IceIce9
Verified EMT
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2017
- Messages
- 6,264
- Reaction score
- 56,995
Interesting point of view:
If the armorer was criminally negligent and handed Baldwin a gun that had live ammunition, then how could he be held responsible? Under common industry practice, he had a right to rely upon the armorer in believing the weapon to be harmless.
The issue as to whether he pulled the trigger or cocked the gun and it went off accidentally is irrelevant since, either way, an unloaded gun would have done no harm.
Alec Baldwin's conviction in the 'Rust' shooting case just became less likely
If the armorer was criminally negligent and handed Baldwin a gun that had live ammunition, then how could he be held responsible? Under common industry practice, he had a right to rely upon the armorer in believing the weapon to be harmless.
The issue as to whether he pulled the trigger or cocked the gun and it went off accidentally is irrelevant since, either way, an unloaded gun would have done no harm.
Letters to the Editor: Alec Baldwin's conviction in the 'Rust' shooting case just became less likely
The 'Rust' armorer, upon whom Alec Baldwin relied for prop-gun safety, has been convicted. That's good news for the actor's defense.
www.yahoo.com
Last edited: