Alec Baldwin fired prop gun, killing 1 on movie set, Oct 2021 #5

[Laughing]

Honestly there is plenty of blame to go around in this case.

I keep coming back to the fact that the armourer has one job. If she had done her job the tragedy wouldn’t have happened.

bbm

Agree, plenty of blame to go around. IMHO, the longer this drags on, the better HGR looks, imho.

Tragically, articles linked above make it clear that the producers of Rust required HGR to cover more than one job...and none of the producers nor the director required AB to complete the required armorer's safety training.

jmho ymv lrr

 

[IceIce9]

bbm

Agree, plenty of blame to go around. IMHO, the longer this drags on, the better HGR looks, imho.

Tragically, articles linked above make it clear that the producers of Rust required HGR to cover more than one job...and none of the producers nor the director required AB to complete the required armorer's safety training.

jmho ymv lrr

JMO but if the armourer had checked the for a live round, the tragedy wouldn’t have happened.

If she felt that she wasn’t capable of covering the job that they required of her she could have resigned the position. Again, JMO, but she shouldn’t be making excuses for failing to check for a live round, which was the most important part of her job.

Again, I believe there is blame to go around but had she checked for a live round, discovered the live round, taken out the live round, the tragedy wouldn’t have occurred. No live round = no tragedy.

It doesn’t matter that she says she doesn’t know how the live round got on the set, or that she was asked to cover two jobs. She still failed in her most important job, checking to ensure the actor was being handed a cold gun. IMO

Interesting to ponder that if Alec Baldwin wasn’t on this movie, either as an actor or as one of the producers, but some relatively unknown actor, where would the blame fall?

Emphasizing JMO. Differences of opinion is what makes WS an interesting place for discussion.

 

[RANCH]

JMO but if the armourer had checked the for a live round, the tragedy wouldn’t have happened.

If she felt that she wasn’t capable of covering the job that they required of her she could have resigned the position. Again, JMO, but she shouldn’t be making excuses for failing to check for a live round, which was the most important part of her job.

Again, I believe there is blame to go around but had she checked for a live round, discovered the live round, taken out the live round, the tragedy wouldn’t have occurred. No live round = no tragedy.

It doesn’t matter that she says she doesn’t know how the live round got on the set, or that she was asked to cover two jobs. She still failed in her most important job, checking to ensure the actor was being handed a cold gun. IMO

Interesting to ponder that if Alec Baldwin wasn’t on this movie, either as an actor or as one of the producers, but some relatively unknown actor, where would the blame fall?

Emphasizing JMO. Differences of opinion is what makes WS an interesting place for discussion.

When I look at this case it doesn't matter to me if one of the people I feel is responsible is a famous celebrity.

AB pointed a firearm at an innocent person, pulled the trigger and caused her to suffer a fatal injury. JMO.

 

[Laughing]

When I look at this case it doesn't matter to me if one of the people I feel is responsible is a famous celebrity.

AB pointed a firearm at an innocent person, pulled the trigger and caused her to suffer a fatal injury. JMO.

bbm

But, as odd as this sounds, it was AB's job to point a firearm & pull the trigger.

As per movie production policies & protocols posted above, it was the job of AD Hall and Armorer HGR to ensure that AB's action was safe.

Linked articles do indicate that AB was not following/complying with the established policies & protocols in several ways: safety training with the armorer was missed 3 times, firearm pointed directly at a person when not called for in the scene, actual pistol used during walk-thru when a blue prop was indicated....

Convoluted, for certain.

Glad I'm unlikely to be called for any juries re: this case. Now a sibling lives in Santa Fe County, another sib & cousins live in Bernallio County. Well, ope I don't end up with any closer ties to this one!

jmho ymmv lrr

 

[RANCH]

bbm

But, as odd as this sounds, it was AB's job to point a firearm & pull the trigger.

As per movie production policies & protocols posted above, it was the job of AD Hall and Armorer HGR to ensure that AB's action was safe.

Linked articles do indicate that AB was not following/complying with the established policies & protocols in several ways: safety training with the armorer was missed 3 times, firearm pointed directly at a person when not called for in the scene, actual pistol used during walk-thru when a blue prop was indicated....

Convoluted, for certain.

Glad I'm unlikely to be called for any juries re: this case. Now a sibling lives in Santa Fe County, another sib & cousins live in Bernallio County. Well, ope I don't end up with any closer ties to this one!

jmho ymmv lrr

The fact that AB didn't check the gun himself before pointing the gun and pulling the trigger is a big problem for me. JMO.

 

[GatorFL]

The fact that AB didn't check the gun himself before pointing the gun and pulling the trigger is a big problem for me. JMO.

100% spot on and I can add that industry standards also required him to do so.

 

[Marysmith]

The fact that AB didn't check the gun himself before pointing the gun and pulling the trigger is a big problem for me. JMO.

To me I feel like it’s a safety check like in a surgery when you’re counting equipment - the surgeon is not doing the counting but is relying on others that the checks have been done.
But if he hadn’t gone to the training as he should have that’s another big issue.
I think all 3 of the players are culpable honestly...

 

[Laughing]

100% spot on and I can add that industry standards also required him to do so.

Yes, for a personal firearm, for certain.

IIRC, someone posted upthread the movie industry protocol: Armorer sets up arms, Armorer or designated Assistant Director hands firearm to Actor, verbally stating that firearm's status in jargon for blanks or dummies.

If the Actor opens the firearm to check it -- everything is back to Square 1 and the Armorer must re-set that firearm.

I expect this is a hold-over from the Actor as Just Another Pretty Face?

Or a union rule?

In this case, from a previously linked article, AD Hall states to AB cold, iirc.

BUT iirc the same protocol states that for set blocking where framing & camera angles are checked, the Actor should have a blue dummy pistol only.


inertproducts.com

If so, why did the Armorer provide a real revolver at all? Why did the Armorer provide a working firearm -- for an Actor who had ducked safety training three times?

Why did AD Hall hand the pistol over to AB?

Why did AD Hall let AB skate on his required safety training?

Someone needed tha backbone to say "Mr. Baldwin, I'll be able to bring the working revolver to the set after your safety training is complete. Until then, here is a dummy pistol."


IMHO looking grim for at least these three people -- Actor, Armorer, Assistant Director. A woman died because of their compounded mistakes, imho.

jmho ymmv lrr

 

[DI_Isokawa]

IMHO looking grim for at least these three people -- Actor, Armorer, Assistant Director. A woman died because of their compounded mistakes, imho.

Agreed. I hope a certified attorney will come on and explain the concept of joint and several liability and how it is treated in New Mexico law.

 

[PrairieWind]

100% spot on and I can add that industry standards also required him to do so.

Can you point to those industry standards? One thing I have learned is that there doesn't seem to be any actual standard in this regard. I have heard other armorers state that on set actors are actually prohibited from checking the gun. I am a shooting enthusiast, so gun safety is very important to me. But I have to realize that on a movie set, there are different rules than we use at a range. If an actor is handed a gun and told it is cold, he should able (must) to rely on that. So, based on that, AB wont be criminally liable. I think he will bear some civil liability along with multiple other people.

 

[PrairieWind]

Agreed. I hope a certified attorney will come on and explain the concept of joint and several liability and how it is treated in New Mexico law.

With Joint and Several liability, a prevailing plaintiff can seek to enforce the amount of the judgment from any one of the defendants. If there are three defendants and the plaintiff gets a judgment of $100,000, he can seek to recover it equally from the defendants or go after just one for the whole amount. This is useful when one defendant has assets but the others do not. but you typically see this in business and contract cases. I believe that NM has a comparative fault statute that would each defendant to be given a certain percentage of fault.

 

[wary]

bbm

But, as odd as this sounds, it was AB's job to point a firearm & pull the trigger.

As per movie production policies & protocols posted above, it was the job of AD Hall and Armorer HGR to ensure that AB's action was safe.

Linked articles do indicate that AB was not following/complying with the established policies & protocols in several ways: safety training with the armorer was missed 3 times, firearm pointed directly at a person when not called for in the scene, actual pistol used during walk-thru when a blue prop was indicated....

Convoluted, for certain.

Glad I'm unlikely to be called for any juries re: this case. Now a sibling lives in Santa Fe County, another sib & cousins live in Bernallio County. Well, ope I don't end up with any closer ties to this one!

jmho ymmv lrr

I do not believe that it was his job to point the gun and pull the trigger. (Note that he denies pulling the trigger—which in my opinion shows a consciousness of guilt.)

Making points below that agree with you:

1: rehearsal—why would you need to point the gun at a person, during a rehearsal. (It wasn’t pointed at a fellow actor.

2: I believe that it’s standard practice to ‘cheat’ on the camera angles—no need to point directly at anyone, even when filming.

3: Anyone with any seriousness of purpose is going to try to adhere to the safety protocols set up by the Screen Actor’s Guild and other filmmaking organizations. It’s not as though AB doesn’t know that firearms can be dangerous—and I believe that he had the greatest amount of power on the set. He wasn’t some no-name actor afraid of getting fired. If checking a gun was too complicated for him, he had every ability to say: “No rehearsal till the armorer shows me it’s safe.”

Even if he wasn’t the person controlling the entire production—he was the bankable star, and the gun was in his hand.

all the above MOO

 

[wary]

Can you point to those industry standards? One thing I have learned is that there doesn't seem to be any actual standard in this regard. I have heard other armorers state that on set actors are actually prohibited from checking the gun. I am a shooting enthusiast, so gun safety is very important to me. But I have to realize that on a movie set, there are different rules than we use at a range. If an actor is handed a gun and told it is cold, he should able (must) to rely on that. So, based on that, AB wont be criminally liable. I think he will bear some civil liability along with multiple other people.

I assume that Actor’s Equity is stage, not film—but it was the first that I found. And I would think that ‘cheating’ is easier to do on film than on stage, since they have complete control of camera angles, and more ability to fake things in general.

Theatrical Firearms · Actors' Equity Association

Fascinating to see how many of these common-sense rules were violated—not laying all the blame on AB, of course—there’s a lot to go around.

MOO

 

[GatorFL]

Can you point to those industry standards? One thing I have learned is that there doesn't seem to be any actual standard in this regard. I have heard other armorers state that on set actors are actually prohibited from checking the gun. I am a shooting enthusiast, so gun safety is very important to me. But I have to realize that on a movie set, there are different rules than we use at a range. If an actor is handed a gun and told it is cold, he should able (must) to rely on that. So, based on that, AB wont be criminally liable. I think he will bear some civil liability along with multiple other people.

Sure.

https://www.sagaftra.org/files/safety_bulletins_amptp_part_1_9_3_0.pdf

This is the very first standard: "AS AN ACTOR, YOU ARE ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY AND THE SAFETY OF YOUR FELLOW CAST MEMBERS."

Another interesting line: "Treat all weapons as though they are loaded and/or ready to use. Do not play with weapons and never point one at anyone, including yourself."

I would also note that numerous members of the cast and crew violated multiple SAG industry standards in this case.

 

[cocomod]

Sure.

https://www.sagaftra.org/files/safety_bulletins_amptp_part_1_9_3_0.pdf

This is the very first standard: "AS AN ACTOR, YOU ARE ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY AND THE SAFETY OF YOUR FELLOW CAST MEMBERS."

Another interesting line: "Treat all weapons as though they are loaded and/or ready to use. Do not play with weapons and never point one at anyone, including yourself."

I would also note that numerous members of the cast and crew violated multiple SAG industry standards in this case.

TBH, most films do not use this. I do not believe that this is the industry standard. In fact, Apple and Disney have their own Production Safety guidebooks. There are so many production companies and so many different states and locations, I don't believe there is one "standard" safety guideline that is followed. I believe this should probably be looked at and corrected, but Hollywood doesn't seem to ever follow the same as we would. They make up their own rules all of the time - and they break the rules all of the time too! One of the reasons there was almost a strike in the last year is due to the overtime that the crew often has to put in.

We have to remember that some of this crew walked off due to concerns. If the armorer was honestly concerned because they were asking her to do dual roles, she should have walked off as well! This could have been a better outcome all together if several things had been different.

 

[GatorFL]

TBH, most films do not use this. I do not believe that this is the industry standard. In fact, Apple and Disney have their own Production Safety guidebooks. There are so many production companies and so many different states and locations, I don't believe there is one "standard" safety guideline that is followed. I believe this should probably be looked at and corrected, but Hollywood doesn't seem to ever follow the same as we would. They make up their own rules all of the time - and they break the rules all of the time too! One of the reasons there was almost a strike in the last year is due to the overtime that the crew often has to put in.

We have to remember that some of this crew walked off due to concerns. If the armorer was honestly concerned because they were asking her to do dual roles, she should have walked off as well! This could have been a better outcome all together if several things had been different.

How do you know most films don't use this? I know someone who has been in Hollywood special effects for decades and he is the one who told me they were not following industry guidelines and brought this up as the standard. This was not an Apple or Disney production, it was a independent production. So not sure what those companies have to do with this incident.

Agree that local laws will always trump standards like these, the third sentence in the document discusses state, federal and local laws.

Lots of people were not following industry standards, or even common sense, in this tragedy.

 

[PrairieWind]

Gator, I just got to see your post and glance at the SAGA guidelines. Those look pretty good. I just don't know what the applicability of them is. The reason I say that is that after this tragedy there were lots of news stories and I saw numerous armorers interviewed giving widely different views of what is supposed to happen. So I am sort of assuming that there either isn't an agreed upon set of rules or that, whatever those rules are, they are followed/enforced sporadically. Looking at these guidelines, it appears the prop manager or armorer is the one who is supposed to be responsible for ensuring the rules are followed. Unfortunately, she was very young and inexperienced and likely intimidated. As you said, there were a lot of these guidelines that were not followed by a lot of people.

 

[Sabex]

Without knowing the industry standards, if I were responsible for firearm safety on set, I would check all firearms at the start of every day to ensure they were loaded correctly for the scene, and record what rounds were loaded in each firearm.

I'd then check and reload each firearm at the start of every scene personally, or if I had a team, I'd ensure each team member recorded that information.

I'd like to know who put the live round in the gun and why. It could have been a murder attempt on another member of the cast using AB as a proxy. Who was AB meant to be pointing the gun at in that scene?

(I am just a layman and I have no special knowledge in this area.)

 

[cocomod]

How do you know most films don't use this? I know someone who has been in Hollywood special effects for decades and he is the one who told me they were not following industry guidelines and brought this up as the standard. This was not an Apple or Disney production, it was a independent production. So not sure what those companies have to do with this incident.

Agree that local laws will always trump standards like these, the third sentence in the document discusses state, federal and local laws.

Lots of people were not following industry standards, or even common sense, in this tragedy.

Because my husband has worked in the film industry for over 25 years and I have personally been on many sets.

 

[PrairieWind]

As far as I know, no one has been alleged to have loaded the gun except the armorer. And while there a lot of safety violations and breakdowns, one fact rises above the others for me: somehow, the armorer loaded a live round into that revolver.