Alec Baldwin fired prop gun, killing 1 on movie set, Oct 2021 #3

[10ofRods]

If dummies are used to make the movie look realistic, I don't think one would want neon colored dummies. On westerns, people also wear gun belts, presumably with realistic looking dummies. So someone loading guns should be paying attention. But my guess is dummies on Rust were not neon colored. AD claimed dummies had holes on the side. When the gun was unloaded after the shooting, he says he saw at least four dummies with holes on the side, and one casing without the hole (presumably from a live round that fired the bullet).

You wouldn't be able to see them in many situations and in a rehearsal (as this incident was), it wouldn't matter.

Blanks have holes in the side - to my knowledge, dummies do not have holes in their sides. I think you are confusing blanks and dummies.

At any rate, the whole point of a rehearsal is to go through the scene without any need for special effects or shooting of blanks. There are certainly situations in which realistic dummies would be wanted (ammo worn by bandoleros or in the belts of crusty cowboys). These would be handled separated from blanks, in any regular safe and sane production.

If the gun is going to actually shoot for the smoke/flash effect, then it is a HOT gun, it has blanks (not dummies) and should be treated in every respect as if the blanks could kill - because people die from being shot with blanks every year.

If neon colored dummies had been in use on the set of Rust, this likely wouldn't have happened. And since they weren't filming an actual scene yet Halyna would still be alive. If DH is truthful and did check the cylinders, he could have seen the neon and known the gun was cold. I keep reading different versions of how many bullets he says were in the gun - and whether he thought they were blanks or dummies. Did anyone on the set know the actual difference? I can't wait to find out.

A prop gun loaded with blanks is a hot gun ("fire in the hole" is called just before "action"). Only a completely empty gun or a gun with dummies is a cold gun.

There should never be live rounds on a movie set. How this contraband got all the way in front of a camera person (handled by the armorer and the AD), is beyond me.

That's why the industry standard calls for a daily safety meeting when functional firearms (with blanks) are going to be in use. Blanks (not dummies) look realistic and sound realistic and must be treated precisely as if they are live ammunition (which did not happen on the set of Rust, or HH would still be alive, but perhaps injured if someone aimed at her with a blank - which must not be done; the armorer and the AD are supposed to ensure that doesn't happen). The director and actor also have responsibilities in this regard.

But on that day, for that particular purpose, neon dummies wouldn't have mattered, there was no need for "realism" at rehearsal, and anyone in the room could have spun that cylinder and seen that the rounds were...dummies. Of course, if no one really checks the gun, none of this matters. But if dummies were in that gun, Halyna would still be alive. Only blanks and live ammunition can injure/cause death.

 

[10ofRods]

Actually, according to recent reports, she was only 2 feet away from the muzzle. It shocked me to hear that.
'Rust' shooting victim Halyna Hutchins was just 2 feet away from the gun when Alec Baldwin pulled the trigger

'Rust' shooting victim Halyna Hutchins was just 2 feet away from the gun when Alec Baldwin pulled the trigger

Thank you - she is a bit further away in the one still I've seen. This makes more sense, though - they were going in for a close up.

Yeah - so, even with blanks she would have been seriously injured. What the heck was going on, on that set???

 

[katydid23]

Thank you - she is a bit further away in the one still I've seen. This makes more sense, though - they were going in for a close up.

Yeah - so, even with blanks she would have been seriously injured. What the heck was going on, on that set???

EXACTLY. When I heard that both victims were only 2 feet away when shot, that makes it even more shocking that AB was waving the gun around and pointing it at them in such a close range. Even if he thought it was just dummies it still could have been really dangerous.

 

[Cryptic]

HH's husband has hired the top personal injury/wrongful death firm in California - the lawyer who took the case has the record for the highest judgment ever in a civil suit in CA ($2.2B against SoCalEdison).

It could go on for years. Out of court settlements will almost certainly occur - but I don't think Baldwin has enough umbrella insurance to cover the demand and that it's really going to cost him, personally. A lot.

That's probably just now sinking in, now that AB knows who is going to handle the civil lawsuit.

Even the top Personal Injury firm in California mixes alot of hype with real ability:

The website lists mega verdicts including a 4.6 billion dollar auto accident verdict (means nothing), but provides absolutely no information on how much was actually collected from mega verdicts. Companies know how to appeal.

No matter how formidable the injury firm is, Baldwin holds the last card:

- The Courts are not debt collectors. They do not assist in locating property to be seized pursuant to a judgement. Nor do they force defendants to produce it.

AB could move to Texas and purchase a homestead home. Texas homestead homes cannot be seized, even if purchased to avoid a judgement.

Substantial bank accounts can be moved overseas. There are law firms that specialize in doing so discreetly. AB can afford their services and the host nation set up costs. Uncle Sam will not freeze foreign accounts pursuant to a lawsuit. Feds are not debt collectors either.

AB is a hard target: He will fight for his personal assets. The suit will not be targeting company or tax assets. He has enough resources to file appeals that take years to resolve and to effectively avoid payment.

My guess is that the above leads to a big verdict (firm hype) but relatively small settlement (not advertized by firm)

 

[katydid23]

In May 2020, it was announced that Alec Baldwin would produce and star in Rust, a Western based on a story he created with writer and director Joel Souza.[4] Baldwin told The Hollywood Reporter that he was elated to work with Souza after missing the opportunity to star in Crown Vic (2019). He compared the screenplay to the film Unforgiven (1992), and said it was inspired by a true story. When asked about his gun slinging and horse riding skills, he said: "They're always at the ready. I'm an actor of the old school. So if you read my resume – my motorcycle riding, my French, juggling, my horseback riding, my gunplay – is all right at my fingertips at all times."[6]

This is ^^^ just fascinating to read now.

First of all, this production was AB's baby. He wrote and created it, produced and starred in it. So we can not say he was 'just an actor' who happened to be on set that day. He was involved creatively, financially and whole heartedly in every facet of this production.

So when people say 'the producers' were cutting corners because of financial concerns and creating safety hazards, that includes AB. He is one of those decision makers behind those sloppy chaotic decisions.

And he himself touted his 'gun slinging skills.'

So if you read my resume – my motorcycle riding, my French, juggling, my horseback riding, my gunplay – is all right at my fingertips at all times."

 

[happyday]

And pretty much everything else. Seems like.

But, this still does not get AB off the hook. He did not check the gun, he pointed it at a person and pulled the trigger. We still need to go back to that. There are plenty of safety issues that Alec Baldwin ignored.

I actually think AB will be off the hook at least personally, criminally. As an actor, even if he’s supposed to check or have someone show him what is and is not loaded in the gun, he is not responsible for having enough expertise to determine if the gun is safe for the scene. That’s what the armorer is for. And the AD, being the ultimate safety person on set, would also probably be responsible. But not the actor. Even if they were shown by the armorer that there were only dummies or whatever, a lot of actors would be taking the armorer’s word for it anyway. I know a lot of people want AB to be found responsible, but he won’t be. In the end the whole reason they would have an armorer on set is to ensure gun safety. If it were up to the actor to be responsible for ensuring that safety there would be no need for an armorer. Now AB as a producer—that’s a different story.

 

[Luna20]

This is ^^^ just fascinating to read now.

First of all, this production was AB's baby. He wrote and created it, produced and starred in it. So we can not say he was 'just an actor' who happened to be on set that day. He was involved creatively, financially and whole heartedly in every facet of this production.

So when people say 'the producers' were cutting corners because of financial concerns and creating safety hazards, that includes AB. He is one of those decision makers behind those sloppy chaotic decisions.

And he himself touted his 'gun slinging skills.'

So if you read my resume – my motorcycle riding, my French, juggling, my horseback riding, my gunplay – is all right at my fingertips at all times."

I read that this project wasn’t about the money for him, it was that he was passionate about the storyline that he wrote.

 

[jjenny]

EXACTLY. When I heard that both victims were only 2 feet away when shot, that makes it even more shocking that AB was waving the gun around and pointing it at them in such a close range. Even if he thought it was just dummies it still could have been really dangerous.

Dummies are not dangerous. They are inert. They don't fire anything, they don't make noise. They are basically a decorative item resembling a real ammo.

 

[jjenny]

Thank you - she is a bit further away in the one still I've seen. This makes more sense, though - they were going in for a close up.

Yeah - so, even with blanks she would have been seriously injured. What the heck was going on, on that set???

I am not sure why people have such a hard time with differences between blanks and dummies. Gun was loaded with dummies (or at least supposed to have been). Dummies are inert. They don't fire a projectile, they don't make noise. They are harmless, if they are actually dummies.

 

[jjenny]

You wouldn't be able to see them in many situations and in a rehearsal (as this incident was), it wouldn't matter.

Blanks have holes in the side - to my knowledge, dummies do not have holes in their sides. I think you are confusing blanks and dummies.

At any rate, the whole point of a rehearsal is to go through the scene without any need for special effects or shooting of blanks. There are certainly situations in which realistic dummies would be wanted (ammo worn by bandoleros or in the belts of crusty cowboys). These would be handled separated from blanks, in any regular safe and sane production.

If the gun is going to actually shoot for the smoke/flash effect, then it is a HOT gun, it has blanks (not dummies) and should be treated in every respect as if the blanks could kill - because people die from being shot with blanks every year.

If neon colored dummies had been in use on the set of Rust, this likely wouldn't have happened. And since they weren't filming an actual scene yet Halyna would still be alive. If DH is truthful and did check the cylinders, he could have seen the neon and known the gun was cold. I keep reading different versions of how many bullets he says were in the gun - and whether he thought they were blanks or dummies. Did anyone on the set know the actual difference? I can't wait to find out.

A prop gun loaded with blanks is a hot gun ("fire in the hole" is called just before "action"). Only a completely empty gun or a gun with dummies is a cold gun.

There should never be live rounds on a movie set. How this contraband got all the way in front of a camera person (handled by the armorer and the AD), is beyond me.

That's why the industry standard calls for a daily safety meeting when functional firearms (with blanks) are going to be in use. Blanks (not dummies) look realistic and sound realistic and must be treated precisely as if they are live ammunition (which did not happen on the set of Rust, or HH would still be alive, but perhaps injured if someone aimed at her with a blank - which must not be done; the armorer and the AD are supposed to ensure that doesn't happen). The director and actor also have responsibilities in this regard.

But on that day, for that particular purpose, neon dummies wouldn't have mattered, there was no need for "realism" at rehearsal, and anyone in the room could have spun that cylinder and seen that the rounds were...dummies. Of course, if no one really checks the gun, none of this matters. But if dummies were in that gun, Halyna would still be alive. Only blanks and live ammunition can injure/cause death.

I am not confusing blanks and dummies. You keep confusing blanks and dummies. Dummies are the ones with holes on the sides. Blanks have no projectile (bullet). As for colored dummies, if the whole point of dummies to resemble bullets, neon colored ones won't work.

 

[DI_Isokawa]

I am not confusing blanks and dummies. You keep confusing blanks and dummies. Dummies are the ones with holes on the sides. Blanks have no projectile (bullet). As for colored dummies, if the whole point of dummies to resemble bullets, neon colored ones won't work.

It would be a help if the mods put up an info page with photographs and videos of the type of weapon, pictures of blank/live/dummy rounds, and generally accepted definitions of "hot" and "cold" state of a weapon. Just sayin'

 

[MikeF]

You wouldn't be able to see them in many situations and in a rehearsal (as this incident was), it wouldn't matter.

Blanks have holes in the side - to my knowledge, dummies do not have holes in their sides. I think you are confusing blanks and dummies.

At any rate, the whole point of a rehearsal is to go through the scene without any need for special effects or shooting of blanks. There are certainly situations in which realistic dummies would be wanted (ammo worn by bandoleros or in the belts of crusty cowboys). These would be handled separated from blanks, in any regular safe and sane production.

If the gun is going to actually shoot for the smoke/flash effect, then it is a HOT gun, it has blanks (not dummies) and should be treated in every respect as if the blanks could kill - because people die from being shot with blanks every year.

If neon colored dummies had been in use on the set of Rust, this likely wouldn't have happened. And since they weren't filming an actual scene yet Halyna would still be alive. If DH is truthful and did check the cylinders, he could have seen the neon and known the gun was cold. I keep reading different versions of how many bullets he says were in the gun - and whether he thought they were blanks or dummies. Did anyone on the set know the actual difference? I can't wait to find out.

A prop gun loaded with blanks is a hot gun ("fire in the hole" is called just before "action"). Only a completely empty gun or a gun with dummies is a cold gun.

There should never be live rounds on a movie set. How this contraband got all the way in front of a camera person (handled by the armorer and the AD), is beyond me.

That's why the industry standard calls for a daily safety meeting when functional firearms (with blanks) are going to be in use. Blanks (not dummies) look realistic and sound realistic and must be treated precisely as if they are live ammunition (which did not happen on the set of Rust, or HH would still be alive, but perhaps injured if someone aimed at her with a blank - which must not be done; the armorer and the AD are supposed to ensure that doesn't happen). The director and actor also have responsibilities in this regard.

But on that day, for that particular purpose, neon dummies wouldn't have mattered, there was no need for "realism" at rehearsal, and anyone in the room could have spun that cylinder and seen that the rounds were...dummies. Of course, if no one really checks the gun, none of this matters. But if dummies were in that gun, Halyna would still be alive. Only blanks and live ammunition can injure/cause death.

You have the ammo reversed. Blanks have a crimped end and gun powder and a live primer. And yes, a gun with Blanks is considered hot. Dummies look identical to real bullets with the exception being there is a hole drilled in the casing and/or the primer is dimpled or non existent.

 

[MikeF]

Here is a page showing dummy ammo for the .45 colt

.45 Long Colt Dummy Bullets, set of 6 (Brass)

 

[MikeF]

Thank you - she is a bit further away in the one still I've seen. This makes more sense, though - they were going in for a close up.

Yeah - so, even with blanks she would have been seriously injured. What the heck was going on, on that set???

They weren't using blanks. The gun was suppose to be loaded with dummies that have zero firing power.

 

[Luna20]

They weren't using blanks. The gun was suppose to be loaded with dummies that have zero firing power.

The attorneys are saying ‘dummies’. I think that has been the general consensus so far but who knows it may change.

 

[Speculaytor]

I just don't understand how anyone could mistake a live round for a dummy. Maybe a live round for a blank (but seriously, that's also really obvious).

There is still a need for an armorer, as at least two actors have DIED from blanks (that should have been dummies). Blanks used to be much more common in the Shoot 'Em Up Westerns that filled our TV screens until the 70's. The crew member who shot her foot on the set of Rust (a real injury) fired a blank at her foot. Close up, blanks can blind someone (like the camera person). Since this scene supposedly involved Baldwin drawing the gun as he turned toward the camera and the camera is shown in rehearsal taking the shot from above and medium close-up, if HH had been shot in the face with a blank, she could have been blinded, and even if just in the chest or stomach, from that range, she would have likely required more than just first aid.

Blanks are no joke. Blanks are used in starter pistols and are the source of a few fatalities almost every year.

Fatal neck injuries caused by blank cartridges - ScienceDirect

Europe PMC

No one should *ever* fire a blank at something they aren't prepared to harm. Here is what 45mm blanks look like:

.45 Long Colt Brass Blank Ammunition with Smoke

They are still a projectile.

How Do Blanks Work As Compared to Regular Bullets?

The cowboy actors of the Good Old Days did not fire directly at cameras with blanks, nor did they shoot at people with blanks. That's why there's so much clever editing and many shots of cowboys shooting at the Bad Guy from horseback (they're really shooting at rocks in a movie ranch...)

Yes, I was thinking that an armorer would be there for blanks, even if no live ammo was expected to be on set, because of the accidents you speak of. What do you think HGR's responsibility is here, because I feel terrible for her if she expected NO live ammo, and it was mixed with the dummies. AND, how could you not realize it was real ammo? It would seem it wasn't her fault, but the fact that it is her job to check the ammo makes it pretty hard NOT to hold her accountable in this. The person who brought the ammo onto the set, and put it in the box with dummies, or on the cart with dummies is the one who is ultimately responsible!!

 

[jjenny]

The attorneys are saying ‘dummies’. I think that has been the general consensus so far but who knows it may change.

I don't think it will change. Gun was loaded with dummies, and somehow one live round. It was supposed to have just been dummies.

 

[MikeF]

The attorneys are saying ‘dummies’. I think that has been the general consensus so far but who knows it may change.

Correct. The initial statement by HGR to police (according to the warrant) was she had checked the dummies and put them in the gun. Given that we now know how close Baldwin was suppose to be to the camera, I'm assuming Blanks were never a consideration because they do/can cause damage up close.

 

[jjenny]

Yes, I was thinking that an armorer would be there for blanks, even if no live ammo was expected to be on set, because of the accidents you speak of. What do you think HGR's responsibility is here, because I feel terrible for her if she expected NO live ammo, and it was mixed with the dummies. AND, how could you not realize it was real ammo? It would seem it wasn't her fault, but the fact that it is her job to check the ammo makes it pretty hard NOT to hold her accountable in this. The person who brought the ammo onto the set, and put it in the box with dummies, or on the cart with dummies is the one who is ultimately responsible!!

Dummies are harmless but the danger of dummies is that they are similar to real live ammo. So armorer shouldn't just assume that just because the box is labeled "dummy" that it only contains dummies without actually checking. We don't know where they got this box.

 

[katydid23]

Yes, I was thinking that an armorer would be there for blanks, even if no live ammo was expected to be on set, because of the accidents you speak of. What do you think HGR's responsibility is here, because I feel terrible for her if she expected NO live ammo, and it was mixed with the dummies. AND, how could you not realize it was real ammo? It would seem it wasn't her fault, but the fact that it is her job to check the ammo makes it pretty hard NOT to hold her accountable in this. The person who brought the ammo onto the set, and put it in the box with dummies, or on the cart with dummies is the one who is ultimately responsible!!

Well, it is true that the person who brought in the live ammo is legally and morally responsible for the tragedy---it is also HRG and DH that were responsible for checking the weapon IMMEDIATELY before it was handed to the actor. And I would also hold AB responsible because he was the one that was pointing the weapon at people two feet away from him. He should have checked the weapon OR had the AD check it in front of him, before he pointed and pulled the trigger.

If the three that were responsible for double checking the weapon actually did their jobs, the initial act of bringing in live ammo would nit have been a deadly transgression.