I compare this situation to other I've been involved with at work, in my current assignment. We get community groups out here on occasion to play "police" for a day. One of the things they do is force on force with Glock Simunition handguns. They are only slightly modified Glocks that fire primer-only 9mm Simunition rounds. These community members play the part of a police officer and are confronted with a fire/no fire scenario. They are handed a holstered Glock and they are allowed to fire at the role players (me) if that force if they felt they needed to. The community members typically have ZERO firearms experience and 100% have to trust us when we tell them that the gun is loaded with Sim rounds and it is safe to fire at the role players with it. If a live round was fired, it would not be the fault of the community member firing the gun, they had no way of knowing, but rather the person they trusted to ensure it was safe. Some actors are gun people and can safety check their own equipment. Some actors are significantly deficient in that knowledge and rely on others for that. Is that what happened here? I don't know. I do know it is POSSIBLE he is not responsible.
Exactly. He had the ultimate control.If he is not "responsible" as the actor, then what about as the "producer"?
You know there will be people who "Believe" a 45 Colt Revolver shot itself!What, did the gun shoot itself? This is going to be an interesting blame game now.
Alec Baldwin says he 'didn't pull the trigger' in 1st interview since 'Rust' shooting
"The trigger wasn't pulled," Baldwin says in a preview of Thursday's interview. "I didn't pull the trigger."www.yahoo.com
Hmmm, go with me on this. For my comparison I will call both community members you deal with and actors on a movie set "actor".I compare this situation to other I've been involved with at work, in my current assignment. We get community groups out here on occasion to play "police" for a day. One of the things they do is force on force with Glock Simunition handguns. They are only slightly modified Glocks that fire primer-only 9mm Simunition rounds. These community members play the part of a police officer and are confronted with a fire/no fire scenario. They are handed a holstered Glock and they are allowed to fire at the role players (me) if that force if they felt they needed to. The community members typically have ZERO firearms experience and 100% have to trust us when we tell them that the gun is loaded with Sim rounds and it is safe to fire at the role players with it. If a live round was fired, it would not be the fault of the community member firing the gun, they had no way of knowing, but rather the person they trusted to ensure it was safe. Some actors are gun people and can safety check their own equipment. Some actors are significantly deficient in that knowledge and rely on others for that. Is that what happened here? I don't know. I do know it is POSSIBLE he is not responsible.
It's my understanding that this is how it's supposed to work on a set. Not some AD handing the actor the firearm and proclaiming "It's Cold"Hmmm, go with me on this. For my comparison I will call both community members you deal with and actors on a movie set "actor".
If you know that you are assuming responsibility by handing a gun to an "actor" whether on a movie set or in a simulated training scenario, wouldn't it be in your best interest to show the "actor" the gun is unloaded? Likewise, wouldn't it be in your best interest to have the "actor" witness you loading the gun and you being very clear whether that ammunition is live or simunition?
While the "actor" has to trust what you tell them, shouldn't you be taking the time to at least give them a safety briefing and educate them by showing them how the gun you are putting in their hands works? Sure, that may not be enough to make them really feel comfortable or for that information to stick with them.
But, it seems to me it would be better than the equivalent of... here this gun has simulated bullets in it not live bullets and it's ok to shoot it at me. Or, here this gun ain't loaded wifth no boolits... Heck, even the guy working the counter of many big box outdoors stores knows to show you the gun is empty before handing it off to a customer. And frankly, I doubt most of those guys have the training/ professionalism you or a movie set armorer should have.
Really not trying to be an ass here. But regardless if it's you, me or anyone else, as the one putting the gun in another's hands you, I, we owe them the respect to how them how to handle it safely.
That may be. I'm not sure of movie hierarchy, if the buck stops with the Producer. If so, then very likely...civil of course.If he is not "responsible" as the actor, then what about as the "producer"?
I've heard other actors state their sets' safety protocols are nothing like this one. I imagine it was a series of events that set this tragedy into motion.It's my understanding that this is how it's supposed to work on a set. Not some AD handing the actor the firearm and proclaiming "It's Cold"
By all reports they breached safety protocol and that's just plain ass negligence resulting in the death of one person and injury to another.
He has deep pockets. They should be lighter after this is done.That may be. I'm not sure of movie hierarchy, if the buck stops with the Producer. If so, then very likely...civil of course.