Hate to inform you Beaverpeeler but if the gun is in you hands / possession you are responsible for insuring it is safe, to many people seem to think that just because someone says it is safe doesn't excuse you from insuring it is in fact safe.

I hate this kind of attitude. Jealousy will get you nowhere. If you don't have a millions like some, do something to change it if it bothers you.

No wonder your state is in the state it’s in. If I can, he’s referring to the two tere justices system we are livin in..trust me, I see enough of your red and white plates in my state to last me a life time..

There is no justice in New Mexico!

X 100.

The case was dismissed because prosecutors were inept. Baldwin still bears co-responsibility for this tragedy .

Like or dislike Baldwin, his bank account or his politics, it should have no bearing on this case. Prosecuters in ALL cases need to follow the law.

This^^^

Wonder what the gun laws are in that state?Should he have needed a permit to even be messing around with a real pistol capable of shooting live rounds?

Agree! When I was a kid and my father was teaching me safe gun handling procedures, the thing he stressed the most was to always make sure that the muzzle is pointed in a safe direction and that applies even when you are positive that it is not loaded. In the case, Baldwin not only pointed it at someone, he pulled the trigger!

I agree^^^^

I don't like Alex Baldwin, but it was a movie set and a gun used as a prop. He was careless and stupid with the handling, but obviously had no idea about live rounds on a movie set.

Do any of you think that if you came to a stop sign, your brakes fail, and you plow into a van full of children that you’d walk? Seriously, no one’s going to be able to pin this scenario on their mechanic or the manufacturer. Unless you are loaded with $ you will be sitting a long while in prison. Show me the difference, please…. Two tiered system.

I think you'd get sued maybe and your insurance would pay?

He's an actor and it was a movie prop. Shouldn't the prop director be responsible? I would think a movie prop shouldn't be able to even fire? Maybe they did it on purpose to set him up?....and I don't like the guy either.

Was it actually a live round or a barrel blockage that came dislodged when the blank was fired?

Yes you would walk because the brakes failed. If you failed to use the brakes, you would not walk.

Or he wanted or needed her gone, and this was the perfect cover?

Case was never submitted to jury to decide. Was discovered prosecutors knew something about a box of bullets they did not share with defense......so judge threw out the case on technicality. Not declared innocent or guilty........just off the hook. Cannot be tried again in criminal court.

A movie set is a whole different ball game when it comes to weapons. The actors rely heavily on the armorer to ensure the correct ammo is loaded for scenes. In a lot of instances basic gun safety rules can cause massive delays because of actors ensuring the weapon is safe.
They don't load the ammo, or put the safety on. They're basically handed the weapon and told it's clear, safe, what have you. Any checking of the weapon can cause the weapon to malfunction and/or become unsafe. Thus why it's the armorers sole responsibility to ensure the weapon is "ready to go".

How many weapons do you see in movies that are shot directly at a camera? How many of those weapons do you think were individually checked by the actor? The answer is easy.... Absolutely 0.

I'm gonna have to watch John Wick tonight. I'll report back. Lol

Disagree. I 've been a firearms instructor for about 20 years. You never point a real firearm, loaded or unloaded at a person. Doesn't matter if you're positive it's not loaded. And you certainly don't pull the trigger. Baldwin claims he never pulled the trigger. So, it went off by itself? The pistol was checked by several firearm experts who said Baldwin's claim was impossible. There was no doubt he pulled the trigger. He should be in prison.