Alec Baldwin Shoots and Kills Cinematographer, Wounds Director

[henrygandorf 28910]

Just now, Onboard 2.0 said:

Yeah cause reasonable safety just ceases to exist in that world when money is the key factor.

either accidentally or intentionally, you're missing the point that the protocol exists because of safety.

now excuse me, i'm off to the classroom!  my students are everything to me.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Yeah well, putting fries and a burger in a bag isn’t all that complicated. J/k

Well played.....

[henrygandorf 28910]

he said extra ranch.  we all heard him say extra ranch.  but i noticed in the bag that there was no extra ranch.  that's when i knew we were in trouble.

[OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys 2054]

7 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Ahh a teacher ?? Well you're just all kinds of non responsible.

 

Nice deflection brah....

LA dude that talks about movies all the time and his time working with GGW and is filling this thread with discussions of how movies are made is probably a teacher

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

either accidentally or intentionally, you're missing the point that the protocol exists because of safety.

now excuse me, i'm off to the classroom!  my students are everything to me.

I get protocol. I've also read there were issues on that particular set directly related to protocol, and safety.  So maybe, just maybe, and I'm just spitballin' here, they should have taken an extra 60 seconds to check weapons in front of everyone involved who would be handling a weapon (one more time) before having them pointed, and tiggers pulled.  I know I know... that's just crazy talk.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys said:

LA dude that talks about movies all the time and his time working with GGW and is filling this thread with discussions of how movies are made is probably a teacher

Yeah ? Didn't know that.  So then I'd then say it sounds a bit like a classic circling of the Wagons scenario.  We got a bunch of that from the pilot types in the Boeing Max thread.

[immortal13 4059]

42 minutes ago, Lobo said:

‘Gun owner’?  Now Alec Baldwin owns the guns on set?  You are a truly a magician among retards.  How are you not a senator yet?

Keep handling your "weapon", bro. 🤣

[shadow_operative 15931]

21 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Yeah and in my profession, I check behind other people to make sure they've done their job properly.  It's called being responsible, ya might wanna get some.

following the standard protocol used in hollywood, guns have been fired on set hundreds of thousands of times, if not more, for decades on end, and in all of that time firing all of those shots, it has ended in someone being shot a total of three times. that's a 99.999% success rate when following those protocols. that's not good enough for you? that's "irresponsible" to you? 

[shadow_operative 15931]

dp 

(no pun intended)

Edited October 26, 2021 by shadow_operative

[immortal13 4059]

10 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I get protocol. I've also read there were issues on that particular set directly related to protocol, and safety.  So maybe, just maybe, and I'm just spitballin' here, they should have taken an extra 60 seconds to check weapons in front of everyone involved who would be handling a weapon (one more time) before having them pointed, and tiggers pulled.  I know I know... that's just crazy talk.

This

[henrygandorf 28910]

4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I get protocol. I've also read there were issues on that particular set directly related to protocol, and safety.  So maybe, just maybe, and I'm just spitballin' here, they should have taken an extra 60 seconds to check weapons in front of everyone involved who would be handling a weapon (one more time) before having them pointed, and tiggers pulled.  I know I know... that's just crazy talk.

from all accounts, there were many mistakes made here.  from sloppy hiring/lack of vetting, to budget slashing causing shitty workplace (causing some of the more experienced people to walk), to plain lack of oversight when it comes to important props that can actually kill somebody.  the armorer should've been on top of her shit.  the first ad should've been better informed and stayed in his lane.  i'm not sure where the propmaster was, but he/she should've been involved.

a lot of things went wrong that day.  but for better or worse, baldwin the actor was not part of the problem.  he should not be checking the gun nor should he be expected to, especially if he's not an experienced gun user.  baldwin the producer (or at least people who work under his umbrella) should've been better with the hiring and set conditions, and then when he's handed a cold gun, he would be confident that it is actually a cold gun.

unfortunately, on these indie sets, corners often get cut.  and it's not to "make money", it's typically because "shit is expensive and they haven't got much money".  i have a producer buddy (who's actually from texas and is a mega-trumper) who got into some shit when one of his locations couldn't afford to "keep everyone safe" and they got hit pretty hard with legit sexual harrassment/assault accusations.

the "big hollywood" that the right loves to rail against is not on trial here.  this shit isn't happening on the warner bros backlot.  this is an indie production, and because of stuff like this, you're likely to see fewer of them.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

5 minutes ago, shadow_operative said:

following the standard protocol used in hollywood, guns have been fired on set hundreds of thousands of times, if not more, for decades on end, and in all of that time firing all of those shots, it has ended in someone being shot a total of three times. that's a 99.999% success rate when following those protocols. that's not good enough for you? that's "irresponsible" to you? 

In this instance yeah, because there was already a record of safety issues on that set.  So taking an extra few second, or an extra step seems a minimally intrusive, and responsible thing to do.

[Guest Lobo]

9 minutes ago, immortal13 said:

Keep handling your "weapon", bro. 🤣

Your wife handles mine just fine. 

[immortal13 4059]

3 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Your wife handles mine just fine. 

🤣🤣🤣

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Your wife handles mine just fine. 

Now... this is classic Surly, and must be saluted.

[bad_teammate 13022]

 

[Kennythetiger 9284]

35 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

he said extra ranch.  we all heard him say extra ranch.  but i noticed in the bag that there was no extra ranch.  that's when i knew we were in trouble.

They always fuck you in the drive-through. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, Kennythetiger said:

They always fuck you in the drive-through. 

Do you even Chik fil a man !! ??

[Js1 83679]

2 minutes ago, Kennythetiger said:

They always fuck you in the drive-through. 

Does that cost extra? 

[Deej 76219]

20 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

i'm not sure where the propmaster was, but he/she should've been involved.

One person who turned down the job said part of his reason for doing so was the insistence that he be both armorer and propmaster, because they didn't want to spend on both.  He said it was too much for one person to handle both jobs safely. So I imagine the armorer was the propmaster on this film.  

[shadow_operative 15931]

i still can't wrap my head around the people in here who don't understand the following:

1.it's not his job

2.it's not his area of expertise

3.there's no scenario ever where an actor should be fucking around with/inspecting a gun

period. 

IN FACT, imagine if Alec Baldwin had been fucking around with that gun, "inspecting" it to make sure everything was good to go, and the gun had gone off and the exact same result occurred. the very people in this thread who are blaming Alec Baldwin for not checking the gun would be in here screaming, "WTF is he doing screwing around with a firearm like it's a toy?!?! he's a gun-hating libtard actor for christ's sake, you leave that stuff to the experts!!!" 

Edited October 26, 2021 by shadow_operative

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

50 minutes ago, shadow_operative said:

i still can't wrap my head around the people in here who don't understand the following:

1.it's not his job

2.it's not his area of expertise

3.there's no scenario ever where an actor should be fucking around with/inspecting a gun

period. 

IN FACT, imagine if Alec Baldwin had been fucking around with that gun, "inspecting" it to make sure everything was good to go, and the gun had gone off and the exact same result occurred. the very people in this thread who are blaming Alec Baldwin for not checking the gun would be in here screaming, "WTF is he doing screwing around with a firearm like it's a toy?!?! he's a gun hating actor for christs sake, you leave that stuff to the experts!!!" 

I'm sorry you must be attempting to be blissfully obtuse here.

It's not his job, but a weapon is handed to you on a set, and you can't ask the person handing it to you to verify the status of that weapon ?  That's some first class BS right there.

Area of expertise ? You mean asking about the status of a weapon handed to you requires expertise ?  Especially when there's already been an established track record of safety issues on that set ?  More first class BS.

He doesn't need to inspect it, he can have the prop master or armorer open the magazine, and verify it's empty or rounds are indeed blank right there  in front of him without him every touching the weapon.  But hey he's qualified to fast draw it, and pull a trigger (coincidentally the most potentially dangerous part of the entire sequence of events once its in his hands). Congrats that's a triple layer of BS.

 

Awwwwwww skipper......honey hush....

Edited October 26, 2021 by Onboard 2.0

[jimmyjazz 45211]

I still don't understand how people can't see that a movie set, with an "armorer" on site, is a completely different situation than what is presumed when training gun owners to act responsibly.

The whole point of "always check your weapon" etc. hinges on the idea that the person handling the firearm is the only line of defense against accidents.  The message gets lost if we add "except in the case where your hunting guide checks your weapon immediately prior to handing it to you so you can slaughter Bambi".  If we want people to follow the rules, the rules need to be simple and unambiguous.

On a movie set, with an armorer on site, THEY are likely a better last line of defense against accidents than the average actor.  Simple odds bear that out -- roughly 1/3 of all Americans own guns.  I'd guess that number is lower for actors, but it's a guess.  At any rate, the armorer should be the most experienced and capable gun handler on most film sets.  

Now, when shit goes wrong, as apparently happened with this inexperienced armorer, then accidents are more likely to happen.  That's not an indictment of the film industry, it's an indictment of poor hiring on this particular project.  Whether Baldwin, as one of the producers, has any culpability is a different discussion, but just because one film project out of hundreds of thousands went south doesn't mean the gun handling process must change.  It could mean that the vetting and hiring process needs improvement.

[immortal13 4059]

12 minutes ago, shadow_operative said:

i still can't wrap my head around the people in here who don't understand the following:

1.it's not his job

2.it's not his area of expertise

3.there's no scenario ever where an actor should be fucking around with/inspecting a gun

period. 

IN FACT, imagine if Alec Baldwin had been fucking around with that gun, "inspecting" it to make sure everything was good to go, and the gun had gone off and the exact same result occurred. the very people in this thread who are blaming Alec Baldwin for not checking the gun would be in here screaming, "WTF is he doing screwing around with a firearm like it's a toy?!?! he's a gun-hating libtard actor for christ's sake, you leave that stuff to the experts!!!" 

Dude quit trying to CR up this thread. And you're fucking wrong. I don't care whose job it is, if someone hands you a firearm, you should inspect it in a safe manner(ie not fucking pointed at anyone). I'm not pulling a fucking trigger on any gun that I do not know 100% what is in it.......OR some other qualified person(since Alec Baldwin is an ignorant rube) could have checked the gun IMMEDIATELY before it was handed to AB. Blank rounds are noticeably different than an actual live round. This could have easily been avoided.

[Pam Cummings 9424]

6 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I'm sorry you must be attempting to be blissfully obtuse here.

It's not his job, but a weapon is handed to you on a set, and you can't ask the person handing it to you to verify the status of that weapon ?  That's some first class BS right there.

Area of expertise ? You mean asking about the status of a weapon handed to you requires expertise ?  Especially when there's already been an established track record of safety issues on that set ?  More first class BS.

He doesn't need to inspect it, he can have the prop master or armorer open the magazine, and verify it's empty or rounds are indeed blank right there  in front of him without him every touching the weapon.  But hey he's qualified to fast draw it, and pull a trigger (coincidentally the most potentially dangerous part of the entire sequence of events once its in his hands). Congrats that's a triple layer of BS.

Oh look, onboard is blathering endlessly about a subject he knows nothing about again, what a surprise.

[High Plains Drifter 10938]

1 hour ago, Cheeseweasel said:

If this is what the CR is like, I'm glad I avoid it.

 

There is a CR thread on this very topic, and its glorious. Sort of like my morning shit this morning was glorious.

 

 

[Pam Cummings 9424]

6 minutes ago, immortal13 said:

Dude quit trying to CR up this thread. And you're fucking wrong. I don't care whose job it is, if someone hands you a firearm, you should inspect it in a safe manner(ie not fucking pointed at anyone). I'm not pulling a fucking trigger on any gun that I do not know 100% what is in it.......OR some other qualified person(since Alec Baldwin is an ignorant rube) could have checked the gun IMMEDIATELY before it was handed to AB. Blank rounds are noticeably different than an actual live round. This could have easily been avoided.

Oh look, immortal is crying about the cloak room when somone shits on his dumb takes again, what a surprise.

Edited October 26, 2021 by Pam Cummings

[shadow_operative 15931]

11 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I'm sorry you must be attempting to be blissfully obtuse here.

It's not his job, but a weapon is handed to you on a set, and you can't ask the person handing it to you to verify the status of that weapon ?  That's some first class BS right there.

 

as has been posted countless times already, the AD handed him the gun and yelled "COLD GUN!" which *is* "verification of the status of the weapon." 

and you want to talk about being obtuse.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

5 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I still don't understand how people can't see that a movie set, with an "armorer" on site, is a completely different situation than what is presumed when training gun owners to act responsibly.

The whole point of "always check your weapon" etc. hinges on the idea that the person handling the firearm is the only line of defense against accidents.  The message gets lost if we add "except in the case where your hunting guide checks your weapon immediately prior to handing it to you so you can slaughter Bambi".  If we want people to follow the rules, the rules need to be simple and unambiguous.

On a movie set, with an armorer on site, THEY are likely a better last line of defense against accidents than the average actor.  Simple odds bear that out -- roughly 1/3 of all Americans own guns.  I'd guess that number is lower for actors, but it's a guess.  At any rate, the armorer should be the most experienced and capable gun handler on most film sets.  

Now, when shit goes wrong, as apparently happened with this inexperienced armorer, then accidents are more likely to happen.  That's not an indictment of the film industry, it's an indictment of poor hiring on this particular project.  Whether Baldwin, as one of the producers, has any culpability is a different discussion, but just because one film project out of hundreds of thousands went south doesn't mean the gun handling process must change.  It could mean that the vetting and hiring process needs improvement.

I view the armorer as no different than a firearm instructor at a shooting range.  Their job is safety first, and foremost I'd think (hope).  This incident IS the rare time it happens, but that there was already a track record of safety issues, they didn't think to maybe just be a bit more cautious because of that ?    

I'm sorry, but I think 99% of the people who post here on Surly would probably try to exercise a bit more caution if they were in a similar, unique situation like that.  It's not job responsibility it's just common sense, cautious precaution. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

7 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

Oh look, onboard is blathering endlessly about a subject he knows nothing about again, what a surprise.

Good for you,You'd certainly be familiar with going on about shit you don't know anything about.

[immortal13 4059]

1 minute ago, Pam Cummings said:

Oh look, immortal is crying about the cloak room when somone shits on his dumb takes again, what a surprise.

Umm hey Cloak Room Karen, why don't you use a piece of produce to diddle your nasty, fat twat. Derka wasn't replying to me anyway. 

[immortal13 4059]

2 minutes ago, shadow_operative said:

the AD handed him the gun and yelled "COLD GUN!" which *is* "verification of the status of the weapon." 

Apparently it wasn't lmao

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, shadow_operative said:

as has been posted countless times already, the AD handed him the gun and yelled "COLD GUN!" which *is* "verification of the status of the weapon." 

and you want to talk about being obtuse.

PROP MASTER: Cold gun !!  

DIRECTOR, BALDWIN, OTHER CREW MEMBERS: Hey ya know we've had some issues, let Alec/me please see the open breach... Oh no how dare he/they !!!!

The fact there were previous safety issues on the set, people walked off theoir jobs because of the sense of poor safety seems to escape some of you. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, immortal13 said:

Apparently it wasn't lmao

Ouch...........  that's a 3 point shot at the buzzer right there.

[shadow_operative 15931]

alright, we all just need to completely ignore onboard and immortal at this point. God himself could come down from heaven, appear before all of us, confirm his existence to humanity, tell those two that they are wrong, and they would still argue with him. 

Edited October 26, 2021 by shadow_operative

[immortal13 4059]

1 minute ago, shadow_operative said:

alright, we all just need to completely ignore onboard and immortal at this point. God himself could come down from heaven, appear before all of us, confirm his existence to humanity, tell them that they are wrong, and they would still argue with him. 

Maybe he could accurately "verify" the gun is safe? 🤣🤣🤣

[Pato del Muerto 52117]

1 hour ago, immortal13 said:

JFc...Visually check the actual bullets. You realize they don't look the same, right? Of course you do 🤣

One of us isn’t comprehending, because I’m of the belief that based on this thread the gun was to be loaded with dummy rounds for the shot, which do look like hot rounds because they are a cartridge and a bullet but instead of powder/primer there’s bbs that will rattle when you shake it. In that instance, the only way to tell would be to take them out and shake them.  I doubt the propmaster would like to see an actor so that on set. 
 

I thought someone also said earlier that standard practice is for the armorer to do a final check of the firearm with the actor before handing it to them so the actor can see for themselves but not have to know how. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, shadow_operative said:

alright, we all just need to completely ignore onboard and immortal at this point. God himself could come down from heaven, appear before all of us, confirm his existence to humanity, tell those two that they are wrong, and they would still argue with him. 

Of course we do because your lame point was shot down like AB did to that poor woman

[bad_teammate 13022]

Actors, a category of people we all know is perfectly capable of safely screwing around with guns, being able to identify their component parts, and distinguish between varying types of ammunication.

lol

[henrygandorf 28910]

this never would've happened in the 70's. 

cocaine makes everybody so much more focused.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Actors, a category of people we all know is perfectly capable of safely screwing around with guns, being able to identify their component parts, and distinguish between varying types of ammunication.

lol

The usual collective here sticking fingers in theIr ears and going NANANANANANANANANANANANANANANANANANANANA

[Pato del Muerto 52117]

Just now, henrygandorf said:

this never would've happened in the 70's. 

cocaine makes everybody so much more focused.

Cocaine has been out of the industry for 40 years?

[Guest Lobo]

Well it used to be at the craft services table.  But these days, you got your goddamn unions.  

[Pam Cummings 9424]

10 minutes ago, shadow_operative said:

alright, we all just need to completely ignore onboard and immortal at this point. God himself could come down from heaven, appear before all of us, confirm his existence to humanity, tell those two that they are wrong, and they would still argue with him. 

You have to marvel at how quickly it turned from gun safety concern trolling to making jokes and dancing on the victim's grave.

[immortal13 4059]

8 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

One of us isn’t comprehending, because I’m of the belief that based on this thread the gun was to be loaded with dummy rounds for the shot, which do look like hot rounds because they are a cartridge and a bullet but instead of powder/primer there’s bbs that will rattle when you shake it. In that instance, the only way to tell would be to take them out and shake them.  I doubt the propmaster would like to see an actor so that on set. 
 

Nope

[henrygandorf 28910]

4 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Cocaine has been out of the industry for 40 years?

i hear new mexico is more of a meth state.

[Skipper 5969]

33 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I still don't understand how people can't see that a movie set, with an "armorer" on site, is a completely different situation than what is presumed when training gun owners to act responsibly.

 

Because the people in this thread you are referencing are clearly Cloak Roomers incapable of logic or critical analysis.

[Skipper 5969]

19 minutes ago, shadow_operative said:

alright, we all just need to completely ignore onboard and immortal at this point. God himself could come down from heaven, appear before all of us, confirm his existence to humanity, tell those two that they are wrong, and they would still argue with him. 

When this guy is the voice of reason and calling you out as an idiot, and everyone agrees with him, you should probably post less.

[MrBig 5186]

The gun went off when AB was rehearsing a cross draw of the gun while the DP and director were setting up the shot. There was no indication that he was pointing the gun directly at the camera and pulling the trigger. So all this bullshit about checking the gun before you point it at the camera and pull the trigger is irrelevant here. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, MrBig said:

The gun went off when AB was rehearsing a cross draw of the gun while the DP and director were setting up the shot. There was no indication that he was pointing the gun directly at the camera and pulling the trigger. So all this bullshit about checking the gun before you point it at the camera and pull the trigger is irrelevant here. 

Yeah, no he has a weapon in his hands, there's a record of lax safety protocol on the set., An extra 30 seconds to verify it was indeed safe was not something that should be considered outlandish or not his job.  More deflection from the basic issue of verifying the weapon was  safe.