Alec Baldwin WTF

[Falcon3]

it is the responsibility of every one who handles a gun to determine themselves whether or not it is loaded and not just take someone's word for it. That would include the actor, wouldn't it?

I would imagine that in closely controlled situations like this, having an untrained person “inspect” prop guns after they supposedly went through safety checks and were loaded by a highly trained weaponry prop engineer would actually invite more potential error.

It seems like generally, there are several checks and safety requirements before the actor ever gets their hands on the prop. I don’t think the same rules we would use at a range should apply to these situations.

Cases in point: an ex of mine went climbing probably dozens of times and still needed help tying a Figure 8. I took a friend shooting many times and every single time I had to show him how to take the safety off and chamber a round.

Expecting Hollywood actors to do the final check might not be safer than the system in place now because it’s not in their wheelhouse.

[bennymac]

It might be akin to a surgeon having an industry rep and a OR tech both inspect and test your bone drill before handing it to you in the middle of an operation and tell you it is safe and functional and ready to go.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

It might be akin to a surgeon having an industry rep and a OR tech both inspect and test your bone drill before handing it to you in the middle of an operation and tell you it is safe and functional and ready to go.

Not the rep, that would be illegal, but yes on the tech.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[CarlMega]

Expecting Hollywood actors to do the final check might not be safer than the system in place now because it’s not in their wheelhouse.

Just as a lay-person take, outside of reckless gross negligence we are expecting the actors to....act. Not be prop-gun safety experts. No more than I would expect an actor to be the point person on any prop/setting safety/hazard. There are people for that and, at some point, the armory & weapons person says 'safe' and the director says stand here, do this... you quite literally take that direction.

Any actor put in this situation is also a victim. Same as if they had you driving a prop car that was ultimately unsafe which caused a death.

[bennymac]

Not the rep, that would be illegal, but yes on the tech.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Thanks - was constructing an imperfect analogy so I said “might be akin”

[old goat]

How can having an actor check a gun to be sure it's unloaded be more dangerous than not checking? Please explain. We're not talking about the actor being the only one responsible for checking. Ever seen an airline pilot walk around a plane inspecting? I'm sure the mechanics know more about the mechanical safety of the plane than the pilot, but the pilot still checks. If someone tells you the breaker is off before you start fiddling with the wires, do you just take their word for it? If you're in the hospital do you just take every pill they give you without asking what it is, and if necessary why you are getting it? (OK, you probably don't, but you should.)

While I assume it is not the case, it seems to me that anyone who handles a firearm on a movie set or anywhere else should have basic firearm safety training, including how to make sure a firearm is unloaded.

As far as the surgical analogy someone mentioned, yes, before any operation, before the patient is anesthetized I would check that everything I would need for the case was present, and if it was a drill or saw--that it worked.

[Danno]

How can having an actor check a gun to be sure it's unloaded be more dangerous than not checking? Please explain.

I am no expert, but what if the gun is supposed to have a blank in it? You expect the actor to examine the gun and determine that it is loaded with a blank and not a real bullet? Seems like that invites the potential for the actor to hurt themselves.

[old_newguy]

I wonder if the Screen Actors Guild has thought of this and published any guidance?

https://www.sagaftra.org/files/safet...rt_1_9_3_0.pdf

[dunfree]

http://www.todayifoundout.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/what-could-go-wrong.png[/IMG]

[Atrain505]

Here’s the issue with a 24 year old armorer who has one feature under her belt now being asked to do, while still a low budget, a big ass film for her with extremely well known talent. Her job is about safety.

When you have a much more experienced older guy whose job it is to keep everyone on time and on schedule and that sometimes involves yelling at people to move it along and he is the most stressed guy on set because the producers are breathing down his neck to keep things on time so their budget doesn’t balloon, and he takes a gun from the cart because he wants to help and speed things up, when someone is 24 they probably are not going to speak up and say, “STOP. You can’t do that. Only me or my team hands guns to actors. You never do.” The 1st AD has the power to fire her or recommend her to be fired to the producers.

Would any of you at 24 have spoke up to your boss who is probably 20+ years your senior?

That’s the issue with having a young person do a job that is 100% about safety and 100% about taking control of unsafe situations.

The 1st AD should never be handling guns on set. They have way, way too much on their mind/plate. They are the glue that holds every single department together and on time.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[MontuckyFried]

a) movies & tv are often looking for explicitly unsafe behavior with the prop gun and

Well, if you're talking about how most actors handle their guns like a bunch of morans, then sure! Drives me up a wall to see actors trying to look like a bunch of badasses on screen, while having their finger shoved all the way through the trigger guard, cocking a thousand times in a single scene, or pointing them at their allies willie nilly as they flail them around without a care. It's obvious that most people in Hollywood have zero freaking clue about guns. There are certainly some notable exceptions where they bring in the experts and you see good weapons practices, even on screen, but overall, it's pretty bad.

b) learning the basic ins and outs of the thousand + types of firearms used in movies/tv/etc is more than a basics course.

False. Once you've been properly trained, you should safely be able to handle just about any firearm with the most basic of introductions. "First time handling this kind? Ok. No prob. Here's where the primary functions are and how it works." Takes no more than a minute to bring someone up to speed on the particulars. The safety aspects are universal.

[abraham]

Huh, you're shocked that actors are acting the way they are directed to act on camera? That's a special kind of dumb.

[TNKen]

If the projectile stuck in the barrel because of a "squib" load, which is a primer without powder, that would be hard to spot without a close examination.

Any armor or shooter with any experience, however, knows that if you squib a load, there is a projectile stuck in the barrel. A blank would have sufficient power to push it out the barrel.

[dunfree]

False. Once you've been properly trained, you should safely be able to handle just about any firearm with the most basic of introductions. "First time handling this kind? Ok. No prob. Here's where the primary functions are and how it works." Takes no more than a minute to bring someone up to speed on the particulars. The safety aspects are universal.

not sure why gun people have chosen a talking point that showcases how ignorant they are of the really weird guns of the past, and how many of those weird guns make it to the screen, but here we are.

[XXX-er]

I don't see why an actor would be expected to be an expert in weaponry, somebody hands them a gun and tells them what to do, they may wana look like that they know how to handle a weapon but they can be taught that pretty quick and its all called acting

its was suposed to be unloaded

[bennymac]

How can having an actor check a gun to be sure it's unloaded be more dangerous than not checking? Please explain. We're not talking about the actor being the only one responsible for checking. Ever seen an airline pilot walk around a plane inspecting? I'm sure the mechanics know more about the mechanical safety of the plane than the pilot, but the pilot still checks. If someone tells you the breaker is off before you start fiddling with the wires, do you just take their word for it? If you're in the hospital do you just take every pill they give you without asking what it is, and if necessary why you are getting it? (OK, you probably don't, but you should.)

While I assume it is not the case, it seems to me that anyone who handles a firearm on a movie set or anywhere else should have basic firearm safety training, including how to make sure a firearm is unloaded.

As far as the surgical analogy someone mentioned, yes, before any operation, before the patient is anesthetized I would check that everything I would need for the case was present, and if it was a drill or saw--that it worked.

If a pipe bursts in the ceiling above your OR and starts raining dirty water down onto your patient you’re not gonna be liable for damages (although of course you and everyone involved would be named). At some level you are delegating responsibility to others. A pilot does a walk around but doesn’t climb into the fuel tanks or crawl through the holds inspecting wiring.

Expecting an actor to be trained like an expert to ensure gun safety on set is silly. Should they also do brake inspections on any vehicles they might be asked to drive?

[SumJongGuy]

Any armor or shooter with any experience, however, knows that if you squib a load, there is a projectile stuck in the barrel. A blank would have sufficient power to push it out the barrel.

The gun in question should have never had anything but blanks in the chamber for the entirety of its movie gun lifespan. But, some plastic from a misfire still in the barrel followed by another blank plastic wad being fired fits the two people injured with one shot scenario doesn't it?

[mcski]

Not the rep, that would be illegal, but yes on the tech.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Ya, but it was the premise of the great Rockford Files episode w Rita Moreno and Abe Vigoda

[kathleenturneroverdrive]

False. Once you've been properly trained, you should safely be able to handle just about any firearm with the most basic of introductions. "First time handling this kind? Ok. No prob. Here's where the primary functions are and how it works." Takes no more than a minute to bring someone up to speed on the particulars. The safety aspects are universal.

Sure. You can explain basic firearm safety to actors. That's normal.

But you legit, 110%, cannot make it a rule actors must perform a final safety check on their weapons which would, in turn, make them liable for those weapons. Unions, insurance companies, actors, etc. would never allow that (nor should they) to happen.

Would any of you at 24 have spoke up to your boss who is probably 20+ years your senior?

Great post all around.

[seano732]

Looking more and more like the AD might be in deep shit…..
“Rust" assistant director was fired from previous movie after crew member was injured in gun incident:
https://www.cnn.com/entertainment/li...-21/index.html

[Falcon3]

Yup that’s the thing. You can’t expect the actors to use the same rules as recreational shooters.

Rule #1 gun safety: Always keep the gun pointed in a safe direction.

This is literally impossible when shooting a movie because they’re pointing guns at each other and pulling the trigger. There is no such thing as up or down range.

The safety of this situation is provided by an institutional procedure, which is supposed to include weapons control and expert loading/inspections.

[Meadow Skipper]

I wonder if the Screen Actors Guild has thought of this and published any guidance?

https://www.sagaftra.org/files/safet...rt_1_9_3_0.pdf

Good link. Skip to page 13. Everyone read that before commenting further on procedures.

[Rasputin]

Good link. Skip to page 13. Everyone read that before commenting further on procedures.

Or just the first bullet point on page four:

• AS AN ACTOR, YOU ARE ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR
YOUR OWN SAFETY AND THE SAFETY Of YOUR FELLOW
CAST MEMBERS.
Production management and crew are responsible for creating and
maintaining safe conditions, but it is your right and responsibility to double
check the set up to ensure your own Safety.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I can’t believe that they have a safety meeting before handling the firearms


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Rasputin]

I can’t believe that they have a safety meeting before handling the firearms


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Hence the crew members that walked, in part, due to safety concerns?