People still fish for blue stars?

He shouldn't be allowed to handle a gun, not because he accidentally shot 2 people killing 1, but because of his massive hypocrisy regarding calling for gun control.

Baldwin is a script reader, not a professional operator to my knowledge.

Blame lies in the prop supplier who brought live ammo to a movie set and whomever was responsible for QA/QC over the prop supplier (if anyone).

Completely, easily, and 100% avoidable.

Prisoners aren't allowed to demonstrate their 'gunplay' which he was so braggadocious about.

There was a video a few years ago showing a series of actors delivering an anti-gun message, but someone had interwoven movie scenes of those same actors in violent gun scenes. Wish I could find it.

I'd rather he carry a gun than vote.

gotsand said:

---

Baldwin is a script reader, not a professional operator to my knowledge.

Blame lies in the prop supplier who brought live ammo to a movie set and whomever was responsible for QA/QC over the prop supplier (if anyone).

Completely, easily, and 100% avoidable.

---

And producer…responsible for safety.

gotsand said:

---

Baldwin is a script reader, not a professional operator to my knowledge.

Blame lies in the prop supplier who brought live ammo to a movie set and whomever was responsible for QA/QC over the prop supplier (if anyone).

Completely, easily, and 100% avoidable.

---

FAKE NEWS.

If you ever handle a gun, it is always your responsibility to follow the basics of gun safety. There are no exceptions.

That he also was the producer and was negligent in who was hired/on set safety practices (lack of safety briefings, failed to correct concerns AFTER other 'accidental discharges' among other things), is only additive to his direct culpability/liability for the homicide. The only issue really comes down to what others might share in terms of a civil contributory liability. The criminal one starts with him.

HowdyTAMU said:

---

gotsand said:

---

Baldwin is a script reader, not a professional operator to my knowledge.

Blame lies in the prop supplier who brought live ammo to a movie set and whomever was responsible for QA/QC over the prop supplier (if anyone).

Completely, easily, and 100% avoidable.

---

And producer…responsible for safety.

---

Which was...Alec Baldwin.

if you are habdling a gun, pointinf it at peopl, and pulling the trigger i dont se how you get to blame someone else for you shooting the gun

ChemEAg08 said:

---

He shouldn't be allowed to handle a gun, not because he accidentally shot 2 people killing 1, but because of his massive hypocrisy regarding calling for gun control.

---

Apparently there are a couple of thousand gun related accidents each year in the U.S. How often do people get criminally charged vs not? And if not, what is the typical criteria to avoid criminal prosecution and does it depend on which state the incident happened in?

Alec Baldwin needs to serve prison time for manslaughter.

I don't know, but Alec Baldwin intentionally pulled the trigger here. He made several wrong choices.

No antigun actors/actresses should handle guns in movies.

Tommy Chong talks about seeing Cheech Marin playing a cop in Nash Bridges are comical since he was a peacnik hippie against the man.

Don't forget, people don't kill people. Guns kill people. Hold the gun liable!!!!

He obviously didn't have respect for the gun, although hopefully he does now. For most of us, it is common sense to treat every gun like it is loaded and never point it anything you aren't prepared to kill.

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Apparently there are a couple of thousand gun related accidents each year in the U.S. How often do people get criminally charged vs not? And if not, what is the typical criteria to avoid criminal prosecution and does it depend on which state the incident happened in?

---

Fake news again. Less than 1 percent of gun deaths are a result of accidents, total about 500 a year, and are disproportionately likely to involve adolescents.

Feel free to look up charging decision criteria for manslaughter as a result of gross negligence, I don't want to bore the readers of this thread with mundane details as to Texas' standards, which aren't really relevant. Parents who leave unsecured weapons out/available which are used negligently by kids I think should always be charged/liable, but that is...not what we are talking about here.

Quote:

---

Don't forget, people don't kill people. Guns kill people. Hold the gun liable!!!!

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

I don't know, but Alec Baldwin intentionally pulled the trigger here. He made several wrong choices.

---

The story seems to be that Baldwin wasn't intentionally aiming the weapon at anyone or intended to pull the trigger. He was practicing a 'cross draw' from a sitting position drawing the gun out of his holster with opposite hand and the gun went off. So I am curious what the legal criteria is in New Mexico for his criminal exposure. We'll see if he gets charged.

I am for common sense Alec Baldwin control, because guns don't kill people, Alec Baldwin kills people. What does common sense Alec Baldwin control mean? Well you have to pass it to find out and leave the decisions up to unelected bureaucrats.

gig em 02 said:

---

People still fish for blue stars?

---

What you did there, I saw it...

nortex97 said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Apparently there are a couple of thousand gun related accidents each year in the U.S. How often do people get criminally charged vs not? And if not, what is the typical criteria to avoid criminal prosecution and does it depend on which state the incident happened in?

---

Fake news again. Less than 1 percent of gun deaths are a result of accidents, total about 500 a year, and are disproportionately likely to involve adolescents.

Feel free to look up charging decision criteria for manslaughter as a result of gross negligence, I don't want to bore the readers of this thread with mundane details as to Texas' standards, which aren't really relevant. Parents who leave unsecured weapons out/available which are used negligently by kids I think should always be charged/liable, but that is...not what we are talking about here.

---

Ok. 500 then. I got the couple of thousand from a quick Google. Agree New Mexico would be relevant here, not Texas.

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

I don't know, but Alec Baldwin intentionally pulled the trigger here. He made several wrong choices.

---

The story seems to be that Baldwin wasn't intentionally aiming the weapon at anyone or intended to pull the trigger. He was practicing a 'cross draw' from a sitting position drawing the gun out of his holster with opposite hand and the gun went off. So I am curious what the legal criteria is in New Mexico for his criminal exposure. We'll see if he gets charged.

---

If he was just practicing, why was it loaded? Why would there ever be a live round on a set?

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

I don't know, but Alec Baldwin intentionally pulled the trigger here. He made several wrong choices.

---

The story seems to be that Baldwin wasn't intentionally aiming the weapon at anyone or intended to pull the trigger. He was practicing a 'cross draw' from a sitting position drawing the gun out of his holster with opposite hand and the gun went off. So I am curious what the legal criteria is in New Mexico for his criminal exposure. We'll see if he gets charged.

---

From the other thread:

Quote:

---

On the other hand, perhaps this shooting death is more accurately characterized as negligent, or perhaps even reckless and if reckless, then certainly as involuntary manslaughter, which New Mexico law defines (in the context of this case) as an unlawful killing committed "in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death … without due caution and circumspection."

Under New Mexico law involuntary manslaughter is a fourth-degree felony normally punishable by up to 18 months in prison and a $5,000 fine.

---

nortex97 said:

---

gotsand said:

---

Baldwin is a script reader, not a professional operator to my knowledge.

Blame lies in the prop supplier who brought live ammo to a movie set and whomever was responsible for QA/QC over the prop supplier (if anyone).

Completely, easily, and 100% avoidable.

---

FAKE NEWS.

If you ever handle a gun, it is always your responsibility to follow the basics of gun safety. There are no exceptions.

That he also was the producer and was negligent in who was hired/on set safety practices (lack of safety briefings, failed to correct concerns AFTER other 'accidental discharges' among other things), is only additive to his direct culpability/liability for the homicide. The only issue really comes down to what others might share in terms of a civil contributory liability. The criminal one starts with him.

---

I agree with you. But, the exception is when your job description literally calls for concurrent violations of multiple basic rules of gun safety.

Having live ammo on the property, much less the set, should be considered criminally negligent. Apparently, this was not the first time the armorer had safety violations/complaints concerning their firearms.

If given prior instruction on how/why/when to clear a firearm, Baldwin should be held as criminally negligent, too. If he wasn't given these instructions, someone needs to find out why not. Multiple failures abound, including his as producer it appears. I think Baldwin's ultimate responsibility civil/criminal depends upon many factors.

Sure, civil negligence all around. Yay for the lawyers, I guess.

To answer the OPs question: I don't give a rat's ass if he ever handles a firearm (prop or otherwise) again. Neither myself or anyone I care about will ever find themselves on such a set.

I never followed the mega thread, and it's no excuse for poor gun safety but what was it loaded with? Actual ammo or some sort of blank?

Just read what was posted while I had the reply window open. It's still no excuse for Baldwin not making sure that what he was practicing with was without a doubt unloaded, but what the hell is with live ammo on the set?

Pumpkinhead said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Apparently there are a couple of thousand gun related accidents each year in the U.S. How often do people get criminally charged vs not? And if not, what is the typical criteria to avoid criminal prosecution and does it depend on which state the incident happened in?

---

Fake news again. Less than 1 percent of gun deaths are a result of accidents, total about 500 a year, and are disproportionately likely to involve adolescents.

Feel free to look up charging decision criteria for manslaughter as a result of gross negligence, I don't want to bore the readers of this thread with mundane details as to Texas' standards, which aren't really relevant. Parents who leave unsecured weapons out/available which are used negligently by kids I think should always be charged/liable, but that is...not what we are talking about here.

---

Ok. 500 then. I got the couple of thousand from a quick Google. Agree New Mexico would be relevant here, not Texas.

---

Google is fake news propaganda on anything tangentially related to politics. That was your first mistake. HTH.

Hint, it will come down to the prosecutor evaluating what caution and circumspection Baldwin demonstrated;

Quote:

---

Julie Rendelman, a New York City criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor, said that New Mexico prosecutors are likely to examine two key statutes when determining whether to file charges against anyone involved in the incident. However, proving them beyond a reasonable doubt may be difficult.

The first, involuntary manslaughter, provides as follows in one subsection (emphasis added):

Quote:

---

Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice.
. . .

B. Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.
Whoever commits involuntary manslaughter is guilty of a fourth degree felony.

---

However, New Mexico's powerful excusable homicide statute may provide some cover for anyone charged. The following subsection is most on point:

Quote:

---

Homicide is excusable in the following cases:
A. when committed by accident or misfortune in doing any lawful act, by lawful means, with usual and ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent.

---

The statutes do not conflict: they together require individuals to act with a certain degree of care; acting without it can lead to charges. Any hypothetical criminal case surrounding the deadly incident would turn on the question of what specific acts constitute "caution" and "circumspection" (or "usual and ordinary caution") under New Mexico law.

Law&Crime Network's Bob Bianchi, former New Jersey prosecutor, said that manslaughter law generally requires a "conscious disregard" of a risk or risks and that's what separates criminal law from an accident.

"What caution and circumspection did Baldwin not follow?" Bianchi asked while thinking through the situation. "Accidents happen," he surmised while guessing that Baldwin was provided a gun by an expert, was probably told that it was safe, and fired it with the likely belief that nothing dangerous would happen.

Bianchi acknowledged that prosecutors are afforded significant leeway and discretion when deciding whether to file charges. He said that he would not have charged Baldwin had the incident occurred in his jurisdiction while he was a prosecutor at least on the known facts.

---

Quote:

---

Rendelman also keyed in on another New Mexico statute which involves the negligent use of a deadly weapon. One section of that law forbids "endangering the safety of another by handling or using a firearm or other deadly weapon in a negligent manner." The offense, if proven beyond a reasonable doubt, is a "petty misdemeanor." The punishment is a period of incarceration "in the county jail for a definite term not to exceed six months or to the payment of a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500) or to both . . . in the discretion of the judge."

---

Now, we all probably expect Baldwin to pay some money (hopefully 7 figures) but escape criminal prosecution because he is a member of a protected class (rich famous leftists) but clearly, imho, he did not demonstrate any usual and ordinary caution, let alone circumspection. He also may contractually have been insured by the studio (or insurance agency) for civil liabilities as to his conduct on the set etc. Frankly, if I were the husband of the deceased, one of my demands would be in any settlement that he just shut up, on social media/interviews moving forward, about politics/guns.

The Fife said:

---

I never followed the mega thread, and it's no excuse for poor gun safety but what was it loaded with? Actual ammo or some sort of blank?

---

Yes, it was live ammo. Cast was using it for fun to shoot at stuff between scenes.

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

I don't know, but Alec Baldwin intentionally pulled the trigger here. He made several wrong choices.

---

The story seems to be that Baldwin wasn't intentionally aiming the weapon at anyone or intended to pull the trigger. He was practicing a 'cross draw' from a sitting position drawing the gun out of his holster with opposite hand and the gun went off.

---

It did not "go off". He pulled the triggers. Guns do not go off anymore than a cup sitting on a table goes off of the table by itself

Wow the whole thing just got dumber. Especially on Baldwin not checking to make sure what he was practicing with was empty.