Alec Baldwin CHARGED !
- Thread starter pneuby
- Start date
Welcome to ArizonaShooting.org!
Join today!
Suck My Glock
Member
In my opinion, that charge is appropriate. I hate the guy, but to be fair and honest, he never intended harm. He was simply negligent due to his refusal to be astute with the weaponry he handled all the time. His arrogance allowed him to be a dangerous fool.
Suck My Glock
Member
The sentencing range appears to be between 3 years to as little as 18 months. https://www.nmlegis.gov/sessions/11%20regular/bills/house/HB0464.html
Im torn over this one like I said in the thread that was on here when it went down. I hate the guy but I dont want that to alter my feelings on the shoot. He is an actor and depends on other professionals for other parts of the production. His Armorer for sure should be charged and possibly the Director who declared the weapon safe but .. we depend on people all the time and I would hate to be judged by their negligence.
This may be from ignorance of the laws or Im just being naive but this is how I see it.
If I bring my car in for a brake job I am depending on the mechanics to know their job since I dont know anything about fixing brakes. I default to their declared expertise. They give me back my car and say brakes are good and you are good to go. I leave having trusted the experts.
Two days later I get in a wreck and hurt someone because my brakes failed .. is it my fault or do I get to also sue the mechanics, along with the people hurt, for their negligence or .... should I be punished even though I know nothing about car mechanics or brakes specifically and was told by a professional they were repaired.
Again .. trying to think about it without letting my hatred for him cloud my opinion. I just doubt that every actor from every movie that contained gunplay knew the manual of arms or even the safety rules of the guns they used. They are actors.
This may be from ignorance of the laws or Im just being naive but this is how I see it.
If I bring my car in for a brake job I am depending on the mechanics to know their job since I dont know anything about fixing brakes. I default to their declared expertise. They give me back my car and say brakes are good and you are good to go. I leave having trusted the experts.
Two days later I get in a wreck and hurt someone because my brakes failed .. is it my fault or do I get to also sue the mechanics, along with the people hurt, for their negligence or .... should I be punished even though I know nothing about car mechanics or brakes specifically and was told by a professional they were repaired.
Again .. trying to think about it without letting my hatred for him cloud my opinion. I just doubt that every actor from every movie that contained gunplay knew the manual of arms or even the safety rules of the guns they used. They are actors.
Boriqua said:
I understand your position, but other actors have been interviewed since this incident, and they described the steps they personally take to ensure a safe prop. George Clooney was very vocal about that. If Baldwin ignored industry practices and standards then he is getting off lightly. Anyone other than a politically connected movie star would already be serving their sentence.
I was wrong again. I did not think he would get charged.
I think he was wrongly charged, but the DA doesn't care what I think.
I think he was negligent, and should be sued, and should pay enough millions that it actually hurts him a lot. He should pay enough that he ends up living in a trailer park instead of any of his mansions.
Charged ain't convicted, though. The jury has to find him guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt." I suspect his lawyers can created plenty of doubt in the jurors' minds by pointing the finger at Thell Reed's daughter, and the dumbass who said "Cold gun!"
But again, as Yogi Berra (supposedly) said, "It's hard to make predictions -- especially about the future."
I think he was wrongly charged, but the DA doesn't care what I think.
I think he was negligent, and should be sued, and should pay enough millions that it actually hurts him a lot. He should pay enough that he ends up living in a trailer park instead of any of his mansions.
Charged ain't convicted, though. The jury has to find him guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt." I suspect his lawyers can created plenty of doubt in the jurors' minds by pointing the finger at Thell Reed's daughter, and the dumbass who said "Cold gun!"
But again, as Yogi Berra (supposedly) said, "It's hard to make predictions -- especially about the future."
smithers599 said:
I do think he should be sued but perhaps from a different angle. He was one of the producers. As such part of his obligation should have/would have been how the site is managed and even who works it. Just from the few anecdotes that have sneaked out from the set .. the set was unsafe and there were enough shenanigans to raise alarm. It was a low budget flick and corners were cut. As the boss you are responsible for your crew and the jobsite.
Again .. only my 2 cents but yea I see a successful law suit.
Pale Rider
Member
I have zero sympathy for the arrogant jackass. Hope he offs himself from the stress of it all, but of course narcissists like him would never do the right thing.
MarkItZero
Member
[bbvideo]https://youtu.be/udS6losK7Ts[/bbvideo]
I'm torn...
1) I think Alec Baldwin is a Class A scumbag of a human being...
2) I think anyone who points a real gun at someone they don't intend to kill, and pulls the trigger, is an idiot. The ONE specific exception would be someone doing so in a controlled environment for filming or stage acting - and doing this in full compliance with the safety protocols for that activity.
What I don't know / understand is what controls were in place on the set and whether he, or someone else, or both violated those controls. If I were an actor and we were using guns in our work - I'd sure as hell know how to check and clear the guns. There are a bunch of scenarios that I think are plausible as causes for this tragedy...
1) The weapons master was incompetent and violated protocol by intermingling live and loaded guns with prop guns. (it sounds like this was almost certainly true).
2) Baldwin or someone else violated protocol by getting a gun from some source other than the weapons master.
3) The protocols for handling / assigning prop guns on the set were inadequate.
Guessing it is some combination of these.
I can see scenarios where Baldwin is truly innocent under the protocols for the shoot (e.g. the protocol requires the weapons master to check the firearm, clear the firearm, hand the checked and cleared firearm to the actor before the take - and they just grabbed the gun and handed it to him). That said - if he was one of the folks who violated their protocols - or he set protocols that were insufficient (I believe that he was the primary producer) - then the charges make sense.
No matter how much I dislike the man - I'd like to think that if he were truly the innocent third party - just the actor using a prop that he was assured was safe / inert in the manner expected of him in his capacity as an actor - that he would not have been charged.
Accidents CAN happen - I remember reading up on the death of Brandon Lee - and thinking "wait - so a gun was loaded with blanks and they failed to check to see if there was a squib in the barrel before filming...how do you prevent THAT?!?" The answer is - you put a protocol in place that makes an individual personally responsible for checking the barrel, and for validating the blanks, and...
1) I think Alec Baldwin is a Class A scumbag of a human being...
2) I think anyone who points a real gun at someone they don't intend to kill, and pulls the trigger, is an idiot. The ONE specific exception would be someone doing so in a controlled environment for filming or stage acting - and doing this in full compliance with the safety protocols for that activity.
What I don't know / understand is what controls were in place on the set and whether he, or someone else, or both violated those controls. If I were an actor and we were using guns in our work - I'd sure as hell know how to check and clear the guns. There are a bunch of scenarios that I think are plausible as causes for this tragedy...
1) The weapons master was incompetent and violated protocol by intermingling live and loaded guns with prop guns. (it sounds like this was almost certainly true).
2) Baldwin or someone else violated protocol by getting a gun from some source other than the weapons master.
3) The protocols for handling / assigning prop guns on the set were inadequate.
Guessing it is some combination of these.
I can see scenarios where Baldwin is truly innocent under the protocols for the shoot (e.g. the protocol requires the weapons master to check the firearm, clear the firearm, hand the checked and cleared firearm to the actor before the take - and they just grabbed the gun and handed it to him). That said - if he was one of the folks who violated their protocols - or he set protocols that were insufficient (I believe that he was the primary producer) - then the charges make sense.
No matter how much I dislike the man - I'd like to think that if he were truly the innocent third party - just the actor using a prop that he was assured was safe / inert in the manner expected of him in his capacity as an actor - that he would not have been charged.
Accidents CAN happen - I remember reading up on the death of Brandon Lee - and thinking "wait - so a gun was loaded with blanks and they failed to check to see if there was a squib in the barrel before filming...how do you prevent THAT?!?" The answer is - you put a protocol in place that makes an individual personally responsible for checking the barrel, and for validating the blanks, and...
kenpoprofessor
Member
BigNate said:
They weren't filming, in fact, they weren't even rehearsing the scene. On top of that, they don't point the gun "directly" at the camera, much less pull the trigger. He's guilty of the charge, period.
Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day
Clyde
Anyone know if the prop master is being charged as well? In my mind, she is more criminally liable than Baldwin. He's a stupid actor who just parrots back words written by another person. SHE is the professional responsible for the safety of those firearms. If he is charged, so should she.
Suck My Glock
Member
QuietM4 said:
Yes, she was also indicted.
mock0013
Member
The third person that actually handed the gun to baldwin and didn't check to see if it was hot. did a plea deal with the DA and they didn't list charges for him
kenpoprofessor
Member
QuietM4 said:
If I hand a gun to someone on the range, I'm responsible for them shooting someone??? Regardless of how it came to be, he's the one who pulled the trigger. Part of "the job" you're doing is knowing WTF you're doing. If part of my job is driving, then I should know how to drive, including all the extra stuff like checking the fluids, maintenance, etc.,etc. You can't blame my supervisor if I drink and drive, but, it seems you will.
Seems some of you are fast to blame someone else.
Clyde
Ballistic Therapy
Member
The gun didn't just go off because he pulled the trigger.
He not only pulled the trigger , he cocked the hammer back first.
He not only pulled the trigger , he cocked the hammer back first.
Vinnie B
Member
He was beyond negligent, He shot and killed a person. Not checking to see if it was loaded or not was HIS responsibility. Him and his lawyers can try and spin it however they'd like but it all falls on the last person to handle the weapon. Even if he didn't "pull" the trigger as he claims (ya right) he still did not make sure the gun was clear and for that he should not get a free pass...
brandonsmash
Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2018
- Messages
- 184
The armorer has also been charged. Weirdly, I've seen a lot of people defending Baldwin by saying that he's an actor, he shouldn't have to know gun safety, he was told the gun was clear, etc. etc.
It's a gun. Loaded with live ammunition it can kill people. The end user is ALWAYS responsible for verifying. In this sense it's no different from a piece of machinery: While your employer may provide a piece of heavy machinery that you use, it is ultimately the user's responsibility to understand the function of the machine and how to make it safe.
He was waving around a real gun without bothering to check clear and there were consequences.
It's a gun. Loaded with live ammunition it can kill people. The end user is ALWAYS responsible for verifying. In this sense it's no different from a piece of machinery: While your employer may provide a piece of heavy machinery that you use, it is ultimately the user's responsibility to understand the function of the machine and how to make it safe.
He was waving around a real gun without bothering to check clear and there were consequences.
mock0013 said:
The director didn't get charged. but the assistant did.
Similar threads
