^^This is why the armourer is probably still going down.
Printable View
^^This is why the armourer is probably still going down.
Read the bottom of page 4 of the report. The gun would not fire without pulling the trigger.
During the testing, the FBI struck the hammer and "fractured" i.e. broke the trigger sear and cylinder stop which then allowed the hammer to fall and detonate the primer. "This was the only successful discharge during this testing and it was attributed to the fracture of internal components, not the failure of the firearm or safety mechanisms."
Scroll up.
"Was attributed to" is expert-speak for "I don't know." That the guy managed to write up a final report on his activities while leaving the desperately begged questions above unanswered should have you weeping for the fate of our nation after the death of rigor. Heaven help the prosecutor who takes that pile of crap into court.
Sounds like you should press charges, present your case. Oh wait.Quote:
Originally Posted by TNKen
Or on set. Similar to if you're doing dry fire/reload practice you shouldn't even have live ammo in the room, I can't see what place live ammo has on a movie set.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcski
Live ammo on set and in the gun, broken chain of custody, shitty armorer, none of that matters... Baldwin pulled the trigger so he's at fault. /s
Isnt the story that the cast was using set guns to go plinking in the desert during their free time?Quote:
Originally Posted by leroy jenkins
FifuQuote:
Originally Posted by I Skied Bandini Mountain
What could go wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by californiagrown
That says it fired because shit was broken, not because the safety mechanisms failed or that the gun was working normally. It went off because the components are/were broken.Quote:
Originally Posted by TNKen
Well, one thing comes to mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by I Skied Bandini Mountain
No, the FBI cocked the gun, then took something and banged into the cocked hammer trying to get the mechanism to fail. In doing so, they broke two internal parts in the firearm which, in turn, allowed the hammer to fall striking the firing pin. The report was very clear that at no time did the gun drop the hammer without the trigger being pulled.Quote:
Originally Posted by SumJongGuy
This was not an old worn out gun from the late 1800's.
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/982830090
If you want to "fan" the gun, you hold the trigger down and use the palm of your opposing hand to cock and slid off the hammer. Probably something similar to what Baldwin did.
And yes, the real culprit to some degree is allowing live ammo near a prop firearm.
To all degree.
Once again, AB is a giant gaping asshole but this isn't on him.
If an actor wasnt tied onto belay properly by the movie's ropes expert, and then falls to their death after being pushed off a cliff/building during a scripted take by AB, would people still blame AB for the death? Or is this really just shitheads gleeful about their two favorite things combining into one conversation topic: Muh Guns and Elite Libtard Tears.Quote:
Originally Posted by I Skied Bandini Mountain
Irresponsible if true, but I don't think the "plinking" story was ever confirmed. In any case, my hunch is that they had a gun-handler there who was a gun lover first and a film set professional second. And as far as they're concerned, ammo is part of the kit. I mean, seriously, if you're thinking of this as a dramatic arts job, don't bring bullets to work, period, should be a no-brainer. (Setting aside, that the gun should be inspected before each usage on the set, which shouldn't be hard.)Quote:
Originally Posted by californiagrown
I misread the report initially and thought they were trying to reproduce the firing without a trigger pull as Baldwin claims. Which would be most likely by teasing the hammer near a stop position, not dropping the gun etc. On second look I see that they never attempted to reproduce that at all, so the report offers no evidence either way.Quote:
Originally Posted by TNKen
Now that the gun is broken there's no way to check it to see if (or how easily) it could fire without a trigger pull. As the report notes, they can't always reproduce that anyway, but it would certainly be different now. So reasonable doubt became automatic for Baldwin.
All that aside, yes: bullets.
The movie in question has resumed shooting (film, that is)
https://variety.com/2023/film/news/r...ts-1235594621/
RUN AWAY!
BahahaQuote:
Originally Posted by dookeyXXX
Ha!Quote:
Originally Posted by dookeyXXX
The court case is not going well.
Prosecution costs climbing as ‘Rust’ cases crumble
New Mexico law system could fuck up a wet dream.
Hunter Biden hold my beer?
'Rust' weapons expert passed drugs to someone else on day of fatal shooting, prosecutors say
Drugs and people hungover on set? Sounds like every gig I worked on back in the day. Amateur clowns couldn't produce a professional product under those conditions...
I need to go produce a movement.
Update:
Prosecutors seek to recharge Alec Baldwin in the 'Rust' movie shooting
Quote:
"After [an] extensive investigation over the past several months, additional facts have come to light that we believe show Mr. Baldwin has criminal culpability in the death of Halyna Hutchins and the shooting of Joel Souza," read a statement by attorneys Kari T. Morrissey and Jason J. Lewis. "We believe the appropriate course of action is to permit a panel of New Mexico citizens to determine from here whether Mr. Baldwin should be held over for criminal trial."
The Rust armorer FAFO’d
‘Rust’ Armorer Convicted of Manslaughter in Alec Baldwin Shooting
Baldwin still on the hook in NM for involuntary manslaughter charges.
TMIQuote:
Originally Posted by riser4
WTF?
Quote:
Ms. Gutierrez-Reed passed her a baggie of cocaine and asked if the crew member could hold on to it for her.
Baldwin trial starts in NM.
https://www.santafenewmexican.com/ne...c3a09f208.html
Who's betting he can pull off an OJ and walk on the criminal charge?
What is the over under? Manslaughter?
It’s absurd he’s charged at all. He’s an actor. It’s not their job to know anything about guns. That’s the armorers job. An argument could be made for some culpability as a producer, but they dropped that angle. It’s crazy this went to trial at all so there’s no rational to the odds
if he wasn't an asshole, he'd be fine.
100%Quote:
Originally Posted by mcski
Ahem- NEW MexicoQuote:
Originally Posted by mcski
If you have a gun in your hand, it's your job to be safe with that gun.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcski
You'd have some sort of point if this was Brandon Lee, an accident that happened during actually filming a scene in which the gun was supposed tobe pointed at the actor, and have it's trigger pulled, but a fuckup with dummy rounds and blank rounds created danger.
Baldwin, wasn't actively shooting a scene, the script didn't have him pointing this gun at this woman in this scene. She wasn't an actor.
Hollywood gun rules are different than normal people gun rules, but even by hollywood rules, there is no reason to point a gun at someone who isn't an actor, while the cameras aren't running.
leroy with a valid, cohesive point involving guns? well i'll be.
Not quite. They were rehearsing a scene.Quote:
Originally Posted by stealurface831
Yeah, Baldwin was drawing the revolver and pointing it at the camera during a rehearsal. According to the sheriff there's video of the rehearsals.
Alec has played with guns before. I bet he’s had training from movies.
He pointed a gun at someone and it went bang. He knows the difference between a rubber gun and the gun used.
Sucks, I hope he gets off easy, it was an accident.
They actually pay someone on set to make sure the gun is safe precisely so the actors don't have to be responsible for gun safety.
He knew it was a real gun because it was supposed to be. But he was entitled to rely on the fact that people told him it was safe and not loaded with live ammo; people who were paid to be on top of that very thing. Unless they produce evidence that he knew or should have known that it had live rounds in it, no way is he guilty.