Accident on the set of Rust.
- Thread starter joberg
- Start date
- Status
JPH
Sr Member
JPH
Sr Member
But SAG *IS* a regulatory body. You don't think unions have rules? Though they may not be a government entity, which I stated before they definitely have rules.
I am not sure how you missed that distinction, but there is it for the 2nd time.
TazMan2000
Master Member
2 and 3!
They have to find everything that went wrong and ensure it never happens again.
TazMan2000
They have to find everything that went wrong and ensure it never happens again.
TazMan2000
Last edited:
But that's what a regulatory body is - a government agency. SAG-AFTRA is not a government agency. We both stated they have rules for their members, but, so what? This whole thread centers around a criminal investigation, does it not? Would anyone here care if an actor broke SAG-AFTRA rules? I'm pretty sure the answer is no. Just like the cops involved wouldn't be very concerned either, even in this context. At the most, perhaps the D.A. would take them into consideration once actual charges were filed and they were building their case. That's not happening yet. So, at this point, bringing up SAG-AFTRA rules really serves no purpose unless you're just looking for every little nit to pick. That would mean your participation in this discussion is basically in bad faith. Now off to the ignore list you go. Have fun there.
JPH
Sr Member
And you don't think that if Baldwin goes to court a prosecutor wouldn't post SAG's rules for gun use infront of a jury and Baldwin. Then meticulously, painfully go through EVERY VIOLATION and conclude with getting Baldwin to ADMIT he agreed to these rules?!?!
It's a silver bullet!
If Baldwin goes silent, he's in even deeper poo
In addition to the four basic safety rules, gun owners are strictly taught that the rules apply in all situations at all times without exception. I remember one question in the California gun safety exam asked what next step was after someone clears a gun, shows you an empty gun, and hands it to you. If you didn't say that you checked the gun yourself you got it wrong.
This is a big reason why most gun owners come down hard on AB. This tragic event is exactly the classic dumbass scenario we have all been told to avoid. And blaming someone who told you the gun was clear is a classic folley. If AB had any training (which he supposedly has had) then he should have know this, too and must not have taken it seriously. If AB had no training then he should never have been handling firearms in any of his movies to begin with.
That is why gun owners think AB needs to have some accountability.
This is a big reason why most gun owners come down hard on AB. This tragic event is exactly the classic dumbass scenario we have all been told to avoid. And blaming someone who told you the gun was clear is a classic folley. If AB had any training (which he supposedly has had) then he should have know this, too and must not have taken it seriously. If AB had no training then he should never have been handling firearms in any of his movies to begin with.
That is why gun owners think AB needs to have some accountability.
Nobody is absolving AB of anything, we are just saying placing all the blame squarely on him is not justified. There were others in line who also failed. If just one of them, just one single person in that chain, including AB, did their due diligence and checked the gun out, this would all have been avoided. So they are ALL guilty of negligence, not just him because he was the last in the line. The prosecutor will determine who is most culpable and what the charges should be, not us here.
I swear… we are not getting anywhere here, just the same people, saying the same things over and over. This thread should be closed as nothing of value is being shared and we are just watching everyone going around in circles.
So I'm not sure how what you're saying absolves anyone of personal accountability?
It's not "arming". It's called parenting. There's a greater likelihood that my (now) teenage son will never have an "Alec Baldwin" moment because he was trained to respect firearms from an early age.
That might be true, but there are literally 10's of millions of gun owners in the USA, and this kind of negligence does not happen every day.
Last edited:
Most of the people who are harsh on AB aren't necessarily saying he is solely responsible either. I'm just explaining why most of us are against the idea that he has any less responsibility than the others. If you think we are all arguing that AB is solely responsible then you probably don't understand the gun owner's perspective.
I'm of the school of thought that even some of us with different opinions can find some common understanding. If you have no interest then nobody is forcing you to read.
TazMan2000
Master Member
You're correct. In 2016 it happened 1.25 times per day. This is not counting suicides or criminal acts with a firearm.
Crime Scene and Biohazard Cleanup Services | ServiceMaster BioClean
ServiceMaster BioClean provides professional biohazard, crime scene, and death cleanup services for families and communities nationwide. Available 24/7/365 for cleaning and disinfection.
TazMan2000
My post was hyperbolic. I take no issue with people being instructed to respect firearms.
My post was not about you, but about a few here who have spelled out clearly that AB is solely responsible. Here is an example….
I could link to articles to refute those statistics, but then we would likely be treading the ban-hammer. Suffice to say that roughly half of American households have guns, and there are about 332 million Americans.You're correct. In 2016 it happened 1.25 times per day. This is not counting suicides or criminal acts with a firearm.
Crime Scene and Biohazard Cleanup Services | ServiceMaster BioClean
ServiceMaster BioClean provides professional biohazard, crime scene, and death cleanup services for families and communities nationwide. Available 24/7/365 for cleaning and disinfection.www.aftermath.com
TazMan2000
To put it in perspective, for that number of guns even 1.25 per day in a country the size of the US isn't much. But let us nip this brewing gun control debate in the bud before it gets out of hand.
TazMan2000
Master Member
I don't want to dispute statistics either. This thread isn't about that. In any case, all this discussion about this event is all theory and opinion. We'll see in the coming days and months what comes out as truth and what justice will be served, in addition to any changes to policy.
It's obvious in all our discussions that some opinions run deep. We could sit here and debate this until we're blue in the face, and it won't change the facts or anyone's life. I just find it enlightening to find out how some people think.
I would say the majority of the members who commented here, would agree that this isn't just one person's fault.
TazMan2000
Pumpkinhead
Active Member
Does the thread being open threaten you in some way? Can't handle it? Just bow out. No big deal.
Darth Lars
Master Member
From what I've read since the event happened, AB's gun in this case was not supposed to be an empty gun. It was supposed to be loaded with inert dummy rounds - that look real unless you look very closely.
The only purpose of loading a revolver in a movie with dummy rounds is so that the bullets in the cylinder would be visible in the camera when you point the gun at the camera. And when pointing a single-action gun at the camera in a threatening manner, the hammer was probably supposed to be ****** as well.
From what I understand from reading about them, is that the only visual difference between such a dummy round and a real one is that the dummy has a hole on the side. So, to be able to check the gun for a real round among the dummy rounds, the actor would have to remove each round, look at it from multiple angles and put it back in again.
On the Colt 45, that would have involved a procedure of cocking the gun (or half-cock?), opening the loading gate and for each round, one at a time, rotate the cylinder and push the round out with the ejection rod, inspect it (in the low light inside the church) and put it back again.
If AB would have done that on the set — after two people supposedly had already checked the gun — I'd think that the director, the AD, and the camerawoman herself wearing a heavy steadicam rig on her shoulders would have got quite annoyed at him.
- Status
