Agree! When I was a kid and learning how to safely handle a firearm my father drilled it into me that (loaded or unloaded) you have to always be aware of where the gun is pointed . Even if you are sure it is not loaded you still never point it in the direction of another person. I think these are pretty much the basic rules of safe gun handling and Baldwin broke them all!

He only got let off because of who he is. If anyone of us had done the same thing, we would be behind bars for quite a while. For that brat, they are falling over each other to come up with lame excuses to cover his recklessness

It still remains that you should check every gun to see if it is loaded. Baldwin is a creep.

I agree with the basic gun safety rules Mack listed above. I drill them into my kids and I demand gun safety from all while hunting, in the shop working on guns, at the range, etc.

I totally agree that you never point a gun at another person (or the dog, cat or cows) even if you are 100% sure it is unloaded--unless you intend to shoot the person, dog, cat or cow. Even if you removed the bolt or other crucial mechanism. I would vote this is Rule Number 1.

But this was a movie set. In every western, Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, John Wick and an almost endless list of movies, guns are pointed at other people. I love those movies. How could they have made this scene, for example, without violating Rule Number 1? Serious question. I get that they use blanks, special effects and all but I am watching real humans point real guns at each other.



I know a lot of y'all hate Baldwin because of his politics, but be careful vilifying a guy or guys that made a mistake with a firearm. The gun grabbers love this infighting.

If anything, it was plain old negligence.

I look back into this further than checking firearms, etc.

Who brought the live ammo to the set in the first place ?

I understood it to be wanna be gunman, Baldwin. He hates what he wants to be, in his dreams, the most. Acting in all the real men, masculine parts every time. Knowing he will never equal a gnat on a bull's horn in par with expert military men , and others . So he plays big shot on his sets. That's why so many quit working for him.

He brought live ammo to the set and wanted to show off shooting targets, or whatever, between video takes.

I doubt seriously that anyone else took it upon themselves to bring live ammo to a movie set.

Baldwin is to blame for it all.

I remember hearing that crew members were target shooting with that handgun before the murder happened. "They' handled this in a manner to let him off...which was the goal from the start. The opposite of this type of 'justice' is what will happen to Trump in nyc..'they' have decided he will be convicted and everything involved will be conducted with that end in sight.

the major difference is between Rust and the other movies you mentioned is who they got thier guns from.

there are a few prop houses in Hollywood that specialize in firearms for movies , they modify real guns as they need to be to look correct so that they are not real guns any longer either inert or blank firing only , this costs money
buying clone western guns made overseas from a regular gun dealer in NM is less expensive but costs in other ways.

yes acting and portraying these roles is always going to have people pointing prop guns at each other , but prop guns that fire real ammo and knowing they had an issue with live ammo on set , that is an issue of gross neglect of safety protocols for the purpose of a budget.

Somehow I doubt "The Baldwin defence" will become a new point of law. Pointing a real firearm at someone, and pulling the trigger, then saying, I didn't know it was loaded, someone else was responsible for that, won't get traction. (At least with anyone other than a Hollywood celebrity). This is on the prosecuting attorney, maybe he will come to his senses at some point.

He knows all the important people-Money talks,Baldwin walks.
Good old American capitalism,dontcha know?

He's taking lessons from the Biden family?

I cant stand him but he didn't do anything that isn't done in action movies everyday. Person who did something wrong is one that put live rounds in the gun.Tons of scenes as mentioned were person shoots at the camera then it will switch to other guy falling or shooting back.

Boils down to responsibility. He was handed a potentially dangerous object. It was his duty to know and understand how to handle it safely.

Were it me, you or any other of the great unwashed we would already be doing twenty to life.

guns capable of firing live rounds

live rounds on set

not following the protocol for firearms on movie sets

lots of things failed

we have things like TABK we teach kids , and they have layers of overlap in them

movie sets can also have layers of overlap

the firing pin could have been shorten so that it could not strike a primer , inert rounds could have been used with holes drilled in them

chambers made so that they will not take a live round

this wasn't even shooting a live scene this was rehearsal so no rounds needed to be in the gun at all inert or otherwise

the fact of the matter was these things were not done , live ammo was known to have been present and they didn't stop production or even bother to take the rounds out of the gun during rehearsal because it cut into the budget.

is that manslaughter , maybe not but it is criminal business operation , knowingly deviating from industry standard to save money

might as well have bought your lifting straps from harbor freight with not for lifting clearly printed on them and then suspended a load beyond the rating over the persons head and then said well I didn't know the strap would break.

well you took every possible layer of protection out , and you got burned

I thought a gun is never a dangerous object. It by itself is just an object. The person with the gun is what’s dangerous. Right?

yes the person is the danger and he should not have trusted a know live gun would not go off when they had already had the firearms guy quit over it.

A gun is no more dangerous than a hammer. Had he brained her with a real one thinking he had been handed a rubber one I'd say the exact same thing, fry his arse.

He bore the responsibility on multiple levels.

Quite frankly having worked numerous film projects I think every soul on set should have been charged. It should be the responsibility of every responsible person on set to call cut if an unsafe act is observed or suspected.

I still feel guilt over watching one crew run over a stuntman with an army five ton even though my sole responsibility was to ensure a snake free working environment.

BTW, that one never made the news and NDAs see to it that it won't be discussed. This one would've been covered up if it could have been.

1st thing when handed agun make sure it is pointed in a safe direction and then check to see if it is unloaded. He did neither. charge him .

Look back on my posts from when it happened. I called it. A darling of the left. I said he would never see justice.

Usually when you shoot someone in the face you'd expect there to be some sort of consequence.