally "fanning" the hammer and igniting the cap. That's why people in the 19th century would often only load 5 of the six chambers, so that the chamber aligned with the barrel would always be empty. Of course, it would be bizarre to use such a weapon on the set of a film.
to "accidently Fan" the Revolver you need to hold the trigger, the Revolvers has so heavy spring on Hammer that you won't release the hammer UNLESS you pull the Trigger :)
@@triamaria Yeah, this video and my comment predate that information becoming public. At the time, we did not know what kind of revolver was used on the set.
Very, very good explanation John. My Grandfather told me when I was a kid, was never ever "blow down the barrel" after you've cleaned it, because of the moisture in your mouth and could possibly pit or begin to rust. He was an avid hunter fisherman and was an advisor/consultant on a TV show called American Sportsman. 🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲
I've owned single actions for years. Regardless of even the live ammo argument, there were at least 3 if not 4 distinct actions that occurred. 1. He drew the pistol. 2. He cocked the pistol. 3. He pointed it at the director. 4. Either the gun failed, or his finger was on or pulled the trigger. The point being... he (Alec) had to do three different actions for this to happen. As someone else pointed out elsewhere, I forget where, but bullets go in a straight line. Although this happened on a Hollywood set, there wasn't any sort of Hollywood magic that made that bullet go anywhere other than where it was pointed. Alec pointed a gun at another person. That's one of the Prime gun safety rules. Never point a gun at anything you aren't willing to destroy. (unloaded/blanks/prop bullets or not!!!) Some may say the gun didn't fail. Well, they do fail, when not maintained, and there was info about there being several accidental discharges with that weapon. It should have been pulled out of service and fixed before it was ever allowed to leave the armory ever again. Nice presentation Mr. Schneider.
Yep, particularly like the point about servicing of the weapon. Despite their portrayal in most games, even "cheap" guns are typically good for 10s of thousands of rounds before they start to seriously wear. What I hear is that this particular weapon was an Italian-made clone of the Colt Single Action Army in .45 Long Colt. Not ONE person with any credibility has said they are "cheap" or "poor quality" knock-offs. The only way to "excuse" Baldwin (again, he's still culpable for 3 out of 4 acts...) is to disassemble and forensically examine every single part of the action and PROVE wear-and-tear/damage that made the weapon unsafe. Let's just say that I'm not going put money on anyone finding someone wrong with the gun...
There's only two ways to fire a single action revolver that lacks a safety bar. 1. Pull the trigger with the hammer cocked 2. Hit the hammer when it's resting on a loaded chamber If it has a safety bar, then #2 won't work. Only #1 will work. Even if its a broken gun, you still have to pull the hammer back in order to discharge it under the conditions that Baldwin claims the gun discharged. Pulling the hammer back on a pistol that you have not personally cleared and pointing it at a person is reckless. If that action results in the person's death, then you're guilty of manslaughter at a minimum.
The comment that bullets go in a straight line? I saw that said by Kayleigh Mcenany on Outnumbered when they were discussing Baldwin claiming that he didn't pull the trigger.
Well said John. I was in the Navy for 20 years. My daily job was welder, and shipboard plumber. I didn't use a gun daily. With that said, almost everyone had to at least know basic gun safety and how to safely handle and fire a gun. First rule of gun safety is never ever point a weapon at something or someone unless you plan to shoot at it. Second, always check to see if its loaded, and if there is no clip in the handle, then check to see if there is a single round in the chamber. Third always know if the safety is on or off. We used 9MM Barretta, and I know that 9MM are different, but gun safety is gun safety no matter the model. If Baldwin had done this, more than likely this incident might not have happened.
At 4:50 you hit on the scenario that is supposedly involved. It is a fact that some models of old firearms (not just "replicas") can cause a round to fire if the firing-pin is resting on the primer. It was common practice to keep the chamber behind the firing-pin empty because of this. This was common knowledge and a common safety practice. If you had an older model firearm, that had a round in the chamber, and the hammer was fully forward and resting on the ammunition round, there is the wild chance that it could cause the firearm to discharge. I know this because I was brought up around old school gun collectors, and this was something they were very strict about and repeated many many many times.
Thank you John, for demonstrating this,there has been several of these popping up lately.I own several revolvers,single and double action,and are familiar with them.I hope these demonstrations are brought up in a court of law to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
John is the man who you can count on for explaining how to properly use a firearm ! John you’re amazing ! Finally someone who knows what he is doing with an actual firearm! Great job John !
Commendation to you for having someone on, who clearly knows what he’s talking about. Having ten years as a gun and rifle totter and an armourer in the military, I’ve witnessed so many self taught experts handle weapons in a way that makes me cringe. I also hear people talk about how the military accepts less safety in battle conditions. Nothing can be further from the truth. The crazier things get, the smarter at handling weapons you need to be. You can be submissive in your role when your responsible for a weapon. You must assertively stop anyone from mis handling a weapon your responsible for as well as stopping someone taking on your role when they have no authority to do so. Although an AD have more authority than an armourer, safety trumps everything and an armourer does not allow an AD to determine the status of a weapon or to remove a weapon from the cart. I hate to say this but as a young woman with little experience the armourer might not have been able to have complete control. The AD had a reputation for being reckless so on the first day she should have met with the director and AD in question to lay down the ground rules and stop filming when the AD acted outside those rule with the agreed support of the director or you walk away from the job. All sorts of people in every life situation do things they shouldn’t so if you can’t deal with that find a less dangerous job. There, I said my peace.
One of the first things I was taught in firearm safety is to ALWAYS assume a firearm is loaded until you've checked it yourself. Also, never assume a blank is harmless. Even blanks can kill in certain situations, i.e. The Crow, Brandon Lee fatally injured, Cover Up, Jon-Erik Hexum fatally injured. No matter who hands you a firearm, CHECK IT FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY AND THAT OF OTHERS.
@@JimNortonsAlcoholism Yeah, but Baldwin is going to carry around the memory of having killed that woman for the rest of his life. Publicly, for now, he’s blaming the gun. But if he ever handles a gun on a movie set again, I’ll bet he checks it himself from now on. It’s sad that he had to learn this lesson the hard way.
Just to clarify, Brandon Lee's death was allegedly caused by a bullet being stuck in the barrel, after which a blank was fired through the gun, essentially making a live round. I say allegedly because there's still a lot of fishiness surrounding the whole event, but the officially claim is that a 'dummy' round was made by pulling the bullet from a live round, the powder being removed, then replacing the bullet. The primer was kept--whether due to negligence, ignorance, or on purpose so that when used, it would make a small 'pop' that could be used in editing to key the sound of the gunshot in. Either way, the primer was struck by the hammer at some point, which had enough oomph to push the bullet from the cartridge and lodge it in the barrel (referred to as a squib). Sometime after this, without the barrel being checked (again possibly due to negligence) the same firearm was used to fire blanks (the powder load of which is unknown) at Brandon Lee's character in the film. The actor firing the gun wasn't supposed to aim directly at Lee, but for whatever reason, the muzzle was indeed pointed at Lee at the time it was fired, launching a bullet at a very much lethal velocity into Lee's torso. He died in surgery several hours later. Anyway, that's all I've got.
I was taught the same exact lesson... He didn't take the time to learn anything about firearms. In less than an hour he could have at least learned the basic safety rules. I am not saying it is totally his fault, but he is negligent and if nothing else he will and should be hit with a huge civil suit.
This was an unbiased and professional analysis. Thank you. While Alec Baldwin shooting two coworkers was tragic, this is a great opportunity to reinforce that guns don’t kill people, people kill people.
@@Earthneedsado-over177 People with knives, shovels, hammer, glass bottles, and chairs kill people. What's your point? Or better yet people with intent to grievously harm people will opt for more destructive methods such as a large vehicle, enclosed fire, and acid.
Just a good ol boy… showing how a Colt works. On a side note I went through a lot of toy cars because of the Dukes of Hazard. Keanu Reeves spent months of training and shooting 1,000’s of rds for each of his John Wick movies and I’m sure gun safety is a major priority for him.
and he never shot anybody....but...even if there was a situation where he did, he would own up to it...by all accounts, keanu reeves is good guy, not at all like baldwin, with his temper and anger
Some people probably are saying, why check the barrel if you've noted the cylinder is empty? It's simple. If "anything" is in the barrel and a blank is fired, that item becomes a projectile.
Alec is guilty of murder, if they can try someone who was defending himself, they can try princess alec. Wish more actors were like you we might get movies worth watching.
Not murder. Get real. We don't know all the facts. But from what IS known, Baldwin could be looking at negligent homicide charge. As producer of the movie that none of us are going to spend our money to see, he was responsible for safety on the set. He was responsible for hiring and USING a qualified armorer. As producer, he was responsible for making sure safety rules are in place and followed.
Come on I'm no fan of Alec Baldwin but I'm pretty sure he would not be running around deliberately shooting people at work and I think the man has been vilified more than enough by the rest of us that don't know what actually happened
As far as I am aware(and I am no expert in such matters) there is 1st degree murder where you planned ahead of time to kill someone then there is 2nd degree murder where you kill someone in the passion of the moment(ex. you lost your tempter and reached for a weapon and hit them over the head with it and they die as a result) and then there is manslaughter where you hit someone and they die as a result not intending to kill them(ex. you are both drunk, you get into an argument which leads to a fight, you hit them, they fall backwards hit their head on something and die). Everything reported in the media points so far to manslaughter but hey, what do I know?
That was a wonderful demonstration of safety and protocol when it comes to single action Revolvers. Thank you. It has been quite a while since I was part of SASS, the refresher was great. I have broken both of my wrists since then and am unable to shoot anymore from the pain. I believe that if there is a need for an armorer to be on set, that every single person who might handle a weapon needs to have a basic safety course on those weapons. It should be a requirement for people like Alec Baldwin who don't like firearms, but have accepted a job as a character who uses one. Learning second hand what the safety terms mean is unacceptable.
Baldwin knew exactly what he was doing. Dems prob. said they'd get him off the hook. The women he killed had dirt on the Clintons that could send them to prsion.
ABSOLUTELY! Thanks John!! Great demonstration and explanation. New Mexico police need to charge AB with manslaughter or reckless homicide at the very least. Regardless of who handed him the firearm, the person holding the weapon is ultimately responsible for whatever happens with it. Even my teenage son knows that.
It was reported that a federal judge immediately imposed a gag order in this case because of 'other' considerations. The New Mexico PD has to comply with the gag order and will only report what they are allowed to report.
During my gun safety training, i was advised once the bullet leaves the chamber - you are responsible. sounds like quite a bit of negligence, took place-- not just Alec-- So, will be interesting to hear the outcome-
I’m a retired deputy sheriff from Canada and have completed many fire arms and tactical procedure courses. Its extremely refreshing to see how safety conscious he is.
@@redrambler2000 without a cylinder, its basically the same as you pointing your spoon at your face. Spoon maybe deadlier, if its putting icecream in your mouth all the time
2:17 Notice that John’s thumb slipped off the hammer while cocking it back. Also notice that even though that happened, since he wasn’t holding the trigger down, the hammer did NOT go all the way back down and would not have fired even if it was loaded with a live round. Seems like that pretty much settles it, regarding the claim that AB just let go of the hammer and it went off.
I noticed that, too. Unless they discovered his gun was badly damaged, even pulling the hammer almost all the way back and letting it fly wouldn't have fired the round. What no doubt happened is Baldwin has no trigger discipline and was resting his finger on it. When he pulled back on the hammer, the trigger moved backwards with basically zero resistance. Then he let the hammer go, and since the trigger was all the way back, the hammer flew forward and struck the primer. Even if the gun WAS badly damaged and had no half-cock notch, following literally ANY of the other basic gun safety rules would've prevented this. Case closed.
BALDWIN IS A BIG FAT LIAR . agree. I own a Colt 1873 Peace maker .. Baldwin had to have his liberal lying finger on the trigger and have depress it so it could fire when he cocked and release the hammer. Period !!!
While that is true, and I am of the opinion he likely cocked the hammer and pulled the trigger... regardless of what his intentions were or knowing a live round was there, ALL mechanical devices can fail. A mechanical safety, such as a safety sear, CAN fail, not saying that's what happened, but on worn guns, they can potentially slip and go off. My 1911 had the main sear catch fail, but the safety sear caught it while at the range one day. I replaced the springs after that, but it is possible. The gun would need to be inspected to verify, beyond just speculation. All people are assumed innocent until proven guilty.
You have to trigger was damaged that would be the only way it would be possible. But there were six rounds in that gun five dummy one real. What are the chances he fired the real one
@@eppyz I definitely agree on the liability. That's why the basics of firearm safety are redundant, to avoid a mishap. Just wanted to chime in on mechanical failures being a real thing.
The hammer obviously didn't fall forward while the firearm was half-cocked during loading. AND... Baldwin himself didn't mention experiencing any issues while HE was familiarizing himself with it- as he stated he had done during the interview. He said he spent an hour and a half firing the weapon WITH THE ARMORER the first day he was on set, before ANY rehearsals were done.
I think everything points to Baldwin already holding down the trigger when he was fanning it. When he remembers it he might legitimately think he did not hold down the trigger, when really he was holding it down the entire time.
I hadn't heard that before... that's an interesting possibility. The way I understood it, he wasn't fanning it in that scene, but they mentioned that the gun had been fanned to point out that the fanning could have damaged the action, which then failed. Since he claimed that once they got the angle right, the director had him cock the hammer and when he took his thumb off, the hammer supposedly fell without him pulling the trigger, then he could claim that he didn't do it on purpose. The problem with that theory is that fanning doesn't damage the catches between the trigger and hammer, it damages the "bolt" that locks the cylinder in place. Either way, the armorer should have checked the gun for both being unloaded AND for any faults in the action before handing Baldwin the gun... and he should have checked it as well. It's understandable that he wouldn't know enough to check the action for proper operation, but he should at least have known how to check if it was loaded knowing he was going to be pointing it at people. It may very well have been an accident, but he's still responsible for it since he could have prevented it.
Thank you for sharing John. I appreciate you teaching us gun safety. Gun safety is very important along with getting trained using a gun. Training is a must after buying a gun.
This is an example of several things: 1) Someone trained in gun safety; 2) Someone putting gun safety into practice; 3) Knowledge of guns and how guns operate; 4) Someone in Hollywood not jumping on the anti-gun wagon because of rhetoric. Great job, John. I'm going to share this with all the people I know.
@@kungpowchickenwing without guns on set you basically can't have action movies. The only way to get realistic gun action in a movie is to have a gun firing blanks so it looks and sounds like a real gun. So your 'best way' is, in fact, a really dumb answer that you haven't, and likely never will, think all the way through. If you want realism in your movies, you need functional guns on set... and someone with a brain in their skull making sure they're properly inspected before each shoot. THAT is the best way to not have an accident... to actually use your brain.
@trumptard nation Perhaps you should watch the video again, John specifically mentions "Alec" and what happened with the person killed and the director. He is talking about gun safety, but he is also talking about the specific type of gun in question used in the shooting, the events of the shooting on set, and Alec Baldwin.
“. . .this is a pain in the butt. . .” - exactly why every film needs a weapons master (armorer, weapons specialist, weapons handler, weapons wrangler, or weapons coordinator) with a rigorous chain of custody for the weapons. Excellent demonstration on checking a gun. Thank you.
Being a western historian esp concerning 19th century firearms as well as owning several Colt model P SSAs, you are absolutely correct John. In fact when the 1st Model Ps ( also known as Peacemakers) were introduced in 1873, Colt actually recommended carrying only 5 rounds with the hammer resting on an empty chamber
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is: No transfer bar or drop block in the old revolvers, and they weren't carried on half cock because of the cylinder being unlocked in that position. The hammer's natural resting place had the firing pin just off or barely touching the primer and the forward momentum of the hammer would carry it past that point briefly when the gun was fired normally. As such, a hard enough blow on the hammer could set the primer off as well. Modern revolvers with transfer bars or drop blocks, or replicas with those safety features added, that primer isn't getting hit unless the trigger is pulled even if the hammer somehow comes forward without the trigger being pulled.
I have read that prominent gunfighters would roll up a $100 bill and keep that in the empty chamber as “burial money” for the mortician, should their luck run out.
Thank you, John, for your dedication to your craft. I have fond memories watching you and the crew in Dukes and subsequent works. I truly appreciate the time you took to please your fans. This new chapter of your life is also great. Thanks for sharing.
I grew up watching and LOVING the Dukes of Hazard with my father, brother and even mother and we loved it so much ♥️☺️ But I’ve never loved this guy more than today because of his investigative brain that JUST WONT LET GO OF THIS!! Please sir: Keep doing what you are doing until lies are exposed & justice is served!!! 🙏
Same here! Daisy Duke ( Catherine Bach ) was my first crush... My second, unfortunately, was Samantha Micelli ( Alyssa Milano ) from "Who's the Boss"... But, John Schneider is completely wonderful in allowing himself to think things through with logic and purpose...
Baldwin pointed it at a person without checking the rounds. It is the person in control of the gun responsibility to know how it works and to check the rounds. Really cool that you posted this. So many do not know how guns work and just assume they walk around shooting themselves which is folly and simple minded at best. Also if I could add that is a beautiful gun. I love the old western style colts and own a few myself. I have never had one fire itself. Ever.
This is one of the safest guns in recorded history, especially when they added that first safety. Even then some people left the first chamber empty just in case. The fact this happened with that gun on set is absolutely negligence. The only thing in my mind right now is whether it was accidental or intentional murder in my opinion. I can not believe he hasn't been arrested for at minimum reckless homicide or what ever his jurisdiction calls it. John I grew up watching you as a kid and throughout my life. I've always enjoyed your candor when you spoke in interviews. I hope you have had a wonderful life.
@@carrollsanders9376 They inspected the pistol for defects or any other problems that could cause an accidental discharge. Your theory has already been ruled out.
@@randymagnum8721 Really John Wayne's glove caused the same Malfunction in a single action 45 Colt, just as the 🐎 he shot in the Ass. Anything could jam a trigger sticking it at full cock.
@@randymagnum8721 I think it is a moot point. what matters is "why was there a live round on set and make it's way into that gun". And next who is ultimately responsible. If an actor is given a gun and is told it is safe, then more liability goes on the person that gave it to him. and ultimately the producers. My guess is no one will go to jail, but the movie/insurance on that movie, will pay out the $$$$......
I have always liked and respected John Schneider! He is one of my mothers favorite actors. This video and his character and values have only increased my respect! Sir, you are one helluva guy, and I thank you for being you!
