Alec Baldwin charged with involuntary manslaughter.

4,513 Views | 60 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by ABATTBQ11
Urban Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's great and I'd agree but as great as a guy Keanu seems to be how does anyone know he would know the difference between live ammo, inert, and charged blanks? How does anyone know he has a clue what he's even looking at? I do. But I'd have no expectation that an actor would and why would why?

Same reason my cardiologist has to walk me thru my CT scan
Not my subject matter
lethalninja
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Baldwin and the armorer are facing up to eighteen months for the manslaughter charges, and those charges also have firearm enhancements that are punishable by a mandatory five year sentence if convicted. The prosecutor will most likely drop the firearm enhancements if they plead guilty.
powerbelly
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Rex Racer said:

Urban Ag said:

Again, are these real operable firearms? I don't know I'm asking. Even the US military has safeguards installed when firing blanks in training simulation
At least they did when was in and that was the 90's
Yes, they are real operable firearms.


Sometimes
Belton Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Urban Ag said:

That's great and I'd agree but as great as a guy Keanu seems to be how does anyone know he would know the difference between live ammo, inert, and charged blanks? How does anyone know he has a clue what he's even looking at? I do. But I'd have no expectation that an actor would and why would why?

Same reason my cardiologist has to walk me thru my CT scan
Not my subject matter


It's all just internet speculation of course because I don't know either guy, but based on what I've read and seen, Baldwin seems to be a careless ***** and Keanu seems like someone who would actually take care to make sure the people around him are safe.

I don't think in this case it really makes a difference what a live round or a blank round feels like when it fires because Baldwin only fired the one shot directly at the director and the person who was killed.
ABATTBQ11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Urban Ag said:

That's great and I'd agree but as great as a guy Keanu seems to be how does anyone know he would know the difference between live ammo, inert, and charged blanks? How does anyone know he has a clue what he's even looking at? I do. But I'd have no expectation that an actor would and why would why?

Same reason my cardiologist has to walk me thru my CT scan
Not my subject matter


It comes down to professionalism.

Keanu has a reputation for being highly professional. He's not just good at acting and playing his part, but he takes all the other aspects of being on set seriously. That includes attending all of the safety meetings and maintaining high standards and expectations.

Baldwin is somewhat the opposite. He has a reputation of being an arrogant jerk and often unprofessional. If reported standards on the Rust set were any indication, that's probably accurate. Not saying this was the case, but if either of the two were to act flippantly towards a firearm and not take safety instruction and protocols seriously, it would definitely be Baldwin.

As for knowing what they're doing and looking at, that's the point of all of the safety briefings and instruction before and during filming. Production companies do, or are supposed to do, their due diligence in making sure everyone on set, including actors, knows weapons safety protocols and that actors know what they're doing with weapons they're handed. There simply too much risk involved to not brief them on safe operation of the weapon, the difference between rounds, the danger of blanks, etc. What they can't do is make everyone listen and pay attention. Professionals do, hacks don't.

TLDR Keanu is more of a professional than Baldwin, and actors aren't handed potentially deadly weapons without being instructed on safety and their operation.
ElephantRider
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TLDR you're making generalizations because you like one actor and don't like the other
The Lost
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Urban Ag said:

That's great and I'd agree but as great as a guy Keanu seems to be how does anyone know he would know the difference between live ammo, inert, and charged blanks? How does anyone know he has a clue what he's even looking at? I do. But I'd have no expectation that an actor would and why would why?

Same reason my cardiologist has to walk me thru my CT scan
Not my subject matter


This is dumb. Why can't he learn?

Most jobs deal with something that might not be their expertise. I deal with sensitive data all the time, I'm expected to know who can and cannot see it, even though manipulation is what I'm good at, not cyber security.

This isn't rocket science, tons of movies have guns. If you can't learn gun safety, you should be kicked off the movie.

And as someone who has worked in utilities in California, good god they take those safety meetings over top with seriousness. There's going to be neglect to pick up nothing from them.
scoop12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ElephantRider said:

TLDR you're making generalizations because you like one actor and don't like the other


This good enough evidence for you?

lethalninja
How long do you want to ignore this user?
From Law and Crime: "I'm surprised, in particular, at how they threw the book at Alec Baldwin," Abrams told host Michelle Yu. "Because this isn't just an involuntary manslaughter charge. Because, under New Mexico law, typical involuntary manslaughter: up to 18 months in prison. You just have to show negligence. That's what we were expecting. They've offered a potential jury two theories here."

Abrams went on to read from a document that outlines a mandatory, five-year sentence for involuntary manslaughter if jurors find "more than simple negligence" was involved in the homicide.

"These prosecutors, even if they wanted to charge Alec Baldwin with involuntary manslaughter, didn't also have to offer this second option," he added. "Which is to say, an even stiffer potential crime where you're talking about the possibility of a mandatory, five-year prison term."

"This charge includes a firearm enhancement, or added mandatory penalty, because a firearm was involved," the DA's office said. "The firearm enhancement makes the crime punishable by a mandatory five years in jail."
lethalninja
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/23/nyregion/alec-baldwin-pleads-guilty-harassment.html

Alec Baldwin's criminal record
Rex Racer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
powerbelly said:

Rex Racer said:

Urban Ag said:

Again, are these real operable firearms? I don't know I'm asking. Even the US military has safeguards installed when firing blanks in training simulation
At least they did when was in and that was the 90's
Yes, they are real operable firearms.


Sometimes


These clearly were.
LMCane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Urban Ag said:

I'm torn on this. Firearms are integral component of my livelihood. Literally part of my career on a daily basis. Only bring that up to point out I am an absolutely laser focused on firearms safety in use, transportation, maintenance, and storage.

But............Alec Baldwin is an actor. He's not a soldier, LEO, armorer, professional hunter, etc. The firearm was supposed to be a prop. And we can argue gun safety all we want but the weapon is going to get pointed in unsafe directions to film that actual scene, regardless (I would think anyway).

I haven't kept up with this story so maybe these questions have been answered. Was it made known to the cast and anyone who handled the firearms that it was in fact a working, operable firearm? Second, how did live ammunition get on the set and who actually loaded the firearms before it was handed to Baldwin? To me that's the responsible party.

Let's say that during the filming of SPR that somehow a live grenade got mixed in with the prop grenades. Then Tom Sizemore, while filming the scene, pulls the pin, chuck it at the actor playing the German soldier, it goes boom and kills the guy. Would we charge Tom? Surely not.
standard procedure that in these close up shots with the camera right in front of you - the actor is supposed to point the pistol to the side and not fire directly at people.

Baldwin was also a senior producer on this movie- not just an actor

the entire thing was an exercise in hiring cheap and incompetent armorer working her first gig, and unsafe practices where people were using the prop guns to go shoot in the days prior
Not a Bot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
A lot of factors here.

1) This was a real gun.

2) Baldwin was handed the gun, was told it was clear, and didn't check for himself.

3) He pointed the gun at someone and pulled the trigger.

4) There was live ammunition found not only in the gun, but also in the bandolier and in an ammo box on set. There should NEVER be live ammunition on a film set.

5) Members of the crew had already walked off set because of repeated safety issues.

6) After the shooting Baldwin gave an interview to the police and to the media boasting about his gun and ammunition knowledge, which is only going to hurt him. Someone used to handling firearms didn't check the gun himself, pointed it at someone and pulled the trigger? Hello, negligence. Meet Mr. Baldwin.

7) His claims of the gun firing on it's own fall apart when the actual type of gun is considered. This model of gun cannot fire unless the trigger is pulled. Multiple demonstrations have been performed by firearms experts and they cannot recreate an accidental fire of this nature. The mechanics of that firearm don't work the way Baldwin wants people to believe.
Belton Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The fact that Baldwin claimed in the media that he didn't pull the trigger speaks volumes to the kind of character he has. It also in a way demonstrates the value he places on others and leads me to believe he probably did everything the prosecutors say he did.

Having said all that, since this incident happened I have seen and read quite a bit about how firearms are handled on movie sets and I'm still not sure what the industry standard is. I don't know if he should be held criminally responsible or not. The only thing I do know is that he didn't want to kill anyone.
ABATTBQ11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ElephantRider said:

TLDR you're making generalizations because you like one actor and don't like the other


No, but thanks for playing
Rudyjax
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

The only thing I do know is that he didn't want to kill anyone.
I think, everyone agrees with that.

The Porkchop Express
How long do you want to ignore this user?
He will get off and the armored will get sentenced. Or he will get community service and spend 18 hours in jail. Substitute Alec Baldwin for tom hanks in the scenario and everyone is heartbroken for tom hanks. Baldwin is too rich and famous to go to prison for something that be 100% be blamed on someone else.
Rudyjax
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Porkchop Express said:

He will get off and the armored will get sentenced. Or he will get community service and spend 18 hours in jail. Substitute Alec Baldwin for tom hanks in the scenario and everyone is heartbroken for tom hanks. Baldwin is too rich and famous to go to prison for something that be 100% be blamed on someone else.


You mean one is a world respected liked man and one is a dbag? Yeah.

I get it.
The Porkchop Express
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Chuck Cunningham said:

The Porkchop Express said:

He will get off and the armored will get sentenced. Or he will get community service and spend 18 hours in jail. Substitute Alec Baldwin for tom hanks in the scenario and everyone is heartbroken for tom hanks. Baldwin is too rich and famous to go to prison for something that be 100% be blamed on someone else.


You mean one is a world respected liked man and one is a dbag? Yeah.

I get it.
Right, but neither of those things has anything to do with being guilty/innocent.
Rudyjax
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Porkchop Express said:

Chuck Cunningham said:

The Porkchop Express said:

He will get off and the armored will get sentenced. Or he will get community service and spend 18 hours in jail. Substitute Alec Baldwin for tom hanks in the scenario and everyone is heartbroken for tom hanks. Baldwin is too rich and famous to go to prison for something that be 100% be blamed on someone else.


You mean one is a world respected liked man and one is a dbag? Yeah.

I get it.
Right, but neither of those things has anything to do with being guilty/innocent.


I didn't say that. I just meant people would have more sympathy for a non dbag.
bearamedic99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Don't the John Wick movies use animation to simulate gun fire instead of firing blanks? Unsure if true. If blanks were really used, I couldn't imagine the hearing loss suffered by the crew.
AliasMan02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
bearamedic99 said:

Don't the John Wick movies use animation to simulate gun fire instead of firing blanks? Unsure if true. If blanks were really used, I couldn't imagine the hearing loss suffered by the crew.

Almost no movies fire blanks is my understanding. My buddy who does camera and post work says it's totally useless and they redub all the sound anyway in his experience because live blanks don't sound right when translating to the screen.
AliasMan02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Lots of "WWKD" talk in this situation. Everything I've ever read or heard or seen about Keanu is that he is a nut for gun safety on his sets and clears every weapon handed him. I've read/seen the same about Will Smith.

Truth is there's no reason for an operable weapon to even be on a set, but if one is, I find it hard to believe there are not mountains of safety protocols that are required by the industry. Not to mention requirements for insurance reasons. If ANY safety precaution had been observed by ANYONE on the set, including Baldwin, this wouldn't have happened, and that's a fact. This place must have had no controls at all.
ABATTBQ11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ElephantRider said:

TLDR you're making generalizations because you like one actor and don't like the other


Oh hey... Look at the probable cause statement:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23593070-statement-of-probable-cause-d-101-cr-2023-00039-state-v-alexander-rae-baldwin-iii_redacted

According to this, Baldwin skimped on his firearms training and wasn't paying attention for the training he actually went to because he was on the phone with his family. Expert armorers told prosecutors that this rehearsal should have been done with a plastic replica, and there was no reason for Baldwin to pull the trigger or even have good hand inside the trigger guard. Basically, he was ****ing around because he too cool for school and didn't pay attention to basic safety.

Who could have guessed? Oh wait...
Corporal Punishment
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That reads like the whole culture on the Rust movie set had absolutely no respect for firearms. And Baldwin didn't do himself any favors by giving media interviews. "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law." Not smart, Alec.

Also makes you realize if any one of the safety protocols were followed that day, then Halyna Hutchins' child would still have a mother. So sad and so unnecessary.
ABATTBQ11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yep. That whole thing was an accident waiting to happen.
Refresh
Page 2 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.