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

[steeltowngirl]

bbm
Same thought here -- not my first thought, of course, and only a slight thought since, being a WSleuther, just wondered, as we all do here...
Why would live rounds even be there? My only thought was that since the cast & crew were filming outside in what appears to be a deserted-looking area, they might have had a weapon for snakes or other predators, but seems to me, if so, they would have had rifles and not handguns. Please know that I know next-to-nothing about firearms WRT dramatic scenes in outdoor places. This was an outdoor scene, correct, and not on a set? Why-oh-why live rounds? What's the reason? I would really like to know. Thanks to whoever can explain it.

The setting apparently wasn’t outdoor, it was in some type of church setup, and AB had been sitting in a wooden church pew. So it seems it was inside a structure repurposed as a movie-set church.

 

[Kiranerys]

Gun Alec Baldwin used to accidentally kill Halyna Hutchins had been used by crew that morning | Daily Mail Online

Well this doesn't bode well for anyone .....

 

[steeltowngirl]

I don’t know the answer to your question but it prompted another thought. If there was supposed to be no amo on the set who will be held responsible for it being there? Will the people who played around with the target shots be accountable also (if they were aware of no amo)?

The people who brought live ammo onto the set are the ones I’m most angry with. Next up: anyone who knew the live ammo was there, and that it had been used for target practice in set guns. The armourer for not doing her job. The AD for handing off the gun and from the sounds of it, generally being a pompous Azz. Finally, AB - who despite his many years of experience as an actor, and being part of the production team - subsequently failing to recognize how desperately unsafe and very wrong things were on the Rust movie set. Then still pulling a trigger.

 

[Luna20]

Electrician describes harrowing moment he held dying Halyna Hutchins in his arms after she was shot | Daily Mail Online

 

[borndem]

Thank you for your reply! Of course, it only brings up more questions for me, LOL. These are not directed at you, just more of my wheels spinning...

So, relying on others, for the safety and well being of mankind is an acceptable excuse in the 'pretend world' of actors? Is there any other group of people that are exempt from safety rules and or laws?
Is there a special clause in an actors contract, that clears this up? Or, is it just kind of 'understood' ?

There is an ongoing investigation into how this happened, and I'm hoping it will be thorough. Someone, or more, will be held accountable. I can't see AB being a POI unless there is way-y-y-y more to this story. If AB had been handed a chocolate pie to slam in someone's face, would he have to check to make sure glass shards, or similar, were not hidden in the pie (yes, that's a weak comparison)? I don't think so, unless he put the shards in there himself.
Again, they have to follow the Armorer first IMO, to trace the chain of custody of the firearm. Then go from there. JMO

 

[Luna20]

The people who brought live ammo onto the set are the ones I’m most angry with. Next up: anyone who knew the live ammo was there, and that it had been used for target practice in set guns. The armourer for not doing her job. The AD for handing off the gun and from the sounds of it, generally being a pompous Azz. Finally, AB - who despite his many years of experience as an actor, and being part of the production team - subsequently failing to recognize how desperately unsafe and very wrong things were on the Rust movie set. Then still pulling a trigger.

I wonder if that will be the starting point ‘who brought the ammo to the set’? With the several checkpoints following behind that. If everyone was aware of no ammo will everyone be at fault for not speaking up and turning a blind eye? It’s going to get complicated.

 

[mickey2942]

I have worked with guns for decades, the protocol has always been the person who gives you the gun, shows you that it is not loaded. Open the barrel, check it. The clip, check. Or in this case, the cylinder. Takes about 15 seconds. FIFTEEN SECONDS.

 

[WillieMac]

No clue. She should have been fired after first two un-planned gun discharges, not praised, as far as I am concerned.

If no one else contributed to those first gun related issues, I completely agree with you on this. But then I'll also ask, so why wasn't she fired? Not only not fired, but allowed to retain the additional role of assistant Prop Master? You would think that if anyone were concerned about the prior incidents that they may have at least realized that they shouldn't have reduced the responsibilities of an Armorer to basically being a glorified assistant to someone else on set. And if there had been concerns (because I agree that there should have been), why wouldn't others on set have realized that maybe they should have been more prudent about fulfilling their own responsibilities around gun safety on set. ..you know, things like the AD actually checking a gun before declaring it cold? Or like an actor dbl-checkimg a gun that had been handed to him that he was about to swing around in a small area with other crew members who were not behind protective shielding before he proceeded to point it at multiple crew members from a very close distance and actually pull the trigger for nothing more than a rehearsal? I fo not want to try to completely absolve the Armorer of any fault here, but I simply can not understand how others seem to think this even is completely her fault and that no fault whatsoever should lie at the feet of AB, the AD, or the team that was in charge of hiring this crew of misfits and then deciding to push thru all of the issues they had encountered, the red flags the crew that walked off set had attempted to raise, and not only just blindly push on with filming while they disregarded all of those concerns, but they apparently tried to push thru all of that and also speed things up in an attempt to make up for lost time. Anyone that's trying to point the finger at any one specific person is (IMHO) either very bias or just not paying attention to all of the facts.

 

[LaborDayRN]

Alec Baldwin Rust Movie Shooting: Inexperienced Producers to Blame? – The Hollywood Reporter

This is an excellent article full of detailed information.

 

[mickey2942]

Film crew voiced complaints before fatal on-set shooting

I am very interested in the prior accidents with guns. When many employees walked off the set because they decided it was "unsafe".

Why weren't there any "Incident Reports"? Accident Analysis? Usually critical incidents like this, merit review and analysis, to ensure that things like this don't happen again. Yet, on this set, there were FOUR documented weapon discharges.

The last one resulted in a fatality. What about the three prior incidents?

Sounds like there were some real problems.

 

[Satchie]

If there was supposed to be no amo on the set who will be held responsible for it being there? Will the people who played around with the target shots be accountable also (if they were aware of no amo)?

I'm not sure what you mean in terms of 'be held responsible' or 'be held accountable'. Those are pretty vague terms.

The criminal law is very clear: if someone (one person, or a deliberate conspiracy of people), take an action, or fail to take an action, which is specifically listed in the criminal code of that area as a criminal offense, then they can be criminally charged.

I don't know the criminal code in New Mexico: is it prohibited to have live ammunition, or to put it somewhere not locked up?

On the other hand, safety rules are created and enforced by the organization, above and beyond what the criminal code requires. The only punishment is, potentially, being fired for violating the rules, or allowing your staff to violate the rules, and that all depends on circumstances.

 

[LaborDayRN]

bbm
Same thought here -- not my first thought, of course, and only a slight thought since, being a WSleuther, just wondered, as we all do here...
Why would live rounds even be there? My only thought was that since the cast & crew were filming outside in what appears to be a deserted-looking area, they might have had a weapon for snakes or other predators, but seems to me, if so, they would have had rifles and not handguns. Please know that I know next-to-nothing about firearms WRT dramatic scenes in outdoor places. This was an outdoor scene, correct, and not on a set? Why-oh-why live rounds? What's the reason? I would really like to know. Thanks to whoever can explain it.

I'm guessing there were live rounds there because some of the cast and/or crew wanted to fire guns. Completely irresponsible and negligent IMO.

 

[borndem]

I have worked with guns for decades, the protocol has always been the person who gives you the gun, shows you that it is not loaded. Open the barrel, check it. The clip, check. Or in this case, the cylinder. Takes about 15 seconds. FIFTEEN SECONDS.

Sounds like that might not have been done... It sounds like they were using blank cartridges which can indeed kill -- I wasn't aware of what type ammo was used when I posted earlier.
Where is the fault -- the armorer not showing AB the ammo or AB not asking to see? Both? Was AB taking aim at Hutchins? SMH.
Several people have been killed with blank cartridges -- four incidents were shown in Wikipedia.

Blank (cartridge) - Wikipedia

 

[10ofRods]

Attorney retained by one crew member, a woman:

Criminal Charges Possible in Shooting on Alec Baldwin Set, D.A. Says

If she wants to tell her full story, it's good she got an attorney. I can't imagine the emotional distress of being on a crew where people were shooting live rounds for fun (and possibly partying at night on the set).

If no one else contributed to those first gun related issues, I completely agree with you on this. But then I'll also ask, so why wasn't she fired? Not only not fired, but allowed to retain the additional role of assistant Prop Master? You would think that if anyone were concerned about the prior incidents that they may have at least realized that they shouldn't have reduced the responsibilities of an Armorer to basically being a glorified assistant to someone else on set. And if there had been concerns (because I agree that there should have been), why wouldn't others on set have realized that maybe they should have been more prudent about fulfilling their own responsibilities around gun safety on set. ..you know, things like the AD actually checking a gun before declaring it cold? Or like an actor dbl-checkimg a gun that had been handed to him that he was about to swing around in a small area with other crew members who were not behind protective shielding before he proceeded to point it at multiple crew members from a very close distance and actually pull the trigger for nothing more than a rehearsal? I fo not want to try to completely absolve the Armorer of any fault here, but I simply can not understand how others seem to think this even is completely her fault and that no fault whatsoever should lie at the feet of AB, the AD, or the team that was in charge of hiring this crew of misfits and then deciding to push thru all of the issues they had encountered, the red flags the crew that walked off set had attempted to raise, and not only just blindly push on with filming while they disregarded all of those concerns, but they apparently tried to push thru all of that and also speed things up in an attempt to make up for lost time. Anyone that's trying to point the finger at any one specific person is (IMHO) either very bias or just not paying attention to all of the facts.

<modsnip - no links>

 

[jjenny]

I'm guessing there were live rounds there because some of the cast and/or crew wanted to fire guns. Completely irresponsible and negligent IMO.

Yep, from what has been reported, guns were used by some crew members to shoot at beer cans, using real bullets. It might have went on the very same day the incident happened. What legal jeopardy can those people (who loaded the guns and then returned the loaded gun, if that's what happened) face? Could they be charged?

 

[mickey2942]

Behind-the Scenes: How Hollywood's Best Gun Armorers Keep it Real

Interesting information about "armorers". And the fact that guns are supposed to be locked up at all times.

 

[Satchie]

Sounds like that might not have been done... It sounds like they were using blank cartridges which can indeed kill -- I wasn't aware of what type ammo was used when I posted earlier.
Where is the fault -- the armorer not showing AB the ammo or AB not asking to see? Both? Was AB taking aim at Hutchins? SMH.
Several people have been killed with blank cartridges -- four incidents were shown in Wikipedia.

Blank (cartridge) - Wikipedia

Since it was apparently a movie with many guns in various scenes, I would think the Armorer and AD would have created some kind of agreed-upon system for who did what when. So I guess the safety check aspect might depend on what the system was between them on the previous occasions.

IMO, the whole point of a low budget film is to cut corners to save money, and time is money, so whatever they did was likely to be as time-efficient as possible: for example, checking guns in advance rather than as each gun was handed out. Maybe it never occurring to them that someone might put a bullet into one of the guns on the cart.

I recall the incident of the pedestrian bridge that collapsed on traffic in Miami, that was a whole new system of low cost, time efficient construction.

It seems that sometimes people have to rediscover for themselves why tedious, expensive systems are in place...

 

[WillieMac]

It is my understanding now that the gun was not even supposed to have blanks in it. Is that correct?

Apparently. The Assistant Director picked it up and declared it to be a Cold Gun. And from what has been shared in these threads, that means no blank ammo, no dummy ammo, no fully live ammo. So despite not bothering to check it, he declared for all to hear that it was unloaded and safe for rehearsal. If he was so darned sure, I wish he'd have even taken the time to pick it to the sky & pull the trigger to prove it. As reckless as that would have been, it wasn't nearly as reckless as what he did - and it would have saved a life.

 

[WillieMac]

It's pretty hard to fire people on the spot: if they have contracts there has to be a discipline process, lawyers to draw up the severance agreement etc. And then, who was going to step in to do her job?

Basically then, they should have shut the film down, cancelled their remaining time on the ranch, and everyone gone home for career counselling and look for another, less stressful line of work.

Then maybe AB should have paid everyone off for their time and trouble, and gone into retirement and take up a harmless hobby.

And the industry should just stop making low budget films and the movie theatres could just screen classic Westerns over and over again.

JMO

Isn't that exactly what happened to the AD on a previous set though? There was an incident where his carelessness caused him to be let go that same day as I recall. I don’t have a link to a story with that info available but I'm sure we've heard that several times in the later pages of the prior thread here.

 

[jjenny]

Isn't that exactly what happened to the AD on a previous set though? There was an incident where his carelessness caused him to be let go that same day as I recall. I don’t have a link to a story with that info available but I'm sure we've heard that several times in the later pages of the prior thread here.

Yep, fired that same day.