You have a systemic problem, and it isn’t just racism.
1. Handle ALL firearms as if they are loaded. ALL THE TIME.
I don’t care if someone said, “Cold gun.” You check that for yourself.
2. Never point the firearm at anything or anyone that you aren’t willing to destroy.
I’ll admit that gets tricky when you’re supposed to be filming a movie scene in which you’re protraying a character willing to destroy your target. That’s why extra care is called for. And the person the firearm is going to aimed at should ALSO check that the firearm is unloaded. Better yet, the director should adjust camera angles so it only looks like the firearm is aimed directly at a person. Especially if you have Alec Baldwin on set.
3. Keep your finger OFF the trigger until you’re on target and ready to fire.
By various reports, this incident happened between takes. Therefore, there was absolutely no reason for Baldwin’s finger to be anywhere near the trigger.
4. Be sure of your target and what is beyond it. Like your cinematographer, and the director beyond her.
That way if you are stupid enough — or Alec Baldwin, but I repeat myself — if to violate the first three rules, you still won’t kill anyone.
While official facts about this incident are still lacking, it clear that at the very least Baldwin lacks the very basic safety knowledge I’d expect — and have seeen — in a seven year-old with his first gun. For a man in his sixties, who has handled firearm for other films, this is criminal. Given the time period of this movie, and at least one report that Baldwin “cocked” the handgun, it appears that it was a single-action revolver. That means Baldwin actively and knowingly put the firearm in a condition to fire; pulling the trigger on an uncocked single-action does nothing. He had to consciously ready the weapon to fire.
According to some reports, though contradicted by others, some crew members had already walked off the set due to discomfort with firearms safety — or, rather, the lack thereof — displayed by cast and crew; reportedly two other negligent discharges prior to this one.. Since someone died to due to a criminal lack of safety, I’m willing to believe it.
And this, per Fox News:
“Cold gun,” assistant director Dave Halls announced at the time, using lingo for an unloaded firearm, before a rehearsal for the movie, The Associated Press reported.
[…]
The gun used by Baldwin was one of three firearms that had been placed on a cart by Hannah Gutierrez, who was identified as the armorer for the film, The Associated Press reported.Halls was unaware live rounds were inside the firearm he grabbed and handed to Baldwin, a detective wrote in an application for the search warrant, the AP reported.
The so-called armorer placed firearms on a cart, clearly without verifying their status (loaded/unloaded, or with what).
Then a second person picked up a gun, and failed to check its condition (loaded/unloaded, or with what).
That idiot then handed it to a freaking moron (Baldwin) who — three time’s the charm — failed to check its condition (loaded/unloaded, or with what).
First, no one but the armorer and the actor should be touching those guns. And they both should be checking the guns’ condition.
Another issue is terminology; you may have noted my reference to “or with what.” Several reports say the firearm was loaded with a “live round.” In other reports, apologists rushed in to explain that Hollywood calls blanks “live rounds.” If that is true, then the only real wonder is that so few actors are shooting people on set.
Live round: A cartridge with primer, powder, and projectile(s) — bullet or shot –, ready to fire. Since the Baldwin projectile reportedly penetrated the woman’s body and struck the director with sufficient force that he had to be transported to a hospital, I’m inclined to suspect a live round was used.
Blank: A cartridge with primer and powder, but no projectile. Be aware that blanks are also dangerous; the use of blanks is no excuse to abandon basic firearms safety. Ask Brandon Lee… oh, wait.
Dummy round: A cartridge-shaped object. This may be a cartridge without a live primer and powder, but with a bullet. It may be a plastic or metal model. It may be a snap-cap for dry firing. But a dummy round is inert. Amateur “armorers” should be aware that pulling the bullet from a case, emptying out the powder, and reseating the bullet does not make that into a dummy round; that is a “squib” load — a live round — and can lead to death as well, re: Brandon Lee.
There is no valid reason for a single live round being present in the props for a location set.
Based on the limited facts currently known, I believe Baldwin should be charged with involuntary manslaughter (§ 30-2-3).
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.
Again, he broke all the rules a child should know, and consciously readied the weapon to fire. He should face an assault charge (§ 30-3-1) for the director’s wounding.
The Raconteur Report disagrees with me on where the blame — and any charges — should be placed. And Aesop makes a valid point: The armorer’s job is to prevent stupid actors killing people. But Baldwin is 1) an adult, 2) has handled a lot of firearms, and 3) like any person handling firearms should know and follow the rules. If he’s incapable of that, then Aesop is correct and he should have been handed a rubber gun. Baldwin should have asked for a rubber gun. And checked to see if the barrel bends. If Baldwin’s mental competence is less than that of a six year-old, he should be so ruled and assigned a responsible guardian. (Then, of course, it would be unlawful to hand him a real gun. With two prior negligent discharges on set already, a sane and normally intelligent actor should have been especially on guard.
I think whether or not the armorer should face charges is trickier; she contributed, but all could still have been well except for Baldwin’s actions. However, this report suggests other possibilities.
[ Armorer] Ms. Gutierrez Reed had arranged the guns on the cart, the affidavit said. After the incident, she took the gun back and removed a spent casing before handing it to sheriff’s deputies who had arrived at the scene, the affidavit said.
That sounds remarkably like tampering with evidence (§ 30-22-5), and raises questions about her motive in removing the casing, and where it is now. Even if the projectile hasn’t been recovered, the casing could indicate just what the firearm had been loaded with, and by whom. And now it appears that they experienced at least two negligent discharges, possibly three, prior to Baldwin’s fatal shot, because a “cold gun” was actually loaded.
Hollywood, you have a gun safety problem. Fix it, or shut the eff up. Writing guidelines doesn’t help if your culture encourages expediency over safety.
At least one person gets it.
“What it means is that somebody was tired, somebody didn’t follow protocol, someone didn’t hire the right person,” said Mr. Lighthill, speaking generally. “It’s not an accident, it’s a preventable incident. We’re all well schooled in how to avoid those problems,” he said.
In fact, just STFU.
Added, 10/24/2021: If this is accurate, “Armorer” Hannah Gutierrez Reed has some problems. TMZ.com is claiming:
Multiple sources directly connected to the ‘Rust’ production tell TMZ … the same gun Alec Baldwin accidentally fired — hitting the DP and director — was being used by crews members off set as well, for what we’re told amounted to target practice.
We’re told this off-the-clock shooting — which was allegedly happening away from the movie lot — was being done with real bullets … which is how some who worked on the film believe a live round found its way in one of the chambers that day.
[…]
There’s also this … one source who was on set and familiar with the goings-on of the crew tells us that when cops showed up, they found live ammo and blanks were being stored in the same area — another possible explanation for how an actual bullet slipped got in the gun.
I’m leery of unnamed sources, but this is consistent with other claims of lax-to-downright-sloppy on-set procedures.
Again, if true, was Reed allowing this? Or was she simply leaving the firearms unsecured? Why live ammo; was it so that crew members had supplies for recreational shooting? Miss Reed appears to be well into “reckless.”
Then there’s this NYP report.
The “inexperienced” armorer in charge of weapons on the set of Alec Baldwin’s movie “Rust” had given a gun to an 11-year-old actress without checking property for safety, a report said.
[…]
“She was reloading the gun on the ground, where there were pebbles and stuff,” one source told the outless. “We didn’t see her her check it, we didn’t know if something got in the barrel or not.”
This incident allegedly occurred on set for the movie “The Old Way.”
If there’s any question, you check. If people will give sworn depositions confirming these incidents, Reed had best start working on a plea deal. And then there’s the civil liability all around.
(More Tip Jar Options) |
Well said, Carl. Well said.
I can’t stand Alec Baldwin. But the reason they hire an armorer for a movie set is to ensure that an incident such as this doesn’t take place, nor even have the remote possibility of taking place.
If this person that they hired to act as their gun wrangler/armorer was not up to snuff then they should never have hired her in the first place. Of course, we could list all of the things we would do if we were responsible for the guns/ammo/blanks, etc. on set of a movie shoot.
Lock everything up, when not in actual use, including all guns, prop guns, blank ammo, snap caps, etc. Make sure that anyone who will touch a weapon on set, even a complete prop gun, is aware of all safety rules, and follows them. Make sure that the armorer has the ability to shut down production, if any safety rules are not being followed, or they suspect that a dangerous issue is presenting itself, until the issue is resolved to the armorer’s satisfaction. And the list could continue from their.
The thing is, the blame lies on the shoulders of the person hired to directly assure that safety measures were being followed in regards to the guns on set. And that obviously was not being done, in any way, shape, or form. And the result is yet another tragic and preventable death, the in this case, will be excused, because it happened with the Hollywood elite. If it were you or me, we would already be behind bars. You can at least rest assured that the poor dead woman will have a nice memorial at this next year’s Oscar ceremony. Tears will flow, and speeches will be made. And guns and gun owners will be vilified, yet again.
I’m going to agree and disagree.
NOTE: I’m still waiting for police reports and official witness statements. For now this is tentative based on media reports, much based on unnamed sources. But for now…
“Armorer” Gutierrez-Reed’s culpability in this seems to increase every day. I now think she should face an involuntary manslaughter charge.
But ultimately, the responsibility lays on the shoulders of the adult person who broke every single basic safety rule — rules understood and followed by little children — and killed a woman. Baldwin’s responsibility in this is made clearer when you consider that he is the co-producer of the film. He was in charge. He/they hired an “armorer” whose failure to assure safety had stopped work on her previously film, a film which was her first time as lead armorer. Rust was only her second; the producers were responsible for hiring an ineperienced lead armorer with a history of issues.
Reportedly, by the time of this shooting, there had already been three negligent discharges on set. Yet the producers still didn’t fire her. Half a dozen experienced crew members walked off the job over the lack of firearms safety, and the producers — Baldwin — still didn’t fire her.
Baldwin, unwilling or incapable of safe firearms handling, continued to rely on an “armorer” to save him from his own incompetence, an armorer whom he knew was incapable of providing such protection. Seemingly because it was cheaper than hiring someone who knew their ass from a hole in the ground.
Yes, everyone who touches a gun should be trained in the rules and following them. But the producers not only failed to enure that, they — Baldwin — condoned safety violations.
And then Baldwin committed the ultimate safety violation personally.
Sounds like Involuntary Manslaughter to me;
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/involuntary+manslaughter
IMHO Baldwin butt is hanging out there both criminally and/or civilly along with some other people.
There will be a price to be paid, stay tune as Bear suggests.
I included a link to New Mexico’s manslaughter statute. [grin]
Based on what we think we know for now, that’s what it looks like.
No doubt that there will be either a civil suit, possibly 2 of them, or more, for each person shot, and others affected by this incident. As for the criminal action, there will be some time before things shake out, but I suspect that it will happen faster than if the incident happened on a sound stage in Hollywood.
The biggest problem I see right now is that so many of the details we are getting are from so many sources, and so varied as to how things happened, that it is hard to tell what really happened. If the evidence shows that Baldwin did show negligence and that he was legally responsible for his actions, the he will be tried, and a jury or judge will have to decide his guilt or innocence. It will be as big of a Hollywood show as any other one that Baldwin has ever been in, with as big of a budget as he can afford.
As for the armorer, her goose is likely cooked, with little way out of her predicament. And what sounds like a decent woman leaves behind a child and husband. Because of mistakes and , money, and bravado.
I still am waiting for the truth to come out.
Seems like the young armorer allowed herself to get bullied by someone in authority.
It seemed obvious that someone had been using live fire in that firearm. Maybe to train a “gun-shy” actor…… whatever, it should not have been a “set/stage firearm”. Since the round penetrated one person and dinged another, it most likely was not a squib load.
I read that the firearm was called “Cold” which means no ammunition of any kind. Seems like an adult with normal (?) IQ could look at the exposed “works” of a pistol. If you see “Brass”, it ain’t “Cold”.
And, whatever, keep your finger off the trigger, especially when others are around. There seem to be a raft of protocols for photography of firearms pointed directly at the camera that were ignored by Baldwin. He pointed at people/crew and obviously cocked the firearm during the “draw”. That was not necessary for the photo set-up.
Curious that he shot the woman who had griefed him about “safety”. “Obviously” an accident…….
“Seems like the young armorer allowed herself to get bullied by someone in authority.”
Perhaps. But the more I read about her, the more I’m inclined to think she was just lackadaisical. Read this, and tell me if she sounds like someone you‘d want in charge of firearms safety.
https://news.yahoo.com/rust-film-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-181206401.html
No. They aren’t safe; but they can be handled safely.
Look at the front of a loaded gun?
She’s 24. When I was 24, I was a Staff Sergeant whose job entailed occassionally telling commanders — up to an Air Division commanding Brigadier General — “No.” My only problem with that was doing so tactfully.
Legal Expert: Investigators looking at criminal charges on ‘Rust’ film shooting
KOAT Legal Expert: Alec Baldwin likely won’t be charged
https://www.koat.com/article/alec-baldwin-movie-shooting-charges/38071775