Alec Baldwin fired prop gun, killing 1 on movie set, Oct 2021 #2

[RANCH]

Question ..
Is the armorer, and the AD, and ( preferably ) the actor expected to perform the same procedures while rehearsing vs filming?
Is there a different protocol for weapon handling between the two?
This all just gets muddier and muddier in my head!

I would hope that all safety standards are used at all times. JMO.

 

[Dotta]

Seems like they are trying to determine if it was plinking or not??

Put them all on lie detector and finish this nonsense is my advice.
This case is testing my patience!

 

[MsMarple]

For the most part, our opinions on AB’s culpability, parallel our basic knowledge of gun safety. IMO

I learned basic gun safety at a young age. Probably because I grew up in south Louisiana where everyone hunts and guns are common place. Even though my knowledge of guns might not involve ‘old west style revolvers’, I would know enough not to take aim at anyone (even in a movie setting) without actually verifying it for myself, with the help of a professional. For that matter, I can’t imagine allowing someone to take aim in my direction without verifying for myself.

In my opinion that is what basic gun safety knowledge is. I echo others that say a gun safety course should be give to actors that handle firearms. Actors have to learn lines, learn to ride horses, among other things that go with their roles. It is not a stretch for them to learn basic firearm safety.

I agree. If the scene had called for AB to drive a semi or fly a plane then an expert would have been brought in to perform the task as a double.

But have him hold an actual firearm and it’s somehow okay that he skips basic gun safety?

Does it make him liable for H’s death? I don’t know the answer- I suspect we’ll find out soon. But there were 3 guns on the cart and 2 weren’t capable of firing real bullets.

IMO choosing a gun that can fire real bullets raises the demand for careful handling. As far as I’m concerned multiple people failed to do their job properly and a talented woman died.

And IMO the armorer is not being truthful. Trying to pass the buck isn’t a good look for her - she was hired as armorer for goodness sake! We still don’t even know where she was when the AD handed the gun to AB. I suspect this story is going to get even uglier.

 

[Thinker22]

Put them all on lie detector and finish this nonsense is my advice.
This case is testing my patience!

I really hope they've interviewed the workers who walked off the set in protest of their various grievances...

 

[Lux et Veritas]

AB spoke out within 24 hours, reached out to comfort / support Halyna's family and attended her memorial service.

DH eventually spoke up after 6 days to admit his failure (did he attend the memorial service?).

HGR today finally 'spoke' through her lawyers - 8 days after the shooting; she takes zero responsibility. I'm pretty sure she did not attend the memorial service or personally reach out to HH's family.

There's the entire story.

[If I'm wrong on any above facts, someone please correct me. TIA]

 

[Mo Thuairim]

AB spoke out within 24 hours, reached out to comfort / support Halyna's family and attended her memorial service.

DH eventually spoke up after 6 days to admit his failure (did he attend the memorial service?).

HGR today finally 'spoke' through her lawyers - 8 days after the shooting; she takes zero responsibility. I'm pretty sure she did not attend the memorial service or personally reach out to HH's family.

There's the entire story.

[If I'm wrong on any above facts, someone please correct me. TIA]

I don't think DH has spoken publicly at all. We just found out what he had told LE about not fully checking the gun from the affidavit. Apparently he is now only communicating with police through his lawyer. As far as I understand it.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

'Rust' armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed breaks her silence, blames producers for 'unsafe' set

... "Hannah still, to this day, has never had an accidental discharge," the statement said. "The first one on this set was the prop master and the second was a stunt man after Hannah informed him his gun was hot with blanks." ...

What does that mean, "she" never had an accidental discharge?! SHE is 100% responsible for any and all accidental discharges on set.

WTF So now the PROP MASTER (Sarah Zachry) accidentally discharged a gun?! This is news! And no one until today knew of this incident except HGR?! And was the stunt guy supposed to have hot blanks in his gun? Did HGR inform the Prop Master her gun had hot blanks?

imho, HGR is loading more lies on top of lies. JMO

 

[jjenny]

She never had an accidental discharge? What does her lawyer call the live bullet being in a gun given to Baldwin, that actually killed a cinematographer?

 

[PrairieWind]

The gun wasn't empty. It was loaded with dummies. So for Baldwin to check it, the gun would have to be completely unloaded and each round checked for having a small hole on the side. And I really don't think actors are supposed to be doing that.

No it wouldn't need to be unloaded to check to see if it had dummies. just opening the loading gate would reveal the back of the casing. you could see there is or is not a primer in the cartridge, then just rotate the cylinder to check each chamber. It would take 10 seconds.

 

[Steelhead]

HGR's in big, big trouble. IMO

 

[DI_Isokawa]

No it wouldn't need to be unloaded to check to see if it had dummies. just opening the loading gate would reveal the back of the casing. you could see there is or is not a primer in the cartridge, then just rotate the cylinder to check each chamber. It would take 10 seconds.

The question as to whether the primers were removed from the dummy rounds is in dispute. The only statements we have about the nature of the dummy rounds is that they had holes drilled in the side of the cartridge. This question will not be resolved until someone (preferably LE) publishes pictures of the actual dummy rounds.

 

[mickey2942]

People are innocent, until proven guilty. I don't see the actions of anyone being suspect here. Gaining advice of an attorney is not a sign of guilt.

There will be an investigation, officials will review the information and release the findings.

 

[GRT]

Replying to Datchery. I hope I have quoted the question <modsnip>

The weapon is a historic design -- not F Lee Pieta as stated, but F.LLI Pietta (not that it matters because the answer to your question is the same).

This is a single-action revolver. That means that it is not fired simply by pulling (squeezing) the triggere! The revolver must first be "cocked" by drawing the hammer back (usually with the thumb of the operating hand) to what is called a "full *advertiser censored*" position. The reason that is important is that the hammer can be drawn back to a half-*advertiser censored* position. It is in the half-*advertiser censored* condition that the weapon is loaded or unloaded or inspected. See note about "going off half-cocked" below.

The round thing (which has been wrongly referred to here as a "drum") is called the "cylinder" and it is in the cylinder that the rounds/bullets are loaded. Unlike modern double-action revolvers, the cylinder does NOT swing out for loading/unloading/inspection. Rather, you can see on the side of the weapon (usually on the right side) just to the rear of the cylinder a "loading gate" which swings away from the frame and allows access to the rear of the cylinder --- ONE CHAMBER AT A TIME!! -- THIS IS IMPORTANT!)

In order to open the loading gate, the hammer must be in the half-*advertiser censored* position. When the hammer is at half-*advertiser censored*, the trigger is blocked and the weapon cannot be discharged. While at half-*advertiser censored* with the loading gate open, the cylinder may be rotated so that each chamber may be inspected, unloaded or loaded. On the same side as the loading gate, there is a rod attached to the frame just forward of the cylinder and the rod is held in position by a spring. The operator may slide the rod to the rear of the frame whereupon it will enter the front end of the cylinder and push through the cylinder thus removing any casing or bullet that is in that perticular chamber of the cylinder. The rod is then released so that the cylinder may be rotated to the next position and similarly cleared/unloaded.

Typically, these revolvers have six chambers (hence the term "six-shooter") but may have only five or, in the case of .22 cal. revolvers, may have as many as nine chambers. Revolvers chambered for .45 Long Colt will not have more than six chambers because the rounds/bullets are too large (almost half an inch in diameter).

Okay; so How do you check the weapon?

I am not familiar enough with the F.LLI Pietta design to know for certain, but I base my answer on the Ruger Single-six which you can examine safely at any gun store where the clerk will have an unloaded weapon in his showcase and will be happy to demonstrate all the above and below. Make him think you are interested in buying because he is not going to respond well to "Oh, I was thinking about the homicide on the movie set . . . . Do not ask to see a F.LLI Pietta because he is not going to have one and he will immediately know why you are there! Ask to see a Ruger Single-six in any caliber like .357 or .44. Don't ask for .45 Long Colt because he may not stock that one.

The most reasonable way to check a single-action revolver for safe condition is to unload it by going to half-*advertiser censored*, opening the loading gate, and using the clearing rod to unload each chamber. Then you can observe the rear of the cylinder as you rotate it (it will turn freely and may or may not have little "click" detents during rotation) and assure that all the chambers are empty. THEN you would load whatever you wish to put into each of the chambers -- or only one or two of them. When that is conccluded, you would close the loading gate and release the hammer -- or just leave it at half-*advertiser censored*.

To fire the weapon, draw the hammer back to the full-cocked position, aim and squeeze the trigger. After the weapon has discharged (or not if you had it set to an empty chamber), nothing will happen until you draw the hammer back to the full cocked position which will cause the cylinder to rotate one increment thus placing the next chamber in position.

To "Safe the weapon" point the barrel to a safe place (not the sky!) away from people and things, hold the hammer securely and squeeze the trigger and SLOWLY lower the hammer. Best place to leave the hammer is at half-*advertiser censored*.

GOING OFF HALF-COCKED

While you are looking at that Ruger Single-Six, ask the clerk about the "Transfer Bar." (The F.LLI Pietta almost surely did not have a transfer bar!)

A single-action revolver which is loaded and fully cocked might be dropped and the impact jolt could release the "sear" which holds the hammer in position. That would allow the hammer to swing forward and strike the bullet and discharge the weapon which could be aimed anywhere at that time. This is often seen in old Western movies and usually the bullet will hit a chandelier and the fixture will fall onto a table or onto a bad guy, etc. If you're old enough, you've seen such a movie. Always in black and white.

Such weapons COULD have the same thing happen if only half-cocked when dropped. That is always what we call "bad ****."

The weapon is said to have "gone off half-cocked."

TRANSFER BAR (circa 1972?)

Rules made in the early seventies required that a half-cocked or fully cocked revolver could not discharge unless the operator was squeezing the trigger while the hammer fell onto the ammunition/bullet.

As the trigger is squeezed, a bar moves up into a position between the hammer and the firing pin. The hammer strikes the transfer bar which, in turn, strikes the firing pin. The hammer has a lug above the place where the transfer bar will be such that IF the transfer bar is not in position, the hammer will strike the frame of the revolver above (usually) the firing pin and the firing pin will not move --- thus the weapon will not discharge.

The Ruger Single-six you are looking at will have a transfer bar and you will be able to observe what happens if you .... Well, just get the clerk to show you. It would be very difficult for me to explain without a video or series of pictures.

ANYWAY -- IN CONCLUSION

A.B. <modsnip> I would not expect him to know how to properly inspect the single-action revolver. That is why the movie company has an armorer and why it is reasonable to say that A.B. should have been able to rely on the "unloaded" weapon assurance when the weapon was handed to him. Whether the A.D. should have been allowed to handle the weapon between the armorer's preparation is a question for someone else.

THE QUICK CHECK we are taught to use with double-action revolvers does NOT APPLY to single-action revolvers. I don't happen to like A.B., but he is being criticized for not checking the weapon and l submit that he could NOT have been expected to know how to do that. I would have been expected to know how to do it because I am a self-confessed "gun nut."

I hope that helps somebody.
C

I really appreciate your spelling it out. Thank you.

I don't care for AB either, but I think the problem lies in an industry that does not train it's actors as well as it should. If they're going to be using real guns on the set--and they seem to want to--the actors who will be using them should first be trained. I think it should be mandatory. They need to be able to recognize blanks from live rounds. They need to know how the gun works.

I grew up in NW Colorado and we were required to take hunters' safety courses in Middle School. Yes, we went to the range and shot live rounds. It taught me not to mess around with guns. AB is not completely at fault here, but he too should take responsibility for knowing more about guns if he's going to be using them on the set.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

There should be NO live guns on any set; we have decent enough CGI to make it look real. The only thing actors should learn to act is to make it seem they are realistically firing an actual gun, even if it’s a flippin’ water pistol in their hand.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Peer of 'Rust' gun handler expresses shock: 'I'm surprised any of this happened on her watch'

... On set, she said, she was often judged for her age and gender. Many actors would walk into the prop department and look at Crow instead of her, expecting he was the armorer, she said: “I’d be, like, ‘Don’t look at him. Look at me.’” ...

Well, everyone is most assuredly looking at YOU.

 

[Luna20]

HGR's in big, big trouble. IMO

Her statement of defense has implications. If she doesn’t know how live ammo got into the gun implies she took her eyes off the guns.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

'Rust' armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed breaks her silence, blames producers for 'unsafe' set

Notice that HGR's attorneys carefully avoided any mention of the 100% UNSECURED ammo boxes that she allowed to remain on the UNATTENDED cart. How easy to add / remove / replace / manipulate. But somehow, this armorer is 100% innocent of any wrongdoing or malfeasance whatsoever - she's not at fault for any of it!

 

[everybodhi]

This is how a bullet became stuck in the gun that killed Brandon Lee. When a blank was later fired it launched the stuck bullet at deadly velocity.

Is it possible that HGR made her own dummy rounds to save money and the same thing happened?

JMO.

How did Brandon Lee die? The story behind the tragic death of Bruce Lee's son

I wondered about a squib load at first too but it seems like they have evidence of live rounds on set now, including the bullet removed from AH's shoulder after it exited HH's body. Jmo

 

[whitelilac]

Mike Tristano has supervised firearms on film sets for more than 30 years.....

When it comes to guns and ammunition on sets, Tristano said, “the buck always stops” with the armorer, the licensed professional — sometimes credited as a “weapons master” — tasked with making sure movie firearms are safe and secure on set.

That’s why Tristano was baffled when he learned that Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, 24, the armorer on the ill-fated Alec Baldwin project“Rust,” said she had “no idea” how live ammo got on set, according to her lawyers.

“I think it’s a ridiculous statement,” Tristano said on Friday. “How could you not know what’s on your set in terms of anything that’s related to the weapons you’re supposed to be handling?”

After ‘Rust’ shooting, industry veterans say ‘buck stops’ with armorers on movie sets

 

[RANCH]

There should be NO live guns on any set; we have decent enough CGI to make it look real. The only thing actors should learn to act is to make it seem they are realistically firing an actual gun, even if it’s a flippin’ water pistol in their hand.

Maybe the film industry can one day be all CGI including actors. No need for stuntmen. No one would get hurt because of lax safety measures on set.

James Bond would never age out of his role. It would probably be way cheaper to produce. Lots of benefits.

JMO.