Alec Baldwin Fatally Shoots Crew Member With Prop Firearm, Authorities Say

[EricH]

Baldwin was handed the revolver and told it was safe. He should have checked for himself, but it's a movie set and actors may not be gun savvy.

I heard him talking and he doesn't know much about guns. A dead giveaway is when people refer to magazines as clips. The army surplus M1 carbine I hunted with as a teenager allowed one to use a clip to quickly load the magazine in the gun, and you can find clips to quickly load selected revolvers for competition shooting, but nothing made in 19th century used such clips to my knowledge. And the magazine in a revolver is usually referred to as the cylinder, not a magazine.

It is the armourer's responsibility, in my opinion, to educate the actors on how the gun works, and show them how to verify that there is no live ammunition in the gun before it is used in a scene. If you are going to be handling a real gun on set, you need to know the safety protocols for the weapon you are working with, and observe the safety protocols. Ignorance is not an excuse.

Some of those period single action revolvers are hard to check because the cylinder doesn't flip out and you can't see the primers. You load by flipping the little side latch and feed one round at a time through the slot while rotating the cylinder to the next empty chamber, and from the front the dummy rounds, unlike blanks, have realistic looking projectiles.

In such a case, the gun should be unloaded and reloaded in front on the actor, and anyone else involved in the scene, so each round can be inspected by the interested parties before it is put back in the gun. Simply looking at the back of the cartridge tells you nothing as to whether the round is live. That is what the state expert testified.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Baldwin was handed the revolver and told it was safe. He should have checked for himself, but it's a movie set and actors may not be gun savvy.

I heard him talking and he doesn't know much about guns. A dead giveaway is when people refer to magazines as clips. The army surplus M1 carbine I hunted with as a teenager allowed one to use a clip to quickly load the magazine in the gun, and you can find clips to quickly load selected revolvers for competition shooting, but nothing made in 19th century used such clips to my knowledge. And the magazine in a revolver is usually referred to as the cylinder, not a magazine.

It is the armourer's responsibility, in my opinion, to educate the actors on how the gun works, and show them how to verify that there is no live ammunition in the gun before it is used in a scene. If you are going to be handling a real gun on set, you need to know the safety protocols for the weapon you are working with, and observe the safety protocols. Ignorance is not an excuse.

Some of those period single action revolvers are hard to check because the cylinder doesn't flip out and you can't see the primers. You load by flipping the little side latch and feed one round at a time through the slot while rotating the cylinder to the next empty chamber, and from the front the dummy rounds, unlike blanks, have realistic looking projectiles.

In such a case, the gun should be unloaded and reloaded in front on the actor, and anyone else involved in the scene, so each round can be inspected by the interested parties before it is put back in the gun. Simply looking at the back of the cartridge tells you nothing as to whether the round is live. That is what the state expert testified.

Anyone handling a gun should be familiar with that particular gun. If they can take the time to learn their lines, they can take the time, probably less than a hour for weapon familiarization. The armorer should hand over an empty weapon and the appropriate rounds. The recipient should be responsible for loading and unloading it. Both individuals verify it's empty upon receipt. No one is asking these people to do something as complicated as say, building something out of Legos. This is some pretty simple shit. And if Alec Baldwin had even basic familiarization (safety) training he would never have had is finger inside the trigger guard, let alone pointing and firing it until the intended time. If he did have this basic training then it should be his ass on the line.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

Baldwin was handed the revolver and told it was safe. He should have checked for himself, but it's a movie set and actors may not be gun savvy.

I heard him talking and he doesn't know much about guns. A dead giveaway is when people refer to magazines as clips. The army surplus M1 carbine I hunted with as a teenager allowed one to use a clip to quickly load the magazine in the gun, and you can find clips to quickly load selected revolvers for competition shooting, but nothing made in 19th century used such clips to my knowledge. And the magazine in a revolver is usually referred to as the cylinder, not a magazine.

It is the armourer's responsibility, in my opinion, to educate the actors on how the gun works, and show them how to verify that there is no live ammunition in the gun before it is used in a scene. If you are going to be handling a real gun on set, you need to know the safety protocols for the weapon you are working with, and observe the safety protocols. Ignorance is not an excuse.

Some of those period single action revolvers are hard to check because the cylinder doesn't flip out and you can't see the primers. You load by flipping the little side latch and feed one round at a time through the slot while rotating the cylinder to the next empty chamber, and from the front the dummy rounds, unlike blanks, have realistic looking projectiles.

In such a case, the gun should be unloaded and reloaded in front on the actor, and anyone else involved in the scene, so each round can be inspected by the interested parties before it is put back in the gun. Simply looking at the back of the cartridge tells you nothing as to whether the round is live. That is what the state expert testified.

Anyone handling a gun should be familiar with that particular gun. If they can take the time to learn their lines, they can take the time, probably less than a hour for weapon familiarization. The armorer should hand over an empty weapon and the appropriate rounds. The recipient should be responsible for loading and unloading it. Both individuals verify it's empty upon receipt. No one is asking these people to do something as complicated as say, building something out of Legos. This is some pretty simple shit. And if Alec Baldwin had even basic familiarization (safety) training he would never have had is finger inside the trigger guard, let alone pointing and firing it until the intended time. If he did have this basic training then it should be his ass on the line.

I’ve seen movies where having the actors verify and load their own weapons would take days. For one take.

Who gets blamed if an actor is injured because they improperly loaded a magazine?

 

[TV and credit cards]

Baldwin was handed the revolver and told it was safe. He should have checked for himself, but it's a movie set and actors may not be gun savvy.

I heard him talking and he doesn't know much about guns. A dead giveaway is when people refer to magazines as clips. The army surplus M1 carbine I hunted with as a teenager allowed one to use a clip to quickly load the magazine in the gun, and you can find clips to quickly load selected revolvers for competition shooting, but nothing made in 19th century used such clips to my knowledge. And the magazine in a revolver is usually referred to as the cylinder, not a magazine.

It is the armourer's responsibility, in my opinion, to educate the actors on how the gun works, and show them how to verify that there is no live ammunition in the gun before it is used in a scene. If you are going to be handling a real gun on set, you need to know the safety protocols for the weapon you are working with, and observe the safety protocols. Ignorance is not an excuse.

Some of those period single action revolvers are hard to check because the cylinder doesn't flip out and you can't see the primers. You load by flipping the little side latch and feed one round at a time through the slot while rotating the cylinder to the next empty chamber, and from the front the dummy rounds, unlike blanks, have realistic looking projectiles.

In such a case, the gun should be unloaded and reloaded in front on the actor, and anyone else involved in the scene, so each round can be inspected by the interested parties before it is put back in the gun. Simply looking at the back of the cartridge tells you nothing as to whether the round is live. That is what the state expert testified.

Anyone handling a gun should be familiar with that particular gun. If they can take the time to learn their lines, they can take the time, probably less than a hour for weapon familiarization. The armorer should hand over an empty weapon and the appropriate rounds. The recipient should be responsible for loading and unloading it. Both individuals verify it's empty upon receipt. No one is asking these people to do something as complicated as say, building something out of Legos. This is some pretty simple shit. And if Alec Baldwin had even basic familiarization (safety) training he would never have had is finger inside the trigger guard, let alone pointing and firing it until the intended time. If he did have this basic training then it should be his ass on the line.

I’ve seen movies where having the actors verify and load their own weapons would take days. For one take.

Who gets blamed if an actor is injured because they improperly loaded a magazine?

I don't know what to tell you. Enlisted military personnel can manage this, a short 20 minute e-learning course in which a perfect score has to be obtained and then a safety brief/range qualification. Why an actor can not meet this mark is beyond me.

The person with the weapon in their hand.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

Baldwin was handed the revolver and told it was safe. He should have checked for himself, but it's a movie set and actors may not be gun savvy.

I heard him talking and he doesn't know much about guns. A dead giveaway is when people refer to magazines as clips. The army surplus M1 carbine I hunted with as a teenager allowed one to use a clip to quickly load the magazine in the gun, and you can find clips to quickly load selected revolvers for competition shooting, but nothing made in 19th century used such clips to my knowledge. And the magazine in a revolver is usually referred to as the cylinder, not a magazine.

It is the armourer's responsibility, in my opinion, to educate the actors on how the gun works, and show them how to verify that there is no live ammunition in the gun before it is used in a scene. If you are going to be handling a real gun on set, you need to know the safety protocols for the weapon you are working with, and observe the safety protocols. Ignorance is not an excuse.

Some of those period single action revolvers are hard to check because the cylinder doesn't flip out and you can't see the primers. You load by flipping the little side latch and feed one round at a time through the slot while rotating the cylinder to the next empty chamber, and from the front the dummy rounds, unlike blanks, have realistic looking projectiles.

In such a case, the gun should be unloaded and reloaded in front on the actor, and anyone else involved in the scene, so each round can be inspected by the interested parties before it is put back in the gun. Simply looking at the back of the cartridge tells you nothing as to whether the round is live. That is what the state expert testified.

Anyone handling a gun should be familiar with that particular gun. If they can take the time to learn their lines, they can take the time, probably less than a hour for weapon familiarization. The armorer should hand over an empty weapon and the appropriate rounds. The recipient should be responsible for loading and unloading it. Both individuals verify it's empty upon receipt. No one is asking these people to do something as complicated as say, building something out of Legos. This is some pretty simple shit. And if Alec Baldwin had even basic familiarization (safety) training he would never have had is finger inside the trigger guard, let alone pointing and firing it until the intended time. If he did have this basic training then it should be his ass on the line.

I’ve seen movies where having the actors verify and load their own weapons would take days. For one take.

Who gets blamed if an actor is injured because they improperly loaded a magazine?

I don't know what to tell you. Enlisted military personnel can manage this, a short 20 minute e-learning course in which a perfect score has to be obtained and then a safety brief/range qualification. Why an actor can not meet this mark is beyond me.

The person with the weapon in their hand.

And no enlisted military personnel ever have trouble after that? What are the legal/financial consequences if a soldier is injured because he screws something up? Same as if an actor does it?

 

[DBT]

Whatever bad gun handling Baldwin was engaged in, the job of the armorer is to put a stop to actors mishandling firearms. Perhaps a power imbalance played a part, a young relatively inexperienced person trying to build a career having deal with a big star who might ruin their prospects for future work if they cause trouble, yet safety on set comes before reputation.

In the instance that they were rehearsing a scene, apparently Baldwin was meant to point the gun at the camera and pull the trigger, so the fault lies with whoever mixed up the ammo and supposedly checked the revolver before handing it to Baldwin.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It is indeed, both safer and cheaper for the film to have an armorer perform this task than the actor. The armorer is a lot more familiar/trained and a lot less costly to do such a task.

 

[ZiprHead]

The “Rust” armorer was sentenced to 18 months in prison yesterday.​

Why? Hannah Gutierrez-Reed was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in March for her role in the fatal on-set shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins in 2021.
What’s next? The film’s star, Alec Baldwin, who was handling the weapon when it discharged, is facing trial this summer on involuntary manslaughter charges.