The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Advice on Hiring Your Movie Set Armorer
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

@PumkinBaer tweets:

“Armorer” is one of those jobs where you want to lean hard into stereotype accuracy and only hire middle aged dads with non-ironic mustaches and eagle-globe-anchor tattoos who don’t mind telling people, “No, you’re doing that wrong” all day.

 
Hide 429 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Hollywood chucked out westerns like sausages in the fifties ,never heard of anything like the Baldwin shooting ,of course they didn’t have little girls with purple hair armorers.

    • Agree: Thirdtwin
  2. ““Armorer” is one of those jobs where you want to lean hard into stereotype accuracy and only hire middle aged dads with non-ironic mustaches and eagle-globe-anchor tattoos who don’t mind telling people, “No, you’re doing that wrong” all day.

    This description fits me to a T, except the non-ironic mustache (what’s an ironic mustache?).

    I only spent about 30 seconds thinking about it, but what job do we NOT want someone like the above doing? Editor?

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
    @Mike Tre


    what’s an ironic mustache?
     
    https://wellgroomedgentleman.com/media/images/2._A_curled_mustache_with_the_most_genuine_hip.width-800.jpg

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @Expletive Deleted
    @Mike Tre

    Relationship counselor.
    Workplace mediator (except in a King Solomon way).
    Art critic.

  3. And yet how do you know it wasn’t just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?

    • Disagree: tyrone
    • Thanks: Hangnail Hans
    • LOL: Daniel H, El Dato, Gordo, Cato
    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    @Altai

    And John Kennedy was murdered by the guy who gave LHO the rifle.

    It was one of 3 guns laid out on a cart, I read. The gofer grabbed one when his choleric master barked, allegedly stating "cold gun!". Were they all set up for Russian roulette?
    Why did Ol' Powder Finger point it down camera or whatever (least culpable scenario) while there was anyone in line?
    It's not 1935 anymore, squinting through the eyepiece; monitors are a thing.

    I understand the whole production was a shambles, and the fellow knows nothing about firearms (maybe a bit more now), but there's a lot of digging to be done here.

    Replies: @Corn

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Altai

    The armorer from Rust:

    https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/10/NINTCHDBPICT000688664971-1.jpg

    https://www.the-sun.com/news/3926657/who-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed/

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Lurker, @The Wild Geese Howard, @JackOH, @ic1000, @Altai, @Dumbo, @Jack Armstrong, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Mike Tre

    , @Joe S.Walker
    @Altai

    Somebody's been watching too many Dick Wolf TV shows.

    Replies: @Ben tillman

    , @Jack Armstrong
    @Altai

    I found it kind of Adlai Stevensonian.

    , @Charlotte
    @Altai

    I actually wondered about a psycho crew member pissed off at Baldwin. There was that walkout the very same day.

    , @Wade Hampton
    @Altai

    I am sure the FBI is investigating that theory as we speak.

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Altai


    And yet how do you know it wasn’t just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?
     
    One intriguing suggestion in the comments on another site is that it may have been union sabotage. They wanted to teach the reckless producers a lesson. Unfortunately for them, it cost the life of one of their own.

    Replies: @Crawfurdmuir

    , @Buffalo Joe
    @Altai

    Altai, baldwin was playing Gabby Hayes ?

    , @EdwardM
    @Altai

    The set supposedly had a lot of complaints and they were using, or recruiting, scab camera crews. Could this have been a sabotage labor action? Far more likely than some triple bank-shot pro-Trump frame-up.

  4. Accidents happen. That I understand. But how does a real cartridge get anywhere near a film set?

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    @Tono Bungay

    'Accidents happen. That I understand. But how does a real cartridge get anywhere near a film set?'

    Look up some pictures of the armorer.

    , @Buffalo Joe
    @Tono Bungay

    Tono, was it a real cartridge? Or did the wadding do the damage? On the range we used to fire cartridges call 'wad cutters.' The wax or plastic wad would certainly damage you if fired close range. Wasn't Bruce Lee's son killed by a 'blank' on a set?

    Replies: @Sean, @Crawfurdmuir

  5. 4 rules of firearm safety:

    1) Treat all guns as if they are loaded with live rounds, all the time, even if you ‘know’ they are not.

    2) Do not point the muzzle at anything you are not prepared to destroy.

    3) Keep your finger off the trigger and outside and above the trigger guard until you are on target and ready to fire.

    4) Be aware of your backstop — where the bullet will stop, what it could pass through.

    That said, in the military rules 1 and 2 are routinely broken when using blank cartridges. Automatic and semi automatic weapons require a blank firing attachment over the muzzle or for machine guns, usually a blank firing barrel, to cycle. Protocols for keeping live rounds separate from blanks are in place. And besides, blanks look quite different, they don’t have a bullet.

    Back to this case, in addition to the ‘armourer’, and others. I suspect Baldwin is going to face a rather large claim. Whatever protocols were not in place or were ignored, the guy operating the weapon is the last line of defence and he — Baldwin — should have checked.

    • Replies: @John Henry
    @NickG

    I never see this one: "Clear every firearm when you pick it up or it is handed to you. It doesn't matter if you just handed it to someone else, they did the same thing, and they gave it right back." What I've always done and taught my children to do.

    Replies: @ScarletNumber

    , @SaneClownPosse
    @NickG

    Basically, the movie company is running a "Producers" scam, making a money losing production for the backers, meanwhile pocketing untaxed cash.

    Blanks can kill, e.g. Brandon Lee on "The Crow" set.

    Is anyone sure this happened as they say it happened? Or is this yet just another hoax event involving firearms?

    Displaying the use of firearms on screen to be banned? Similar to the on screen smoking ban.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Muggles

    , @Catdompanj
    @NickG

    I can't stand the sight of Baldwin. But let's wait for a completed investigation and please with all the protocols. Are you experts saying that in all those Westerns the gun safety and final checks or "protocols" were John Wayne or Clint Eastwood's responsibility???? Stop already. It's one thing to suggest that MAYBE Baldwin had some responsibility for set safety, but that depends on exactly what his job was other than being an actor. Did he do the hiring? I don't know, you don't know but to flat out say its an actors job to check his gun is bs.

    Replies: @NickG

  6. I wonder what Trump would look like with a beard.

  7. @Altai
    And yet how do you know it wasn't just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?

    https://twitter.com/Villavelius/status/1451499563903242242

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @Almost Missouri, @Joe S.Walker, @Jack Armstrong, @Charlotte, @Wade Hampton, @Reg Cæsar, @Buffalo Joe, @EdwardM

    And John Kennedy was murdered by the guy who gave LHO the rifle.

    It was one of 3 guns laid out on a cart, I read. The gofer grabbed one when his choleric master barked, allegedly stating “cold gun!”. Were they all set up for Russian roulette?
    Why did Ol’ Powder Finger point it down camera or whatever (least culpable scenario) while there was anyone in line?
    It’s not 1935 anymore, squinting through the eyepiece; monitors are a thing.

    I understand the whole production was a shambles, and the fellow knows nothing about firearms (maybe a bit more now), but there’s a lot of digging to be done here.

    • Replies: @Corn
    @Expletive Deleted

    Why did Ol’ Powder Finger point it down camera or whatever (least culpable scenario) while there was anyone in line?

    I can’t be certain but I read he wasn’t intentionally aiming or pointing the gun at anyone. He was supposedly holstering or unholstering the gun.

    Still, if so, he should have kept the gun pointed down.

  8. Who cares? It’s just Hollywood. I don’t care if they all wipe each other off the face of the earth with their stupidity.

    • Disagree: Ian Smith
    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Splendid! A capital notion.
    Henceforth, all cinema, television and stage productions are permitted to have only live ammunition.
    Including bombs etc.

    , @J1234
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I want to agree with you in spirit, but there's a nine year old child left without a mom due to Alec Baldwin and his production company's lack 0f professionalism. Their armorer should've been fired when guns used in filming were also used by the crew for target practice off set after hours. IMO, the only armorers that should be employed by any industry are those who've seen or experienced gun shot wounds first hand. That's something that would stay with you for a while.

    I wonder if any of Rust was filmed or scheduled to be filmed in Kansas (where a significant part of the story apparently takes place) or if - like all of those old school westerns - they decided to film it all in the Southwest and figure nobody can tell the difference. It could be that part of the story takes place in NM. Or it could be Santa Fe is a more pleasant place for stars to stay than Colby or Dodge City.

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @Jack D, @Hibernian

    , @Kylie
    @Achmed E. Newman

    B"Who cares? It’s just Hollywood. I don’t care if they all wipe each other off the face of the earth with their stupidity."

    I care. Very much. So much, in fact, that recently, I've been hoping DeNiro decides to do a western, with Angelina Jolie as his costar and Meghan Markle and Jane Fonda in brief cameos.

    , @Prof. Woland
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I feel bad for the woman that was killed. Alec Baldwin, no so much but it is harder to care when considering the fact that I could not work there due to my politics. You could swing a dead cat anywhere in the movie industry and not hit a 'conservative' or any based person for that matter.

    I had a bit of schadenfreude when old Harvey Weinstein and the others were rousted out of Hollywood. You knew that every single one of them hated people like me and mine.

    I am looking forward to Baldwin getting his just deserts. It could not have happened to a bigger prick.

    Replies: @PaceLaw

  9. He’s so ronrey….

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    @AceDeuce

    "He's so ronrey ..."

    Bad for glass. #2

  10. OTOH, the only pic I can find quickly (Mirror, 25th) shows the woman behind a camera with an in-line view.
    If so they’re both crazy. Was she going to catch whatever debris was discharged in her teeth?
    What kind of lunatic takes anybody else’s word/sincere belief at face value where the status of firearms is involved?

  11. @Achmed E. Newman
    Who cares? It's just Hollywood. I don't care if they all wipe each other off the face of the earth with their stupidity.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @J1234, @Kylie, @Prof. Woland

    Splendid! A capital notion.
    Henceforth, all cinema, television and stage productions are permitted to have only live ammunition.
    Including bombs etc.

    • Agree: The Alarmist
  12. Gun discipline/gun etiquette is easy, but needs to be learned by drill/repetition so it’s second nature. I’d guess set armorers/gun wranglers ought to be hired for having gun etiquette drilled into them. Ex-military, ex-police, experienced gun enthusiasts.

    A radio interview yesterday with a onetime movie guy had it there’s no cinematic reason for live rounds on a set.

    (Truth in commenting notice: I’m a onetime gun owner and 2A supporter.)

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @JackOH


    Ex-military, ex-police, experienced gun enthusiasts.
     
    Can you imagine a group of producers including Baldwin hiring them?
    , @JimB
    @JackOH


    I’d guess set armorers/gun wranglers ought to be hired for having gun etiquette drilled into them. Ex-military, ex-police, experienced gun enthusiasts.
     
    You think loudmouth lefty Alec Baldwin wants someone like that on the set? He probably felt highly virtuous hiring a purpled haired 24-year old Tik Tok thot.
  13. Either this guy:

    or this guy:

    • Replies: @Oh the irony
    @El Dato

    Interestingly, Eli Wallach said about the scene that he had no experience with guns and had no idea what he was doing. Sergio Leone hadn't given him exact orders so he did what he thought would make sense.

  14. It’s ironic that in the ‘dark ages’ the mischievous fool in felt shoes and jangling bell cap was the court idiot, present for amusement and frivolity. Now such people literally run the show…

    You have grown adults playing a child’s game of ‘throw the ball in the basket’ being paid astronomically high sums of money so that the ‘serious’ in our society can sit and idolize their playground efforts. You have very overpaid ‘high intellectuals’ writing excruciating screeds about the color of their skin and their imagined torments in society while true scientists, engineers and mathematicians are ritually sacrificed for holding on to the belief that 2+2=4. The hypocrisy of this flipped meritocracy! Being good at something when it truly counts for society is now thought criminal… Meritocracy for children’s games ‘good,’ meritocracy for life-advancing efforts is now ‘bad.’ It’s amazing when you think about it!

    How easily an advanced society self-immolates.

    • Thanks: Buffalo Joe
  15. You would think that with green screen tech, they could do prop guns in a way that they could not be loaded with real bullets.

    They spend umpteen million dollars on movies, would it be so hard to make a green prop gun with a grid pattern that could be automatically “turned into” a realistic gun in post-production? Once they have the program done once, they could use it on every movie gun.

    [MORE]

    Blanks have a “wad” at the end, right? Something that takes the place of the actual metal bullet at the end of the cartridge. They should get rid of that, even if, for some reason, green guns are not realistic.

    For automatics (i think that is the right term — guns with clips) there is no reason a real bullet should even fit in the gun. Make the space in the clip short enough that a cartridge with a bullet at the tip does not fit.

    The same thing would apply to rifley guns and shotgunny guns.

    For spinny-wheel guns, have shorter cartridges too. The spinny thing’s cylindrical holes should have a constriction in the middle with normal-gun openings at either end, so it still looks realistic.

    Why do they even have to work like real guns? Have multiple powder charges in the barrel, so that there’s not even a place for the bullets to go.

    For all types of prop guns, make the barrel with a constriction in the middle, so a real bullet won’t fire. I guess that’s not really better, because a gun that explodes in the actor’s hand is not really better.

    Make prop “bullets” fire differently than real bullets. Real guns have a hammer that smacks into a primer charge, which then causes the “gunpowder” to react right? Well, have prop blanks fire using an electric charge to set off a different kind of primer deeper in the cartridge that won’t fire when a hammer hits it. You don’t much want a real gun to be battery-powered. What if you need to protect yourself, but the battery is dead? With a prop gun that is not a problem. Just yell “cut” and get another prop gun from the prop gun guy, and then yell at him for not keeping his guns charged. What a jackass, right?

    With simple changes, alone or in combination, there would be no way a prop gun could ever have a bullet in it. If the character needs to put a bullet in the gun, and then shoot, would having to have a cut really ruin the auteur’s vision? They do cuts in violent scenes all the time to make fake violence look somewhat realistic.

    In principle, that’s kind of how other weapons work in tv and movies, right? Like, they have a rubber machete, so actors are not hacking at each other with real weapons, right? If they need to use a real machete to hack through the underbrush, they just switch out real for fake machetes, right? Do the same with guns. If they need to shoot real bullets at something, use a real gun. If they need to shoot people, use the in-bullet-able prop gun.

    Come on prop guys and special effects dudes. I’m a mentally ill shut-in. If I can figure this shit out, then you can too. Prop makers, you could sell special effects guns and electric bullets for a lot more than regular guns and blanks. Directors and studios would pay higher prices without too much grumbling because they could pay lower insurance premiums.

    • Disagree: Catdog
    • Replies: @El Dato
    @Rob


    For automatics (i think that is the right term — guns with clips)
     
    If this were 4chan, that would be cloud level trolling.

    "Magazines", man!

    https://i.postimg.cc/YCQ79SVX/clip-vs-mag.png

    Replies: @Right_On, @Expletive Deleted

    , @bomag
    @Rob

    Excellent ideas.

    But there's a certain frisson from handling real guns, and Hollywood is weird about guns and other things.

    Replies: @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    , @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Rob


    You would think that with green screen tech, they could do prop guns in a way that they could not be loaded with real bullets.
     
    There are working firearms and rubber replica guns on set. The replica guns are used for shots where detail isn't a prime concern.

    Of the real firearms, they are presented to the actors "cold" or "hot." A "cold" gun is supposed to be repeatedly and redundantly checked to make certain that it is inert. In the case of a revolver where close shots could show the lack of cartridges in the chambers of the cylinder, inert dummy rounds which have no powder charge and no primer, and with distinguishing case markings are loaded into the firearm immediately before handing the firearm to the actor. In shots where it is important to show muzzle flash and the report of cartridges firing, a "hot" gun with blanks is used.

    Apparently there are some circumstances where live ammunition is necessary for a shot, but I don't think that this was one of them.

    IIRC, there have been three instances of fatal shootings on set. The first was an actor who held a "hot" blank firing gun to his temple and fired as a joke (not part of a shot), and the wad and concussive force caused a fatal brain injury. The second was the Brandon Lee incident, in which a firearm has previously fired a "squib" round, which is an inadvertently underpowered cartridge which does not generate enough propellant force for the bullet to leave the firearm's barrel. The bullet remains stuck in the barrel until removed. In Brandon Lee's case, the bullet was removed by a blank cartridge while the firearm was pointed at him. The Rust incident is the third, and is evidently the only one in which a complete cartridge seems to have been the culprit.

    One would think simply keeping all live and complete cartridges outside of a quarantine area (where bags and effects are checked before entry) would be a way to preclude both accidents and foul play on set. Strictly enforcing a rule that no actor or others may horse around with any firearm of replica would help too. Add to that inspecting and function testing every non-replica firearm redundantly including immediately before use would help as well.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rob

    I'll take your word on the movie production end of this, Rob (and, again, I don't care too much - see above*) Re: the guns, I have some corrections. Clips don't go in guns at all. They can be used to quickly load magazines, which go in handguns other than single-shotters or revolvers and some semi-auto rifles**. I would guess all FULL automatics use magazines, but I'll probably be corrected - Joe Stalin, what say you?

    .

    * Why am I on this thread then? Good question! I'm eating breakfast.

    ** The .22 Marlins, for example, hold 18 shots, but there is no magazine. They are held in a tube under the barrel.

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @That Would Be Telling, @Diversity Heretic, @Veteran Aryan

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rob

    BTW, how are you mentally ill, Rob? You read as much more lucid and sane than 90% of the people in government, education, big business, ... etc., etc... etc.....

    Replies: @Polistra

    , @Chris Mallory
    @Rob

    Because CGI weapon firing looks awful.

    , @Sick 'n Tired
    @Rob

    Reading what you wrote tells me you know absolutely nothing about guns.

    Replies: @TWS, @Rob

  16. @Rob
    You would think that with green screen tech, they could do prop guns in a way that they could not be loaded with real bullets.

    They spend umpteen million dollars on movies, would it be so hard to make a green prop gun with a grid pattern that could be automatically “turned into” a realistic gun in post-production? Once they have the program done once, they could use it on every movie gun.

    Blanks have a “wad” at the end, right? Something that takes the place of the actual metal bullet at the end of the cartridge. They should get rid of that, even if, for some reason, green guns are not realistic.

    For automatics (i think that is the right term — guns with clips) there is no reason a real bullet should even fit in the gun. Make the space in the clip short enough that a cartridge with a bullet at the tip does not fit.

    The same thing would apply to rifley guns and shotgunny guns.

    For spinny-wheel guns, have shorter cartridges too. The spinny thing’s cylindrical holes should have a constriction in the middle with normal-gun openings at either end, so it still looks realistic.

    Why do they even have to work like real guns? Have multiple powder charges in the barrel, so that there’s not even a place for the bullets to go.

    For all types of prop guns, make the barrel with a constriction in the middle, so a real bullet won’t fire. I guess that’s not really better, because a gun that explodes in the actor’s hand is not really better.

    Make prop “bullets” fire differently than real bullets. Real guns have a hammer that smacks into a primer charge, which then causes the “gunpowder” to react right? Well, have prop blanks fire using an electric charge to set off a different kind of primer deeper in the cartridge that won’t fire when a hammer hits it. You don’t much want a real gun to be battery-powered. What if you need to protect yourself, but the battery is dead? With a prop gun that is not a problem. Just yell “cut” and get another prop gun from the prop gun guy, and then yell at him for not keeping his guns charged. What a jackass, right?

    With simple changes, alone or in combination, there would be no way a prop gun could ever have a bullet in it. If the character needs to put a bullet in the gun, and then shoot, would having to have a cut really ruin the auteur’s vision? They do cuts in violent scenes all the time to make fake violence look somewhat realistic.

    In principle, that’s kind of how other weapons work in tv and movies, right? Like, they have a rubber machete, so actors are not hacking at each other with real weapons, right? If they need to use a real machete to hack through the underbrush, they just switch out real for fake machetes, right? Do the same with guns. If they need to shoot real bullets at something, use a real gun. If they need to shoot people, use the in-bullet-able prop gun.

    Come on prop guys and special effects dudes. I’m a mentally ill shut-in. If I can figure this shit out, then you can too. Prop makers, you could sell special effects guns and electric bullets for a lot more than regular guns and blanks. Directors and studios would pay higher prices without too much grumbling because they could pay lower insurance premiums.

    Replies: @El Dato, @bomag, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Achmed E. Newman, @Achmed E. Newman, @Chris Mallory, @Sick 'n Tired

    For automatics (i think that is the right term — guns with clips)

    If this were 4chan, that would be cloud level trolling.

    “Magazines”, man!

    • Replies: @Right_On
    @El Dato

    Andy, the gun dealer in Taxi Driver: "You interested in an automatic? It's a Colt .25 Automatic. It's a nice little gun. It's a beautiful little gun. It holds six shots in the clip, one shot in the chamber, if you're dumb enough to put a round in the chamber. Here, look at this. 380 Walther, holds eight shots in the clip. That's a nice gun."

    In the movies, they always say "clip" rather than "magazine". Blame it on Hollywood.

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix

    , @Expletive Deleted
    @El Dato

    O c'mon fair play lads.

    Old bloke who'd spent all his best years knocking 'em through the same hole at Bisley. And then sticking it to the krauts.
    Couldn't even remember what the damn' clip thing was called. Fire & forget.
    " A .. a .. little gadget"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpGWOouAvhQ&list=PLnN4TYr3AGycd-D5w05wf7wn-olqRzRmy&index=9

    You does this wiv yer fum, then you do this wiv ..
    Put it through your left eye at a furlong, so he could

    Or your right eye, accordin' to Orders. Ain't no big fuss.

  17. Until now, the fictions of affirmative action and “equality” have been maintained having enough competent white men on hand to carry the dead weight of the stupid and the incompetent. But we’re rapidly approaching — if not already at — the point where white men have been purged to the extent that this is no longer possible. Having clueless little girls LARPing as armorers — and as sailors, cops, journalists, professors, senators, and vice-presidents — is starting to have negative real-world consequences.

    I made this point to a retired corrections officer once, and he related a story where they had to do a “cell extraction” on a big, muscular black inmate who was freaking out in his cell (possibly on drugs). The guy had trashed his cell, stripped naked, covered himself with soap to make himself slippery, snarling and foaming at the mouth, and wanted to fight the COs.

    Three male COs and a female CO with a reputation for being incompetent responded. One of the male COs said “OK, here’s what we’re going to do.” To the female he said “You go in there first, and then we’ll go in and grab his arms and legs.”

    The female CO blanched. “I’m not going in there!” The male looked at her and said “You make the same paycheck as me, don’t you?”

    Ultimately the male COs, who were all big, dumb football player types able (and willing) to fight, handled the situation.

    Moral of the story: Once guys like that are are gone… reality will kick in and it won’t be pretty.

    • Agree: Sick of Orcs, AceDeuce
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    @Dr. X

    'Three male COs and a female CO with a reputation for being incompetent responded. One of the male COs said “OK, here’s what we’re going to do.” To the female he said “You go in there first, and then we’ll go in and grab his arms and legs.”

    The female CO blanched. “I’m not going in there!” The male looked at her and said “You make the same paycheck as me, don’t you?”...'

    More routinely, we had a house fire close to twenty years back now. Nothing horrific, but a year of bullshit thereafter.

    Anyway, the fire department shows up with three guys and three gals. It worked -- but it was hard not to notice something.

    The three guys fought the fire. The three gals consoled the family.

    This -- if it's understood, and matters are arranged accordingly -- actually isn't too bad a system. However, the pretense is otherwise.

    , @Colin Wright
    @Dr. X

    '...The female CO blanched. “I’m not going in there!” The male looked at her and said “You make the same paycheck as me, don’t you?”...'

    This is actually a good example of the problem with hiring women to fill positions involving physical danger.

    I think most of us would have to admit that in this situation, we too would hear a little inner voice saying, 'I'm not going in there.'

    But, being men, we would try to override it, and in all likelihood, would succeed. Aside from the perfectly possible genetic differences in psychology, women just aren't brought up to make these demands of themselves.

    I once read about some Israeli patrol in a Humvee that was ambushed somewhere in Negev. All were killed -- except for one woman. The men fought and died. She'd promptly dived into a ditch and hid.

    Now, most of us can sympathize with the woman's reaction. However, most of us would 'man up' -- as the expression has it -- and go down shooting along with the rest of the patrol.

    , @2BR
    @Dr. X

    Remember the incident with the Olympic torch parade (when someone tried to grab the torch)?

    Watch how the male and female security guards react:

    https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-18921332

    Replies: @Nicholas Stix

  18. @Altai
    And yet how do you know it wasn't just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?

    https://twitter.com/Villavelius/status/1451499563903242242

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @Almost Missouri, @Joe S.Walker, @Jack Armstrong, @Charlotte, @Wade Hampton, @Reg Cæsar, @Buffalo Joe, @EdwardM

    • Replies: @Mike_from_SGV
    @Almost Missouri

    OK that photo and the article explains a lot. Memo to Hollywood: competence and experience are not "white privilege", they save lives.

    , @Lurker
    @Almost Missouri

    I think she just rendered my weapon safe.

    Replies: @Elmer T. Jones

    , @The Wild Geese Howard
    @Almost Missouri

    I can practically smell the multiple STDs through my phone.

    Replies: @TWS, @bomag

    , @JackOH
    @Almost Missouri

    After decades of imbibing feminist empowerment lingo, Hannah, movie armorer to the stars, strikes a pose of steely, martial competence to inspire young women everywhere to enter non-traditional occupations, and serve as a poster girl for Take Your Daughter to Work Day.

    , @ic1000
    @Almost Missouri

    At this writing, the key elements of the story are already clear.

    * Baldwin is producer as well as marquee name, so money/budget pressures.
    * Ignorance of or contempt for basic flyover-country gun safety concepts.
    * Key roles filled by people unqualified by experience or temperament (eg Spidey Girl).
    * No culture of workplace safety (eg off-hours use of "prop" gun for target practice, multiple safety complaints ignored by management).

    So it's kind of boring. 1+2+3+4 = Tragedy.

    On a meta level, the story seems to still be "developing". The Establishment hasn't yet decided whether to protect one of its own (Jussie Smollet) or toss him under the bus (Harvey Weinstein).

    In that regard, reporter Miguel Almaguer's segment for this morning's Today show was interesting. For those who don't watch NBC News, Almaguer is at the top of his profession for a number of reasons:

    * He's handsome, with good on-camera presence.
    * He has a Hispanx name.
    * He's cultivated an authoritative style for delivering voice-overs that signals, "this is very important, pay attention but don't panic (yet)."

    Almaguer kept viewers in the dark about relevant elements that came out over the weekend.

    * Armoror Spidey Girl is the daughter of an established Hollywood heavyweight, thus, Nepotism?
    * Even at this early stage in her career, Spidey has significant screwups under her belt.
    * Per above, crew borrowing "prop" gun for plinking cans in the desert.

    Pravda style:

    * Without mentioning that multiple safety concerns had been forcefully expressed by the crew, Almaguer showed the production company's denial that any official complaint had been lodged.
    * Almaguer related that Tragedy happened when Baldwin pointed the "prop" pistol at the camera and fired. (Remote controls for modern digital cameras are not yet a Thing.)

    Baldwin hasn't yet promised to donate even more money to Hillary's campaign as he redoubles his efforts to keep aspiring starlets away from the casting couch promote workplace safety on Hollywood film sets.

    What's the over/under on the Establishment throwing Baldwin to the wolves?

    Replies: @Technite78, @Paperback Writer

    , @Altai
    @Almost Missouri

    Though she was apparently brought in to replace the union guy who walked off along with others due to apparent poor gun safety on set. (As well as the little matter of not being paid on time and broken promises on accommodation) They talk about the gun going off accidentally before this but I don't know if it was a blank misfiring or real bullets. (How do you end up with a dead DP after 2 separate accidents involving loaded guns?)

    What's interesting is the scale of the blame game, she left out a loaded gun. AD took it up and didn't do the last check he was obliged to to make sure it wasn't loaded. Never spoke to the girl in charge of the guns either and gave it to Baldwin while announcing it was a 'cold gun'. (They were miles from anywhere, where else would she be before shooting scenes?)

    Baldwin then proceeds to somehow shoot at the DP and director while practicing a gun trick despite that also being a big no in terms of pointing, let alone pulling the trigger in the direction of anything you don't intend to shoot.

    Lots of targets for the lawyers to get to their paydays.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @stillCARealist, @Jack D, @Redmen, @JimDandy

    , @Dumbo
    @Almost Missouri

    I know Hollywood is built on nepotism, but whose brilliant idea was it to put this dumb daughter-of-someone as head armorer?

    Hire her as a production intern, or to fellate Mr. Baldwin during the breaks (although from the pic she's probably a lesbian), but not in charge of a job that puts everyone on danger if you don't do it well.

    Also, already two other gun incidents in the same movie? And they didn't stop?

    This is a really weird story, there must be more to it.

    Replies: @kaganovitch

    , @Jack Armstrong
    @Almost Missouri

    To quote the philosopher … What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Almost Missouri

    That photo clarifies a lot. The key question now becomes how was this ditzy tart ever allowed on a movie set, let alone given a responsible position on that set.

    Replies: @The Real World, @Alden

    , @Mike Tre
    @Almost Missouri

    Here's a video she made of herself:

    https://leakedreality.com/video/25485/hannah-gutierrez-reed-head-armorer-on-rust-set

  19. Look into how much deliberate action would be required to load the weapon in question, and then tell us if you still buy it was some sort of accident attributable to a ditzy InstaGram tart.

    • Agree: Hibernian
  20. ‘I think all movie set guns should contain live rounds and the most lethal rounds possible, perhaps incendiary rounds, hollow points, or extreme powder loads. Hell, make the bullets out of depleted uranium also.

    • Agree: Expletive Deleted
  21. @Rob
    You would think that with green screen tech, they could do prop guns in a way that they could not be loaded with real bullets.

    They spend umpteen million dollars on movies, would it be so hard to make a green prop gun with a grid pattern that could be automatically “turned into” a realistic gun in post-production? Once they have the program done once, they could use it on every movie gun.

    Blanks have a “wad” at the end, right? Something that takes the place of the actual metal bullet at the end of the cartridge. They should get rid of that, even if, for some reason, green guns are not realistic.

    For automatics (i think that is the right term — guns with clips) there is no reason a real bullet should even fit in the gun. Make the space in the clip short enough that a cartridge with a bullet at the tip does not fit.

    The same thing would apply to rifley guns and shotgunny guns.

    For spinny-wheel guns, have shorter cartridges too. The spinny thing’s cylindrical holes should have a constriction in the middle with normal-gun openings at either end, so it still looks realistic.

    Why do they even have to work like real guns? Have multiple powder charges in the barrel, so that there’s not even a place for the bullets to go.

    For all types of prop guns, make the barrel with a constriction in the middle, so a real bullet won’t fire. I guess that’s not really better, because a gun that explodes in the actor’s hand is not really better.

    Make prop “bullets” fire differently than real bullets. Real guns have a hammer that smacks into a primer charge, which then causes the “gunpowder” to react right? Well, have prop blanks fire using an electric charge to set off a different kind of primer deeper in the cartridge that won’t fire when a hammer hits it. You don’t much want a real gun to be battery-powered. What if you need to protect yourself, but the battery is dead? With a prop gun that is not a problem. Just yell “cut” and get another prop gun from the prop gun guy, and then yell at him for not keeping his guns charged. What a jackass, right?

    With simple changes, alone or in combination, there would be no way a prop gun could ever have a bullet in it. If the character needs to put a bullet in the gun, and then shoot, would having to have a cut really ruin the auteur’s vision? They do cuts in violent scenes all the time to make fake violence look somewhat realistic.

    In principle, that’s kind of how other weapons work in tv and movies, right? Like, they have a rubber machete, so actors are not hacking at each other with real weapons, right? If they need to use a real machete to hack through the underbrush, they just switch out real for fake machetes, right? Do the same with guns. If they need to shoot real bullets at something, use a real gun. If they need to shoot people, use the in-bullet-able prop gun.

    Come on prop guys and special effects dudes. I’m a mentally ill shut-in. If I can figure this shit out, then you can too. Prop makers, you could sell special effects guns and electric bullets for a lot more than regular guns and blanks. Directors and studios would pay higher prices without too much grumbling because they could pay lower insurance premiums.

    Replies: @El Dato, @bomag, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Achmed E. Newman, @Achmed E. Newman, @Chris Mallory, @Sick 'n Tired

    Excellent ideas.

    But there’s a certain frisson from handling real guns, and Hollywood is weird about guns and other things.

    • Replies: @GeologyAnon Mk 3
    @bomag

    You need realistic looking guns (especially in a western) where realistic looking replica shells are important in scenes where people are reloading or doing other things like that. So you will always need them and have some of them in the arsenal for an idiot to get mixed up. Also they don't have internal restrictors since they don't need the blowback function to cycle the next round. Without that there isn't a physical stop to the bullet, and if the actor drops the gun or it's got a fouled barrel in any other way you still can get an erstatz projectile even while firing blanks, that's basically what killed Brandon Lee. It might turn out to be the exact same situation- a replica dummy round dropped it's bullet into the barrel the gun was unloaded and replaced with blanks, the blank fires and the bullet goes out at near normal velocity

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling, @Jonathan Mason

  22. Pumpkin has it right. It may sound ageist, but a 24-year old is unqualified to be the armorer. I don’t care if his or her daddy is a top guy in the industry. Like the gaffer (head electrician), armorer is a job where if you do it wrong, people die. No kids, no tyros, no wannabes.

    • Replies: @Paul Mendez
    @Woodsie


    . It may sound ageist, but a 24-year old is unqualified to be the armorer.
     
    Uh, 24-year olds launch and retrieve multi-million dollar jets on aircraft carriers every day.

    Replies: @Jack D, @anon, @EdwardM

    , @Expletive Deleted
    @Woodsie

    Luke, I am your father

  23. @Almost Missouri
    @Altai

    The armorer from Rust:

    https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/10/NINTCHDBPICT000688664971-1.jpg

    https://www.the-sun.com/news/3926657/who-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed/

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Lurker, @The Wild Geese Howard, @JackOH, @ic1000, @Altai, @Dumbo, @Jack Armstrong, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Mike Tre

    OK that photo and the article explains a lot. Memo to Hollywood: competence and experience are not “white privilege”, they save lives.

  24. @Almost Missouri
    @Altai

    The armorer from Rust:

    https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/10/NINTCHDBPICT000688664971-1.jpg

    https://www.the-sun.com/news/3926657/who-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed/

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Lurker, @The Wild Geese Howard, @JackOH, @ic1000, @Altai, @Dumbo, @Jack Armstrong, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Mike Tre

    I think she just rendered my weapon safe.

    • Replies: @Elmer T. Jones
    @Lurker

    Good, then no one can accuse you of assault with a dead weapon.

  25. @Almost Missouri
    @Altai

    The armorer from Rust:

    https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/10/NINTCHDBPICT000688664971-1.jpg

    https://www.the-sun.com/news/3926657/who-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed/

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Lurker, @The Wild Geese Howard, @JackOH, @ic1000, @Altai, @Dumbo, @Jack Armstrong, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Mike Tre

    I can practically smell the multiple STDs through my phone.

    • LOL: Polistra
    • Replies: @TWS
    @The Wild Geese Howard

    Hepatitis-Z

    , @bomag
    @The Wild Geese Howard

    LOL

  26. @Almost Missouri
    @Altai

    The armorer from Rust:

    https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/10/NINTCHDBPICT000688664971-1.jpg

    https://www.the-sun.com/news/3926657/who-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed/

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Lurker, @The Wild Geese Howard, @JackOH, @ic1000, @Altai, @Dumbo, @Jack Armstrong, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Mike Tre

    After decades of imbibing feminist empowerment lingo, Hannah, movie armorer to the stars, strikes a pose of steely, martial competence to inspire young women everywhere to enter non-traditional occupations, and serve as a poster girl for Take Your Daughter to Work Day.

    • Thanks: SteveRogers42
  27. why would there be a live round anywhere near the guns on set?

    • Agree: Muggles
  28. @Almost Missouri
    @Altai

    The armorer from Rust:

    https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/10/NINTCHDBPICT000688664971-1.jpg

    https://www.the-sun.com/news/3926657/who-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed/

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Lurker, @The Wild Geese Howard, @JackOH, @ic1000, @Altai, @Dumbo, @Jack Armstrong, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Mike Tre

    At this writing, the key elements of the story are already clear.

    * Baldwin is producer as well as marquee name, so money/budget pressures.
    * Ignorance of or contempt for basic flyover-country gun safety concepts.
    * Key roles filled by people unqualified by experience or temperament (eg Spidey Girl).
    * No culture of workplace safety (eg off-hours use of “prop” gun for target practice, multiple safety complaints ignored by management).

    So it’s kind of boring. 1+2+3+4 = Tragedy.

    On a meta level, the story seems to still be “developing”. The Establishment hasn’t yet decided whether to protect one of its own (Jussie Smollet) or toss him under the bus (Harvey Weinstein).

    [MORE]

    In that regard, reporter Miguel Almaguer’s segment for this morning’s Today show was interesting. For those who don’t watch NBC News, Almaguer is at the top of his profession for a number of reasons:

    * He’s handsome, with good on-camera presence.
    * He has a Hispanx name.
    * He’s cultivated an authoritative style for delivering voice-overs that signals, “this is very important, pay attention but don’t panic (yet).”

    Almaguer kept viewers in the dark about relevant elements that came out over the weekend.

    * Armoror Spidey Girl is the daughter of an established Hollywood heavyweight, thus, Nepotism?
    * Even at this early stage in her career, Spidey has significant screwups under her belt.
    * Per above, crew borrowing “prop” gun for plinking cans in the desert.

    Pravda style:

    * Without mentioning that multiple safety concerns had been forcefully expressed by the crew, Almaguer showed the production company’s denial that any official complaint had been lodged.
    * Almaguer related that Tragedy happened when Baldwin pointed the “prop” pistol at the camera and fired. (Remote controls for modern digital cameras are not yet a Thing.)

    Baldwin hasn’t yet promised to donate even more money to Hillary’s campaign as he redoubles his efforts to keep aspiring starlets away from the casting couch promote workplace safety on Hollywood film sets.

    What’s the over/under on the Establishment throwing Baldwin to the wolves?

    • Replies: @Technite78
    @ic1000


    What’s the over/under on the Establishment throwing Baldwin to the wolves?
     
    Regardless of how hard he tries to be woke, he's still an old white guy who mostly appeals to other white males. I'm also betting he's made a lot of secret enemies in Hollywood. He's disposable.
    , @Paperback Writer
    @ic1000

    On that bus issue, does the fact that the LA Times has been the best on the story factor into the equation?

    Their latest,

    https://web.archive.org/web/20211025101743/https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-24/alec-baldwin-prop-gun-shooting-halyna-hutchins-search-warrant

    (Only defense Baldwin has, an actor, is that he wasn't pointing the gun at Hutchins, he was pointing the gun at the camera. As a producer, he's in deep shit.)

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling

  29. @Lurker
    @Almost Missouri

    I think she just rendered my weapon safe.

    Replies: @Elmer T. Jones

    Good, then no one can accuse you of assault with a dead weapon.

  30. My son is currently directing a movie in Hollywood with lots of gun action (mainly AK-47’s). He told me that it is far easier to add the shot electronically after the scene is completed. Not only is this 100% safe, but the loud noise from the blank shot is distracting to the actors. All of his many guns have solid barrels. He also told me that Baldwin is push his crew far too hard to save some money. Stupidity all the way around.

    • Replies: @Anonymous Jew
    @Robert Weissberg

    What about achieving realistic recoil? Fake recoil might look like those old Hollywood slap punches. I dunno.

    , @Danindc
    @Robert Weissberg

    A Weissberg directing a movie?? Ok, I’ll take your word for it…

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Robert Weissberg

    One defender of Baldwin (because he mocked Trump on SNL; really) said he's not liable because he was only the "executive" producer, and his duties were merely financial. But if saving money was the cause of the whole 💩 🎪, then he would be the most liable of the producers, not the least.

    , @That Would Be Telling
    @Robert Weissberg


    My son is currently directing a movie in Hollywood with lots of gun action (mainly AK-47’s). He told me that it is far easier to add the shot electronically after the scene is completed. Not only is this 100% safe, but the loud noise from the blank shot is distracting to the actors. All of his many guns have solid barrels.
     
    Thanks, that's a good point about the detrimental noise of blanks, and indoors especially they could also cost you some hearing.

    Assault rifles like the AK-47 and AR-15 families are special cases compared to handguns and battle or more powerful rifles. They use an "intermediate" power cartridge and tend to have relatively straight line recoil, that is the butt of the stock does not drop far below the barrel like previous gun designs. So they don't produce much felt or visible recoil, no one is envisioning using them for mass fire at greater than 1,000 yards etc. So faking everything, including what's a much more deafening noise makes sense, and the time savings on the set could pay for at least part of the special effects needed later, and lessening the mental wear and tear on everyone is also all around good (although you should always pull back the bolt a bit to check for sure).

    Handguns should more noticably jump, and should have more of an effect on the shooter, not that a lot of productions really care about such verisimilitude.
  31. @Rob
    You would think that with green screen tech, they could do prop guns in a way that they could not be loaded with real bullets.

    They spend umpteen million dollars on movies, would it be so hard to make a green prop gun with a grid pattern that could be automatically “turned into” a realistic gun in post-production? Once they have the program done once, they could use it on every movie gun.

    Blanks have a “wad” at the end, right? Something that takes the place of the actual metal bullet at the end of the cartridge. They should get rid of that, even if, for some reason, green guns are not realistic.

    For automatics (i think that is the right term — guns with clips) there is no reason a real bullet should even fit in the gun. Make the space in the clip short enough that a cartridge with a bullet at the tip does not fit.

    The same thing would apply to rifley guns and shotgunny guns.

    For spinny-wheel guns, have shorter cartridges too. The spinny thing’s cylindrical holes should have a constriction in the middle with normal-gun openings at either end, so it still looks realistic.

    Why do they even have to work like real guns? Have multiple powder charges in the barrel, so that there’s not even a place for the bullets to go.

    For all types of prop guns, make the barrel with a constriction in the middle, so a real bullet won’t fire. I guess that’s not really better, because a gun that explodes in the actor’s hand is not really better.

    Make prop “bullets” fire differently than real bullets. Real guns have a hammer that smacks into a primer charge, which then causes the “gunpowder” to react right? Well, have prop blanks fire using an electric charge to set off a different kind of primer deeper in the cartridge that won’t fire when a hammer hits it. You don’t much want a real gun to be battery-powered. What if you need to protect yourself, but the battery is dead? With a prop gun that is not a problem. Just yell “cut” and get another prop gun from the prop gun guy, and then yell at him for not keeping his guns charged. What a jackass, right?

    With simple changes, alone or in combination, there would be no way a prop gun could ever have a bullet in it. If the character needs to put a bullet in the gun, and then shoot, would having to have a cut really ruin the auteur’s vision? They do cuts in violent scenes all the time to make fake violence look somewhat realistic.

    In principle, that’s kind of how other weapons work in tv and movies, right? Like, they have a rubber machete, so actors are not hacking at each other with real weapons, right? If they need to use a real machete to hack through the underbrush, they just switch out real for fake machetes, right? Do the same with guns. If they need to shoot real bullets at something, use a real gun. If they need to shoot people, use the in-bullet-able prop gun.

    Come on prop guys and special effects dudes. I’m a mentally ill shut-in. If I can figure this shit out, then you can too. Prop makers, you could sell special effects guns and electric bullets for a lot more than regular guns and blanks. Directors and studios would pay higher prices without too much grumbling because they could pay lower insurance premiums.

    Replies: @El Dato, @bomag, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Achmed E. Newman, @Achmed E. Newman, @Chris Mallory, @Sick 'n Tired

    You would think that with green screen tech, they could do prop guns in a way that they could not be loaded with real bullets.

    There are working firearms and rubber replica guns on set. The replica guns are used for shots where detail isn’t a prime concern.

    Of the real firearms, they are presented to the actors “cold” or “hot.” A “cold” gun is supposed to be repeatedly and redundantly checked to make certain that it is inert. In the case of a revolver where close shots could show the lack of cartridges in the chambers of the cylinder, inert dummy rounds which have no powder charge and no primer, and with distinguishing case markings are loaded into the firearm immediately before handing the firearm to the actor. In shots where it is important to show muzzle flash and the report of cartridges firing, a “hot” gun with blanks is used.

    Apparently there are some circumstances where live ammunition is necessary for a shot, but I don’t think that this was one of them.

    IIRC, there have been three instances of fatal shootings on set. The first was an actor who held a “hot” blank firing gun to his temple and fired as a joke (not part of a shot), and the wad and concussive force caused a fatal brain injury. The second was the Brandon Lee incident, in which a firearm has previously fired a “squib” round, which is an inadvertently underpowered cartridge which does not generate enough propellant force for the bullet to leave the firearm’s barrel. The bullet remains stuck in the barrel until removed. In Brandon Lee’s case, the bullet was removed by a blank cartridge while the firearm was pointed at him. The Rust incident is the third, and is evidently the only one in which a complete cartridge seems to have been the culprit.

    One would think simply keeping all live and complete cartridges outside of a quarantine area (where bags and effects are checked before entry) would be a way to preclude both accidents and foul play on set. Strictly enforcing a rule that no actor or others may horse around with any firearm of replica would help too. Add to that inspecting and function testing every non-replica firearm redundantly including immediately before use would help as well.

    • Thanks: Hibernian
  32. Is the girl armorer a moron who is responsible for this death? Probably. But, the swiftness that powerful people threw her under the bus should give you pause. The playbook for corporate America is to conduct an internal investigation while “cooperating with authorities” (yeah, right). Immediately assigning blame makes my Spidey senses tingle.

    • Replies: @Redman
    @Batman

    I thought you would have “bat” senses. But I agree wholeheartedly.

    I’m not entirely sure what the responsibilities of an “armorer” in Hollywood are. But I’ve seen probably over 1000 films with lots of guns fired. And I’ve never heard of an incident even close to this.

    1. Who decided from a practical
    perspective to even have guns with live ammo?
    2. Who decided it was “necessary” (from a cinematic/realism perspective) to use live ammo?
    3. Who decided to them hire a chick with one other gig on her resume as an armorer?
    4. Apparently some of the producers were involved with “True Grit” and “Fargo”. Did they use 24 y/o girls as “armorers” for those films?
    5. Was this all about cost?


    Lot of questions in this case. Similar to the Twilight Zone disaster in the 1980s with John Landis. His career was ended. But will Alec’s be? I doubt it.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted

  33. Like this guy.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dale_Dye

    Steve has riffed about the support unions in Hollywood being closed shops, but there must be price points for service. If you’ve got the budget, you hire Thell Reed. If you don’t have the budget, you hire his Mexican-hyphenated daughter.

    • Replies: @fish
    @Brutusale

    If you’ve got the budget, you hire Thell Reed. If you don’t have the budget, you hire his Mexican-hyphenated daughter.



    Taking a page from the Monty Burns playbook...........excellent!




    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWxcnl8PL_o

  34. @Brutusale
    Like this guy.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dale_Dye

    Steve has riffed about the support unions in Hollywood being closed shops, but there must be price points for service. If you've got the budget, you hire Thell Reed. If you don't have the budget, you hire his Mexican-hyphenated daughter.

    Replies: @fish

    If you’ve got the budget, you hire Thell Reed. If you don’t have the budget, you hire his Mexican-hyphenated daughter.

    Taking a page from the Monty Burns playbook………..excellent!

  35. @ic1000
    @Almost Missouri

    At this writing, the key elements of the story are already clear.

    * Baldwin is producer as well as marquee name, so money/budget pressures.
    * Ignorance of or contempt for basic flyover-country gun safety concepts.
    * Key roles filled by people unqualified by experience or temperament (eg Spidey Girl).
    * No culture of workplace safety (eg off-hours use of "prop" gun for target practice, multiple safety complaints ignored by management).

    So it's kind of boring. 1+2+3+4 = Tragedy.

    On a meta level, the story seems to still be "developing". The Establishment hasn't yet decided whether to protect one of its own (Jussie Smollet) or toss him under the bus (Harvey Weinstein).

    In that regard, reporter Miguel Almaguer's segment for this morning's Today show was interesting. For those who don't watch NBC News, Almaguer is at the top of his profession for a number of reasons:

    * He's handsome, with good on-camera presence.
    * He has a Hispanx name.
    * He's cultivated an authoritative style for delivering voice-overs that signals, "this is very important, pay attention but don't panic (yet)."

    Almaguer kept viewers in the dark about relevant elements that came out over the weekend.

    * Armoror Spidey Girl is the daughter of an established Hollywood heavyweight, thus, Nepotism?
    * Even at this early stage in her career, Spidey has significant screwups under her belt.
    * Per above, crew borrowing "prop" gun for plinking cans in the desert.

    Pravda style:

    * Without mentioning that multiple safety concerns had been forcefully expressed by the crew, Almaguer showed the production company's denial that any official complaint had been lodged.
    * Almaguer related that Tragedy happened when Baldwin pointed the "prop" pistol at the camera and fired. (Remote controls for modern digital cameras are not yet a Thing.)

    Baldwin hasn't yet promised to donate even more money to Hillary's campaign as he redoubles his efforts to keep aspiring starlets away from the casting couch promote workplace safety on Hollywood film sets.

    What's the over/under on the Establishment throwing Baldwin to the wolves?

    Replies: @Technite78, @Paperback Writer

    What’s the over/under on the Establishment throwing Baldwin to the wolves?

    Regardless of how hard he tries to be woke, he’s still an old white guy who mostly appeals to other white males. I’m also betting he’s made a lot of secret enemies in Hollywood. He’s disposable.

    • Agree: Hibernian
  36. OT: Steve, are you going to cover BeagleGate? Granted, it’s so horrifying that I can’t even read any more about it, but it’s the one thing that might make the normies finally realize that Fauci is a satanic monster, so we need it covered everywhere.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @peterike

    #FauciLiedPuppiesDied

    #BeagleLivesMatter

    , @Anonymous
    @peterike

    Oh, come on! There is no "BeagleGate". There is a sad reality of animal studies and the fact that many of them cannot be restricted to mice, flies and worms.

    Nothing is black and white - in real life, compromises are made. If you're given a choice between keeping your son or an average beagle alive, the decision is obvious, right? Same with animal experiments: Many of them are cruel but on the other scale is that more people will die without them. E.g., the cancer-beating Rituximab antibody would not exist without animal studies.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Catdompanj

  37. @Almost Missouri
    @Altai

    The armorer from Rust:

    https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/10/NINTCHDBPICT000688664971-1.jpg

    https://www.the-sun.com/news/3926657/who-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed/

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Lurker, @The Wild Geese Howard, @JackOH, @ic1000, @Altai, @Dumbo, @Jack Armstrong, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Mike Tre

    Though she was apparently brought in to replace the union guy who walked off along with others due to apparent poor gun safety on set. (As well as the little matter of not being paid on time and broken promises on accommodation) They talk about the gun going off accidentally before this but I don’t know if it was a blank misfiring or real bullets. (How do you end up with a dead DP after 2 separate accidents involving loaded guns?)

    What’s interesting is the scale of the blame game, she left out a loaded gun. AD took it up and didn’t do the last check he was obliged to to make sure it wasn’t loaded. Never spoke to the girl in charge of the guns either and gave it to Baldwin while announcing it was a ‘cold gun’. (They were miles from anywhere, where else would she be before shooting scenes?)

    Baldwin then proceeds to somehow shoot at the DP and director while practicing a gun trick despite that also being a big no in terms of pointing, let alone pulling the trigger in the direction of anything you don’t intend to shoot.

    Lots of targets for the lawyers to get to their paydays.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Altai


    Baldwin then proceeds to somehow shoot at the DP and director while practicing a gun trick ...
     
    Perhaps all three were practicing and lining up a head-on shot of Baldwin's character firing right at the camera. Easy to imagine, at least, and certainly not the first time such a thing has been filmed.


    https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/1/shooting-cowboy-timothy-oleary.jpg


    It seems pretty certain the fault lies with the "armorer" and her belly button.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling

    , @stillCARealist
    @Altai

    As soon as my retired performer husband heard that the union guys had walked off the set he was suspicious that one of them had sabotaged the prop. He had experience with the unions doing nasty stuff to get revenge when they don't get their way during his career... speaking specifically about the stagehand unions.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Mikeja

    , @Jack D
    @Altai

    1. Apparently the guns were left outside on a cart in order to minimize the number of people going into the location as a result of Covid protocols.

    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set. Movie sets can be incredibly boring places when nothing is happening for you. This is the kind of fun thing that Spider Girl might allow. Her dad - NFW are you going to do that on my set. If you touch my guns I'll punch you out and then have you fired.

    This is my guess:

    1. Before lunch, Spider Girl checks the guns, tells AD they are cold, leaves them on cart. Retires to her trailer to text on her phone/do other fun activities. Her job is done. She'll come by at the end of the day to retrieve the guns. She is not allowed inside the building - the great star Baldwin might catch Covid if such icky people were allowed near him. The shoot is set up to minimize the # of icky people that interact with Baldwin "due to Covid" but it suits him just fine. Nor is she going to stand in the open desert and watch those guns while they sit on a cart for hours. You could get heatstroke/ go nuts.

    2. During lunch, someone picks up gun, loads it with live ammo, does a bit of target shooting and returns it to the cart, but they leave 1 cartridge in the cylinder. They have done this before (not the leaving the cartridge part but the plinking) and it was fine. The gun wasn't being used for filming during lunchtime, so what's the harm? Spider Girl might or might not have been aware that it was going on. Strange that the weapons were dirtier than they should have been, but maybe she wasn't really into cleaning weapons anyway.

    3. AD returns from lunch with Baldwin, picks up gun from cart and announces that it is cold.

    4. Tragedy ensues.

    The weapons were supposed to be in the armorer's custody and control. That's what her job description is - to have custody of the weapons at all times when they are not being used on the set. She didn't do her job. She is the main person at fault.

    Secondarily, Covid foolishness - Covid is so dangerous that leaving guns lying around in the open is the safer alternative. At least no one caught Covid from Spider Girl.

    Thirdly the asshole that borrowed the gun and returned it loaded. This person deserves jailtime for sure.

    Replies: @fish, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer, @Anonymous, @Stonewall Jackson, @Paperback Writer, @Etruscan Film Star, @foxotcw, @anonymouseperson

    , @Redmen
    @Altai

    Definitely a lot of spinning going on. Res ipsa loquitorwould seem to apply to Baldwin, despite the great PR efforts underway to protect him and his important status as a major Democrat media personality.

    The only question is if this rises to the level of recklessness. If so, I would expect there to be criminal charges of manslaughter as well as massive civil liability. In terms of civil liability, Baldwin is a very deep pocket. Could become one of the largest civil payouts by an individual for a tort.

    Replies: @prosa123

    , @JimDandy
    @Altai

    Now THAT makes me consider conspiracy theories for the first time. The green haired 24 year old internet prostitute was a scab? If I was a detective, I would interview the disgruntled union guy immediately.

    BTW, why would there EVER be a live round in a movie set armory?

  38. Until we have heard the rest or the story, we can only guess what happened – and my best guess is that the shooting wasn’t part of the script in any way. No matter what they were trying to do – a close-up of Baldwin shooting the gun, or a wide shot of him taking out a bad guy, there’s absolutely no reason the poor woman should be in the line of fire.

    Sometimes you see a movie where you can tell they’re shooting the real thing, but then it’s a close-up taken from a safe angle (better than trying to simulate recoil from an automatic pistol watered down to function with blanks)

    Since the movie was supposed to be a western, the gun was probably a Colt 1873 revolver. It only takes a glance at the front of the cylinder to check if the gun is loaded. And you can instantly tell if it’s loaded with blanks or real ammo – that is, if you know your business around guns.

    Some idiot handed another idiot a gun loaded with live ammo, and the second idiot then killed somebody.

    • Thanks: Ben tillman
    • Replies: @Boy the way Glenn Miller played
    @Mr Mox


    Since the movie was supposed to be a western, the gun was probably a Colt 1873 revolver. It only takes a glance at the front of the cylinder to check if the gun is loaded. And you can instantly tell if it’s loaded with blanks or real ammo – that is, if you know your business around guns.
     
    I'm trying to find out what model firearm was involved. That would be telling.

    Does anyone know for sure? If not, why is the information being hidden?
  39. @Almost Missouri
    @Altai

    The armorer from Rust:

    https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/10/NINTCHDBPICT000688664971-1.jpg

    https://www.the-sun.com/news/3926657/who-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed/

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Lurker, @The Wild Geese Howard, @JackOH, @ic1000, @Altai, @Dumbo, @Jack Armstrong, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Mike Tre

    I know Hollywood is built on nepotism, but whose brilliant idea was it to put this dumb daughter-of-someone as head armorer?

    Hire her as a production intern, or to fellate Mr. Baldwin during the breaks (although from the pic she’s probably a lesbian), but not in charge of a job that puts everyone on danger if you don’t do it well.

    Also, already two other gun incidents in the same movie? And they didn’t stop?

    This is a really weird story, there must be more to it.

    • Agree: Ben tillman
    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    @Dumbo

    Also, already two other gun incidents in the same movie?

    Wouldn't the other gun incidents be best understood as an emergent property of the choice of armorer?

    Replies: @El Dato

  40. At least he has no record of poor impulse control as might be suggested by calling little girls names.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    @Curle

    Agree.

  41. @Altai
    @Almost Missouri

    Though she was apparently brought in to replace the union guy who walked off along with others due to apparent poor gun safety on set. (As well as the little matter of not being paid on time and broken promises on accommodation) They talk about the gun going off accidentally before this but I don't know if it was a blank misfiring or real bullets. (How do you end up with a dead DP after 2 separate accidents involving loaded guns?)

    What's interesting is the scale of the blame game, she left out a loaded gun. AD took it up and didn't do the last check he was obliged to to make sure it wasn't loaded. Never spoke to the girl in charge of the guns either and gave it to Baldwin while announcing it was a 'cold gun'. (They were miles from anywhere, where else would she be before shooting scenes?)

    Baldwin then proceeds to somehow shoot at the DP and director while practicing a gun trick despite that also being a big no in terms of pointing, let alone pulling the trigger in the direction of anything you don't intend to shoot.

    Lots of targets for the lawyers to get to their paydays.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @stillCARealist, @Jack D, @Redmen, @JimDandy

    Baldwin then proceeds to somehow shoot at the DP and director while practicing a gun trick …

    Perhaps all three were practicing and lining up a head-on shot of Baldwin’s character firing right at the camera. Easy to imagine, at least, and certainly not the first time such a thing has been filmed.

    It seems pretty certain the fault lies with the “armorer” and her belly button.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Look more closely at the gun's barrel, you can see the underside of it but not the top side. I think that guy or whomever coached him just before the photo knows enough gun safety to have it angled up so it's unlikely to hit the photographer. I'm not certain because the photo does not have him using the sights, that would likely cover too much of his face for the desired photo.

    We can't know about the handling of the gun before or after, but from what we can tell this is not a gross violation of Rule 2 of gun safety although that's by a hair, and I wouldn't do it myself without personally emptying the gun, double checking that, abd keeping my trigger finger in the trigger guard but touching the forward part of it, not the trigger. But see below, we can assume most of the people on the set weren't taught gun safety starting when they were three (by example, that's when my father would start taking me and my siblings out hunting with him).

    The discussion so far here is excellent, I give particular thanks to ic1000 for bringing us up to date on the facts as they are believed to be known, they allow us to figure out ways this could have happened as Jack D has done (except for the gun being visibly dirty after plinking, smokeless power is pretty clean stuff). However Altai's point, and our general points about people downstream of the armorer double checking the latter's work are iffy because the difference between a regular and blank round is only apparent at the forward end of it.

    So depending on the action type, checking safety for a semi-auto would require removing the magazine and then the round in the chamber, for revolvers based on lighting and such maybe looking at the front of the cylinder, spinning it if single action, or removing all the rounds. And then, not being a specialist armorer, restoring the gun and its blank ammo back to the condition it was in so the film shooting will go right, you don't want to ruin a take because the gun doesn't fire. And all this keeping the barrel pointed in a safe direction, all blanks are deadly at contact range, those with wadding somewhat further, and I assume wadding plus light springs are used make semi-autos cycle new rounds into the chamber.

    So it would make sense for the guns to be completely under the control of the armorer, directly in his physical possession, or locked away with a key only he has, and everyone downstream assuming the armorer is doing his job properly. Which obviously wasn't happening if as said the armorer is allowing the guns to used for plinking, mixing of blank and real ammo should never be allowed except for the rare situations where you want to film that that. In which case the armorer would directly hand the gun to the actor, who he'd previously vetted for being sufficiently experienced and responsible in using guns for real.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Ben Kurtz, @Polistra, @dimples

  42. Anonymous[501] • Disclaimer says:

    This could be an episode of Colombo updated for the 21st Century:
    Gun girl and Cinematographer girl are having secret sapphic relationship… Cinematographer girl is also having an affaire with fading b-lister Baldwin.
    Gun girl sets up Baldwin with a live round…boom! Two birds with one stone… three if you include the director.

  43. @Altai
    @Almost Missouri

    Though she was apparently brought in to replace the union guy who walked off along with others due to apparent poor gun safety on set. (As well as the little matter of not being paid on time and broken promises on accommodation) They talk about the gun going off accidentally before this but I don't know if it was a blank misfiring or real bullets. (How do you end up with a dead DP after 2 separate accidents involving loaded guns?)

    What's interesting is the scale of the blame game, she left out a loaded gun. AD took it up and didn't do the last check he was obliged to to make sure it wasn't loaded. Never spoke to the girl in charge of the guns either and gave it to Baldwin while announcing it was a 'cold gun'. (They were miles from anywhere, where else would she be before shooting scenes?)

    Baldwin then proceeds to somehow shoot at the DP and director while practicing a gun trick despite that also being a big no in terms of pointing, let alone pulling the trigger in the direction of anything you don't intend to shoot.

    Lots of targets for the lawyers to get to their paydays.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @stillCARealist, @Jack D, @Redmen, @JimDandy

    As soon as my retired performer husband heard that the union guys had walked off the set he was suspicious that one of them had sabotaged the prop. He had experience with the unions doing nasty stuff to get revenge when they don’t get their way during his career… speaking specifically about the stagehand unions.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @stillCARealist


    As soon as my retired performer husband heard that the union guys had walked off the set he was suspicious that one of them had sabotaged the prop. He had experience with the unions doing nasty stuff to get revenge when they don’t get their way during his career… speaking specifically about the stagehand unions.
     
    I’ve worked on non-union film sets, and your husband is, unfortunately correct.

    A film set is like a kids summer camp. The participants are in a bubble. Anything outside the immediate wants and needs of the film cast and crew no longer seems real. A non-union film set can easily become a mini "Lord of the Flies." I’ve seen it happen. I’ve seen a producer threaten a poorly performing director with murder. That producer had the ways and means to make it happen. It made for quite an intense few weeks of filming. Crazy shit on non-union films is highly possible, if not probable, since the money for production can often come from amazingly sleazy places, bringing amazingly sleazy people into the mix, including hiring non-union type folks below the line.

    Unions are intended to weed those kind of people out of the creative process. A non-union project gives skeezy people a big say in things. And then stupid low-brow shit can happen. Like getting a woman shot dead for no fucking reason. Some area's of below-the-line expertise, Union or not, tends to bring in what the average person might call, "white trash," many of whom are only in the game thanks to nepotism. Explosives "experts," as well as stunt people weigh heavily in that category. Hire them carefully, or inherit a very shittious wind.

    I’m looking at you, "producer" Alec Baldwin.

    , @Mikeja
    @stillCARealist

    I had the same thought. Accidents happen, but within hours of a walkout? The worst thing about this scenario is, we’d have to feel sorry for Baldwin

  44. @Altai
    @Almost Missouri

    Though she was apparently brought in to replace the union guy who walked off along with others due to apparent poor gun safety on set. (As well as the little matter of not being paid on time and broken promises on accommodation) They talk about the gun going off accidentally before this but I don't know if it was a blank misfiring or real bullets. (How do you end up with a dead DP after 2 separate accidents involving loaded guns?)

    What's interesting is the scale of the blame game, she left out a loaded gun. AD took it up and didn't do the last check he was obliged to to make sure it wasn't loaded. Never spoke to the girl in charge of the guns either and gave it to Baldwin while announcing it was a 'cold gun'. (They were miles from anywhere, where else would she be before shooting scenes?)

    Baldwin then proceeds to somehow shoot at the DP and director while practicing a gun trick despite that also being a big no in terms of pointing, let alone pulling the trigger in the direction of anything you don't intend to shoot.

    Lots of targets for the lawyers to get to their paydays.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @stillCARealist, @Jack D, @Redmen, @JimDandy

    1. Apparently the guns were left outside on a cart in order to minimize the number of people going into the location as a result of Covid protocols.

    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set. Movie sets can be incredibly boring places when nothing is happening for you. This is the kind of fun thing that Spider Girl might allow. Her dad – NFW are you going to do that on my set. If you touch my guns I’ll punch you out and then have you fired.

    This is my guess:

    1. Before lunch, Spider Girl checks the guns, tells AD they are cold, leaves them on cart. Retires to her trailer to text on her phone/do other fun activities. Her job is done. She’ll come by at the end of the day to retrieve the guns. She is not allowed inside the building – the great star Baldwin might catch Covid if such icky people were allowed near him. The shoot is set up to minimize the # of icky people that interact with Baldwin “due to Covid” but it suits him just fine. Nor is she going to stand in the open desert and watch those guns while they sit on a cart for hours. You could get heatstroke/ go nuts.

    2. During lunch, someone picks up gun, loads it with live ammo, does a bit of target shooting and returns it to the cart, but they leave 1 cartridge in the cylinder. They have done this before (not the leaving the cartridge part but the plinking) and it was fine. The gun wasn’t being used for filming during lunchtime, so what’s the harm? Spider Girl might or might not have been aware that it was going on. Strange that the weapons were dirtier than they should have been, but maybe she wasn’t really into cleaning weapons anyway.

    3. AD returns from lunch with Baldwin, picks up gun from cart and announces that it is cold.

    4. Tragedy ensues.

    The weapons were supposed to be in the armorer’s custody and control. That’s what her job description is – to have custody of the weapons at all times when they are not being used on the set. She didn’t do her job. She is the main person at fault.

    Secondarily, Covid foolishness – Covid is so dangerous that leaving guns lying around in the open is the safer alternative. At least no one caught Covid from Spider Girl.

    Thirdly the asshole that borrowed the gun and returned it loaded. This person deserves jailtime for sure.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin, Dumbo
    • Thanks: Cool Daddy Jimbo, Goatweed
    • Replies: @fish
    @Jack D

    A remarkably plausible sequence of events.

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Jack D

    This sounds very plausible.

    It sounds like the armorer was not qualified, did not understand what her job entailed, and was unaware of the potential risks of allowing recreational use of props.

    The whole scenario should be a real wake up call for the movie-making industry.

    This story would make a great plot for a movie.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    But pink-haired sluts aren't always incompetent. You said so yourself.

    , @Anonymous
    @Jack D

    I don't know if Covid worries were part of the deal here, but wouldn't surprise me. Saw a lot of silly things last year. At a big mine site and was told by safety officer that he didn't hold the handrail on stairs because of Covid. (Holding handrail is drummed into you at a certain oval chemical company...number one danger on industrial sites is slips trips and falls...not the SAG mill, not the cyanide, not the trucks, not the explosives.)

    , @Stonewall Jackson
    @Jack D

    You got it. They keep saying prop gun and blanks... That was a live round. It killed one and wounded another person. That means it went through her and that means a real round. A silly little tik tok princess like that would act exactly like you said. Excellent post.

    , @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    Nope. This is the Assistant Director's fault.

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-accidental-shooting-details-halyna-hutchins-death


    However, he [Souza] stated that firearms are supposed to be checked by the armorer followed by the assistant director before handing them to the actor.
     
    Even Jack admits that the AD gave the gun to Baldwin.

    The armorer can't be blamed if she checked the guns, put them where she was instructed to, and was either prevented by dumb rules or was not called by the AD to come and re-check the guns before filming.

    AD's have power. Halls was apparently a nasty prick not averse to using his power, so don't tell me he couldn't have broken the Covid rules and done this. But he didn't, apparently. If she was off-limits to the guns, that's not her fault.

    AND the AD was supposed to check the gun before handing it to Baldwin.

    So there are two crucial steps where the AD fucked up.

    Yesterday Jack pretended to be all patient and rational because it was in opposition to something I wrote. So, paraphrasing him, this will all be sorted out eventually. But going from what we know now, David Hall is in deep shit, Alec Baldwin in deeper shit. But not Hannah Gutierrez Reed.

    The worst the armorer can be accused of is not protesting the stupid rules. Maybe her father would have said, "I'm not letting those weapons on to the set until I check them AGAIN, before they go to the AD, and then Mr. AD, you check them. No gun under my supervision goes onto a set after lying around for an hour." That, IMO, is fair. But as the rules stand, this is David Hall's fuck up.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling, @Catdog

    , @Etruscan Film Star
    @Jack D


    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set.
     
    It's the catering company that is guilty. Providing such a poor lunch that crew members retaliated by shooting the dessert.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    , @foxotcw
    @Jack D

    In support of your hypothesis, the Colt single-action revolver involved is trickier to load and unload than most modern handguns. You have to pull the hammer to half-cock, open the loading gate, and eject each cartridge one-at-a-time. There is no way you can just "check the chamber." Each chamber has to be rotated into view and checked individually. You better be counting that you checked every one of them, too.
    It would be easy for a careless shooter to load six rounds, shoot five, eject five, and forget the live round in the last chamber.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted

    , @anonymouseperson
    @Jack D

    I think you may be very very close to the truth here. It makes sense what you say. I once got talking to a bunch of guys from a film crew. They said much of the time you are just standing around waiting. It can be very boring for long periods of time. Idle hands are the devils' workshop.

  45. @Altai
    And yet how do you know it wasn't just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?

    https://twitter.com/Villavelius/status/1451499563903242242

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @Almost Missouri, @Joe S.Walker, @Jack Armstrong, @Charlotte, @Wade Hampton, @Reg Cæsar, @Buffalo Joe, @EdwardM

    Somebody’s been watching too many Dick Wolf TV shows.

    • Replies: @Ben tillman
    @Joe S.Walker

    Surely Altai was joking.

  46. @Rob
    You would think that with green screen tech, they could do prop guns in a way that they could not be loaded with real bullets.

    They spend umpteen million dollars on movies, would it be so hard to make a green prop gun with a grid pattern that could be automatically “turned into” a realistic gun in post-production? Once they have the program done once, they could use it on every movie gun.

    Blanks have a “wad” at the end, right? Something that takes the place of the actual metal bullet at the end of the cartridge. They should get rid of that, even if, for some reason, green guns are not realistic.

    For automatics (i think that is the right term — guns with clips) there is no reason a real bullet should even fit in the gun. Make the space in the clip short enough that a cartridge with a bullet at the tip does not fit.

    The same thing would apply to rifley guns and shotgunny guns.

    For spinny-wheel guns, have shorter cartridges too. The spinny thing’s cylindrical holes should have a constriction in the middle with normal-gun openings at either end, so it still looks realistic.

    Why do they even have to work like real guns? Have multiple powder charges in the barrel, so that there’s not even a place for the bullets to go.

    For all types of prop guns, make the barrel with a constriction in the middle, so a real bullet won’t fire. I guess that’s not really better, because a gun that explodes in the actor’s hand is not really better.

    Make prop “bullets” fire differently than real bullets. Real guns have a hammer that smacks into a primer charge, which then causes the “gunpowder” to react right? Well, have prop blanks fire using an electric charge to set off a different kind of primer deeper in the cartridge that won’t fire when a hammer hits it. You don’t much want a real gun to be battery-powered. What if you need to protect yourself, but the battery is dead? With a prop gun that is not a problem. Just yell “cut” and get another prop gun from the prop gun guy, and then yell at him for not keeping his guns charged. What a jackass, right?

    With simple changes, alone or in combination, there would be no way a prop gun could ever have a bullet in it. If the character needs to put a bullet in the gun, and then shoot, would having to have a cut really ruin the auteur’s vision? They do cuts in violent scenes all the time to make fake violence look somewhat realistic.

    In principle, that’s kind of how other weapons work in tv and movies, right? Like, they have a rubber machete, so actors are not hacking at each other with real weapons, right? If they need to use a real machete to hack through the underbrush, they just switch out real for fake machetes, right? Do the same with guns. If they need to shoot real bullets at something, use a real gun. If they need to shoot people, use the in-bullet-able prop gun.

    Come on prop guys and special effects dudes. I’m a mentally ill shut-in. If I can figure this shit out, then you can too. Prop makers, you could sell special effects guns and electric bullets for a lot more than regular guns and blanks. Directors and studios would pay higher prices without too much grumbling because they could pay lower insurance premiums.

    Replies: @El Dato, @bomag, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Achmed E. Newman, @Achmed E. Newman, @Chris Mallory, @Sick 'n Tired

    I’ll take your word on the movie production end of this, Rob (and, again, I don’t care too much – see above*) Re: the guns, I have some corrections. Clips don’t go in guns at all. They can be used to quickly load magazines, which go in handguns other than single-shotters or revolvers and some semi-auto rifles**. I would guess all FULL automatics use magazines, but I’ll probably be corrected – Joe Stalin, what say you?

    .

    * Why am I on this thread then? Good question! I’m eating breakfast.

    ** The .22 Marlins, for example, hold 18 shots, but there is no magazine. They are held in a tube under the barrel.

    • Disagree: Catdog
    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Some guns do take clips that are inserted into the weapon, the M1 Garand is the most famous example, which uses an en bloc clip.

    Some weapons use "stripper clips" to load the rounds into the internal magazine. WW1 and WW2 bolt action rifles, the late 1940's SKS, the Mauser C96 pistol.

    The underbarrel tube on some firearms is called a magazine tube or a tubular magazine.

    , @That Would Be Telling
    @Achmed E. Newman

    A nit on top of your nit. Some older gun semi-auto gun designs, plus the better military bolt actions with box magazines have integral magazines, and a clip is conventionally used to put rounds directly into that from the top; in the case of the bolt actions, closing the bolt also removes the clip if you didn't. See the 1896 Mauser C96 handgun called a "broomhandle" for its un-ergonomic grip, I remember Clint Eastwood using one of those in full auto mode in a Western. Yes, these are late 19th Century concepts, see Mauser rifles, you can argue the 1898 model perfected the concept of the infantry bolt action.

    The other gun somewhat like this you might see in WWII and Korean War movies is the M1 Garand rifle which has an eight round "en bloc" clip, the combination of clip and rounds are inserted into the magazine from the top. The clip is ejected along with the last round, one way of telling the operator to put another clip into the magazine.

    A very good concept that was not copied because of its lack of flexibility and small size compared to 20-25 round detachable box magazines used by subsequent battle rifles, but one I would choose if I had to live in a place that had a ten round magazine limit or that I feared would sooner or later. Probably no accident the New York SAFE law had a seven round maximum, but that was struck down as impractical by the courts in a rare "this is silly" decision.

    , @Diversity Heretic
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Clips do go in guns; they hold the cartridges and then are ejected or fall out when the last shot is fired. The device you describe is a charger, which holds the ammunition but which is not inserted into the gun. A magazine is different in that it contains its own spring. The Marlin .22 uses a tubular magazine. Some handguns were clip fed, but they are not common. The M14 rifle uses a box magazine, but the shooter could also use a 5-round charger to insert cartridges into the magazine when the bolt was back. Clip and magazine are often used interchangeably, but there is a difference.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    , @Veteran Aryan
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Clips don’t go in guns at all.
     
    Here's a little Marine Corps meme for you: "Guns" are artillery pieces, i.e. 'The Guns Of Navarone'. During USMC boot camp I observed several different unfortunate fellows who made the mistake of using the term "gun." They were then required to stand on top of their footlocker, pull down their pants, and yell "This is my rifle, this is my gun; this is for fighting, this is for fun."

    Assume the position.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @El Dato, @Catdog

  47. @Rob
    You would think that with green screen tech, they could do prop guns in a way that they could not be loaded with real bullets.

    They spend umpteen million dollars on movies, would it be so hard to make a green prop gun with a grid pattern that could be automatically “turned into” a realistic gun in post-production? Once they have the program done once, they could use it on every movie gun.

    Blanks have a “wad” at the end, right? Something that takes the place of the actual metal bullet at the end of the cartridge. They should get rid of that, even if, for some reason, green guns are not realistic.

    For automatics (i think that is the right term — guns with clips) there is no reason a real bullet should even fit in the gun. Make the space in the clip short enough that a cartridge with a bullet at the tip does not fit.

    The same thing would apply to rifley guns and shotgunny guns.

    For spinny-wheel guns, have shorter cartridges too. The spinny thing’s cylindrical holes should have a constriction in the middle with normal-gun openings at either end, so it still looks realistic.

    Why do they even have to work like real guns? Have multiple powder charges in the barrel, so that there’s not even a place for the bullets to go.

    For all types of prop guns, make the barrel with a constriction in the middle, so a real bullet won’t fire. I guess that’s not really better, because a gun that explodes in the actor’s hand is not really better.

    Make prop “bullets” fire differently than real bullets. Real guns have a hammer that smacks into a primer charge, which then causes the “gunpowder” to react right? Well, have prop blanks fire using an electric charge to set off a different kind of primer deeper in the cartridge that won’t fire when a hammer hits it. You don’t much want a real gun to be battery-powered. What if you need to protect yourself, but the battery is dead? With a prop gun that is not a problem. Just yell “cut” and get another prop gun from the prop gun guy, and then yell at him for not keeping his guns charged. What a jackass, right?

    With simple changes, alone or in combination, there would be no way a prop gun could ever have a bullet in it. If the character needs to put a bullet in the gun, and then shoot, would having to have a cut really ruin the auteur’s vision? They do cuts in violent scenes all the time to make fake violence look somewhat realistic.

    In principle, that’s kind of how other weapons work in tv and movies, right? Like, they have a rubber machete, so actors are not hacking at each other with real weapons, right? If they need to use a real machete to hack through the underbrush, they just switch out real for fake machetes, right? Do the same with guns. If they need to shoot real bullets at something, use a real gun. If they need to shoot people, use the in-bullet-able prop gun.

    Come on prop guys and special effects dudes. I’m a mentally ill shut-in. If I can figure this shit out, then you can too. Prop makers, you could sell special effects guns and electric bullets for a lot more than regular guns and blanks. Directors and studios would pay higher prices without too much grumbling because they could pay lower insurance premiums.

    Replies: @El Dato, @bomag, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Achmed E. Newman, @Achmed E. Newman, @Chris Mallory, @Sick 'n Tired

    BTW, how are you mentally ill, Rob? You read as much more lucid and sane than 90% of the people in government, education, big business, … etc., etc… etc…..

    • Replies: @Polistra
    @Achmed E. Newman

    More like 99٪ imho. But mental illness takes so many forms. Depression, for instance is correlated with intelligence for some reason. Turns out ignorance really is bliss.

    Meanwhile just imagine the self-reflection going on with Mr. Baldwin

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/baseball/#comment-4971238

    Just kidding...

  48. @Jack D
    @Altai

    1. Apparently the guns were left outside on a cart in order to minimize the number of people going into the location as a result of Covid protocols.

    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set. Movie sets can be incredibly boring places when nothing is happening for you. This is the kind of fun thing that Spider Girl might allow. Her dad - NFW are you going to do that on my set. If you touch my guns I'll punch you out and then have you fired.

    This is my guess:

    1. Before lunch, Spider Girl checks the guns, tells AD they are cold, leaves them on cart. Retires to her trailer to text on her phone/do other fun activities. Her job is done. She'll come by at the end of the day to retrieve the guns. She is not allowed inside the building - the great star Baldwin might catch Covid if such icky people were allowed near him. The shoot is set up to minimize the # of icky people that interact with Baldwin "due to Covid" but it suits him just fine. Nor is she going to stand in the open desert and watch those guns while they sit on a cart for hours. You could get heatstroke/ go nuts.

    2. During lunch, someone picks up gun, loads it with live ammo, does a bit of target shooting and returns it to the cart, but they leave 1 cartridge in the cylinder. They have done this before (not the leaving the cartridge part but the plinking) and it was fine. The gun wasn't being used for filming during lunchtime, so what's the harm? Spider Girl might or might not have been aware that it was going on. Strange that the weapons were dirtier than they should have been, but maybe she wasn't really into cleaning weapons anyway.

    3. AD returns from lunch with Baldwin, picks up gun from cart and announces that it is cold.

    4. Tragedy ensues.

    The weapons were supposed to be in the armorer's custody and control. That's what her job description is - to have custody of the weapons at all times when they are not being used on the set. She didn't do her job. She is the main person at fault.

    Secondarily, Covid foolishness - Covid is so dangerous that leaving guns lying around in the open is the safer alternative. At least no one caught Covid from Spider Girl.

    Thirdly the asshole that borrowed the gun and returned it loaded. This person deserves jailtime for sure.

    Replies: @fish, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer, @Anonymous, @Stonewall Jackson, @Paperback Writer, @Etruscan Film Star, @foxotcw, @anonymouseperson

    A remarkably plausible sequence of events.

  49. anon[416] • Disclaimer says:

    I think we might find that ‘Spider Girl’ was one of the striking workers.

    The interesting thing to me is that someone on the set (if not most) knew the cause instantly, but that we [the public] still doesn’t know, exactly.

    OK, sure it was an ‘accident’. But it is hard to believe it wasn’t inexcusable.

  50. Every now and then someone has to be sacrificed on the altar of diversity. Sorry lady. It was your turn.

  51. @Rob
    You would think that with green screen tech, they could do prop guns in a way that they could not be loaded with real bullets.

    They spend umpteen million dollars on movies, would it be so hard to make a green prop gun with a grid pattern that could be automatically “turned into” a realistic gun in post-production? Once they have the program done once, they could use it on every movie gun.

    Blanks have a “wad” at the end, right? Something that takes the place of the actual metal bullet at the end of the cartridge. They should get rid of that, even if, for some reason, green guns are not realistic.

    For automatics (i think that is the right term — guns with clips) there is no reason a real bullet should even fit in the gun. Make the space in the clip short enough that a cartridge with a bullet at the tip does not fit.

    The same thing would apply to rifley guns and shotgunny guns.

    For spinny-wheel guns, have shorter cartridges too. The spinny thing’s cylindrical holes should have a constriction in the middle with normal-gun openings at either end, so it still looks realistic.

    Why do they even have to work like real guns? Have multiple powder charges in the barrel, so that there’s not even a place for the bullets to go.

    For all types of prop guns, make the barrel with a constriction in the middle, so a real bullet won’t fire. I guess that’s not really better, because a gun that explodes in the actor’s hand is not really better.

    Make prop “bullets” fire differently than real bullets. Real guns have a hammer that smacks into a primer charge, which then causes the “gunpowder” to react right? Well, have prop blanks fire using an electric charge to set off a different kind of primer deeper in the cartridge that won’t fire when a hammer hits it. You don’t much want a real gun to be battery-powered. What if you need to protect yourself, but the battery is dead? With a prop gun that is not a problem. Just yell “cut” and get another prop gun from the prop gun guy, and then yell at him for not keeping his guns charged. What a jackass, right?

    With simple changes, alone or in combination, there would be no way a prop gun could ever have a bullet in it. If the character needs to put a bullet in the gun, and then shoot, would having to have a cut really ruin the auteur’s vision? They do cuts in violent scenes all the time to make fake violence look somewhat realistic.

    In principle, that’s kind of how other weapons work in tv and movies, right? Like, they have a rubber machete, so actors are not hacking at each other with real weapons, right? If they need to use a real machete to hack through the underbrush, they just switch out real for fake machetes, right? Do the same with guns. If they need to shoot real bullets at something, use a real gun. If they need to shoot people, use the in-bullet-able prop gun.

    Come on prop guys and special effects dudes. I’m a mentally ill shut-in. If I can figure this shit out, then you can too. Prop makers, you could sell special effects guns and electric bullets for a lot more than regular guns and blanks. Directors and studios would pay higher prices without too much grumbling because they could pay lower insurance premiums.

    Replies: @El Dato, @bomag, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Achmed E. Newman, @Achmed E. Newman, @Chris Mallory, @Sick 'n Tired

    Because CGI weapon firing looks awful.

  52. @Jack D
    @Altai

    1. Apparently the guns were left outside on a cart in order to minimize the number of people going into the location as a result of Covid protocols.

    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set. Movie sets can be incredibly boring places when nothing is happening for you. This is the kind of fun thing that Spider Girl might allow. Her dad - NFW are you going to do that on my set. If you touch my guns I'll punch you out and then have you fired.

    This is my guess:

    1. Before lunch, Spider Girl checks the guns, tells AD they are cold, leaves them on cart. Retires to her trailer to text on her phone/do other fun activities. Her job is done. She'll come by at the end of the day to retrieve the guns. She is not allowed inside the building - the great star Baldwin might catch Covid if such icky people were allowed near him. The shoot is set up to minimize the # of icky people that interact with Baldwin "due to Covid" but it suits him just fine. Nor is she going to stand in the open desert and watch those guns while they sit on a cart for hours. You could get heatstroke/ go nuts.

    2. During lunch, someone picks up gun, loads it with live ammo, does a bit of target shooting and returns it to the cart, but they leave 1 cartridge in the cylinder. They have done this before (not the leaving the cartridge part but the plinking) and it was fine. The gun wasn't being used for filming during lunchtime, so what's the harm? Spider Girl might or might not have been aware that it was going on. Strange that the weapons were dirtier than they should have been, but maybe she wasn't really into cleaning weapons anyway.

    3. AD returns from lunch with Baldwin, picks up gun from cart and announces that it is cold.

    4. Tragedy ensues.

    The weapons were supposed to be in the armorer's custody and control. That's what her job description is - to have custody of the weapons at all times when they are not being used on the set. She didn't do her job. She is the main person at fault.

    Secondarily, Covid foolishness - Covid is so dangerous that leaving guns lying around in the open is the safer alternative. At least no one caught Covid from Spider Girl.

    Thirdly the asshole that borrowed the gun and returned it loaded. This person deserves jailtime for sure.

    Replies: @fish, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer, @Anonymous, @Stonewall Jackson, @Paperback Writer, @Etruscan Film Star, @foxotcw, @anonymouseperson

    This sounds very plausible.

    It sounds like the armorer was not qualified, did not understand what her job entailed, and was unaware of the potential risks of allowing recreational use of props.

    The whole scenario should be a real wake up call for the movie-making industry.

    This story would make a great plot for a movie.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Jonathan Mason


    It sounds like the armorer was not qualified, did not understand what her job entailed, and was unaware of the potential risks of allowing recreational use of props.
     
    According to Altai, she was apparently put in that position after the qualified union guy, along with others, walked off the set due to poor working conditions and pay. I’m sure that guy must be feeling pretty awful if this story is correct. Along with the person(s) who instigated the walkout.
  53. Here is a TikTok video posted by the set armorer Hannah Gutierrez-rReed. As iSteve commenter Nimrod said regarding the picture of Admiral Rachel Levine, “I would not be able to take that person seriously in any professional setting.”

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ARmastrangelo/status/1452022179621638144?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @Harry Baldwin

    Further down that thread - is this a 'joke' or did she really post that?

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCamV0HWUAM1gwc.jpg

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @Anonymous

    , @Rob McX
    @Harry Baldwin

    Talking about TikTok sluttery, it's hard to beat this. That's her dad in his coffin behind her. Her hashtags are #dadless #veteran #ptsd #funeral #neverforgotten.

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/10/25/15/49613479-10128429-OOTD_An_American_woman_posed_for_photos_at_her_father_s_funeral_-a-5_1635171026079.jpg

    Replies: @Not Raul, @Buzz Mohawk, @TWS, @Emil Nikola Richard

  54. Hey Steve:
    Sorry to bust in with an OT link like this, but in the past, you’ve made a few tentative musings about the possibility of WW Handedness. With WWG and WWT ending in overwhelming routs, and WWH closing in on the Fuhrerbunker, we may finally be seeing the opening skirmishes of the next great iSteve content generator.
    https://www.thecollegefix.com/activist-lectures-u-north-carolina-students-about-right-handed-privilege/
    We now return to our regular scheduled blogging.

  55. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rob

    I'll take your word on the movie production end of this, Rob (and, again, I don't care too much - see above*) Re: the guns, I have some corrections. Clips don't go in guns at all. They can be used to quickly load magazines, which go in handguns other than single-shotters or revolvers and some semi-auto rifles**. I would guess all FULL automatics use magazines, but I'll probably be corrected - Joe Stalin, what say you?

    .

    * Why am I on this thread then? Good question! I'm eating breakfast.

    ** The .22 Marlins, for example, hold 18 shots, but there is no magazine. They are held in a tube under the barrel.

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @That Would Be Telling, @Diversity Heretic, @Veteran Aryan

    Some guns do take clips that are inserted into the weapon, the M1 Garand is the most famous example, which uses an en bloc clip.

    Some weapons use “stripper clips” to load the rounds into the internal magazine. WW1 and WW2 bolt action rifles, the late 1940’s SKS, the Mauser C96 pistol.

    The underbarrel tube on some firearms is called a magazine tube or a tubular magazine.

    • Agree: TWS
  56. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Altai


    Baldwin then proceeds to somehow shoot at the DP and director while practicing a gun trick ...
     
    Perhaps all three were practicing and lining up a head-on shot of Baldwin's character firing right at the camera. Easy to imagine, at least, and certainly not the first time such a thing has been filmed.


    https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/1/shooting-cowboy-timothy-oleary.jpg


    It seems pretty certain the fault lies with the "armorer" and her belly button.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling

    Look more closely at the gun’s barrel, you can see the underside of it but not the top side. I think that guy or whomever coached him just before the photo knows enough gun safety to have it angled up so it’s unlikely to hit the photographer. I’m not certain because the photo does not have him using the sights, that would likely cover too much of his face for the desired photo.

    We can’t know about the handling of the gun before or after, but from what we can tell this is not a gross violation of Rule 2 of gun safety although that’s by a hair, and I wouldn’t do it myself without personally emptying the gun, double checking that, abd keeping my trigger finger in the trigger guard but touching the forward part of it, not the trigger. But see below, we can assume most of the people on the set weren’t taught gun safety starting when they were three (by example, that’s when my father would start taking me and my siblings out hunting with him).

    The discussion so far here is excellent, I give particular thanks to ic1000 for bringing us up to date on the facts as they are believed to be known, they allow us to figure out ways this could have happened as Jack D has done (except for the gun being visibly dirty after plinking, smokeless power is pretty clean stuff). However Altai’s point, and our general points about people downstream of the armorer double checking the latter’s work are iffy because the difference between a regular and blank round is only apparent at the forward end of it.

    So depending on the action type, checking safety for a semi-auto would require removing the magazine and then the round in the chamber, for revolvers based on lighting and such maybe looking at the front of the cylinder, spinning it if single action, or removing all the rounds. And then, not being a specialist armorer, restoring the gun and its blank ammo back to the condition it was in so the film shooting will go right, you don’t want to ruin a take because the gun doesn’t fire. And all this keeping the barrel pointed in a safe direction, all blanks are deadly at contact range, those with wadding somewhat further, and I assume wadding plus light springs are used make semi-autos cycle new rounds into the chamber.

    So it would make sense for the guns to be completely under the control of the armorer, directly in his physical possession, or locked away with a key only he has, and everyone downstream assuming the armorer is doing his job properly. Which obviously wasn’t happening if as said the armorer is allowing the guns to used for plinking, mixing of blank and real ammo should never be allowed except for the rare situations where you want to film that that. In which case the armorer would directly hand the gun to the actor, who he’d previously vetted for being sufficiently experienced and responsible in using guns for real.

    • Thanks: Buzz Mohawk
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @That Would Be Telling

    There is no reason that shot cannot be made with a properly prepared movie gun -- straight-on -- with a long enough lens, from a sufficient distance to prevent the cinematographer from getting killed.

    If you force the actor to angle his barrel up and away (such that it looks like he is shooting over the viewer's left ear) then you destroy the suspension of disbelief, upon which all film depends.

    Replies: @Mr Mox

    , @Jack D
    @That Would Be Telling


    because the difference between a regular and blank round is only apparent at the forward end of it.
     
    This was a rehearsal. The gun was not supposed to be loaded with ANYTHING. It was supposed to be "cold".

    If you are shooting blanks at the camera(man) you still have to take precautions - You can use a right angle prism on the lens so that the cameraman is off to the side. You can install a plexiglass shield. At close range even blanks can be dangerous as you point out. But they weren't taking any of those precautions (the plexiglass would not have stopped a bullet anyway) because they were just rehearsing and the gun was supposed to be "cold".

    Why they needed a real weapon during a rehearsal is another question - ideally you use the least lethal prop that is suitable. For a rehearsal a non-functional replica would have been just as good.
    , @Ben Kurtz
    @That Would Be Telling

    You can also snap a photo using a cable shutter release so the photographer does not stand directly behind the camera.

    Line up the model and the photo with the real gun pointed straight up or down; use a rubber prop gun to compose and set up the shot in advance if needed; photographer steps away from camera; model aims real gun at camera; snap photo from remote position using cable; safe the gun and check your work.

    , @Polistra
    @That Would Be Telling


    The discussion so far here is excellent
     
    Have to agree. Entertaining without any real insults to the intelligence. What's not to like? But seriously, the commentariat has done itself justice today.
    , @dimples
    @That Would Be Telling

    This is America so every male individual is completely obsessed with the finer points of the gern accident involving the famous Hollywood film star. If it were 911, then nukes and no-planes will work just fine thanks. Who'd a thunk it?

  57. @ic1000
    @Almost Missouri

    At this writing, the key elements of the story are already clear.

    * Baldwin is producer as well as marquee name, so money/budget pressures.
    * Ignorance of or contempt for basic flyover-country gun safety concepts.
    * Key roles filled by people unqualified by experience or temperament (eg Spidey Girl).
    * No culture of workplace safety (eg off-hours use of "prop" gun for target practice, multiple safety complaints ignored by management).

    So it's kind of boring. 1+2+3+4 = Tragedy.

    On a meta level, the story seems to still be "developing". The Establishment hasn't yet decided whether to protect one of its own (Jussie Smollet) or toss him under the bus (Harvey Weinstein).

    In that regard, reporter Miguel Almaguer's segment for this morning's Today show was interesting. For those who don't watch NBC News, Almaguer is at the top of his profession for a number of reasons:

    * He's handsome, with good on-camera presence.
    * He has a Hispanx name.
    * He's cultivated an authoritative style for delivering voice-overs that signals, "this is very important, pay attention but don't panic (yet)."

    Almaguer kept viewers in the dark about relevant elements that came out over the weekend.

    * Armoror Spidey Girl is the daughter of an established Hollywood heavyweight, thus, Nepotism?
    * Even at this early stage in her career, Spidey has significant screwups under her belt.
    * Per above, crew borrowing "prop" gun for plinking cans in the desert.

    Pravda style:

    * Without mentioning that multiple safety concerns had been forcefully expressed by the crew, Almaguer showed the production company's denial that any official complaint had been lodged.
    * Almaguer related that Tragedy happened when Baldwin pointed the "prop" pistol at the camera and fired. (Remote controls for modern digital cameras are not yet a Thing.)

    Baldwin hasn't yet promised to donate even more money to Hillary's campaign as he redoubles his efforts to keep aspiring starlets away from the casting couch promote workplace safety on Hollywood film sets.

    What's the over/under on the Establishment throwing Baldwin to the wolves?

    Replies: @Technite78, @Paperback Writer

    On that bus issue, does the fact that the LA Times has been the best on the story factor into the equation?

    Their latest,

    https://web.archive.org/web/20211025101743/https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-24/alec-baldwin-prop-gun-shooting-halyna-hutchins-search-warrant

    (Only defense Baldwin has, an actor, is that he wasn’t pointing the gun at Hutchins, he was pointing the gun at the camera. As a producer, he’s in deep shit.)

    • Thanks: ic1000
    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    @Paperback Writer


    (Only defense Baldwin has, an actor, is that he wasn’t pointing the gun at Hutchins, he was pointing the gun at the camera. As a producer, he’s in deep shit.)
     
    As a "responsible gun owner" it's worse than that based on the reporting, for he wasn't intending to fire his gun, was just using it as a prop and pointer in rehearsal or setting up for that for a scene that required repositioning due to an encroaching shadow. That is, anti-gunner that he is, he failed basic gun safety, the discharge was in every way negligent.

    But as you note he's also one of the film's producers, and I'll add was on the set (is that normal for producers who aren't also actors?). After the first reported live round discharge by a stuntman who thought he had a gun loaded with blanks, there should have been a stand down of the whole affair while the armorer figured out what happened and took steps to make sure it never would happen again.

    Including telling everyone the guns nominally under her control were not toys to be played with, bring your own if you want to plink in downtime. And doing the same to the replacement crew. And as noted above, the guns in the "cart" should have been locked down with a key only she had unless she was personally overseeing their use. That negligent discharges are reported to have happened twice before the third occurrence resulted in two people being shot is on every executive involved starting with Baldwin as a producer. I suspect this has been realized by Baldwin or those advising him, based on the careful wording of the statement that he made.

    So I agree the question now assuming the reported facts are correct is will be be given a pass or thrown under the bus by our betters?

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Chris Mallory, @Paperback Writer, @ic1000

  58. @Jack D
    @Altai

    1. Apparently the guns were left outside on a cart in order to minimize the number of people going into the location as a result of Covid protocols.

    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set. Movie sets can be incredibly boring places when nothing is happening for you. This is the kind of fun thing that Spider Girl might allow. Her dad - NFW are you going to do that on my set. If you touch my guns I'll punch you out and then have you fired.

    This is my guess:

    1. Before lunch, Spider Girl checks the guns, tells AD they are cold, leaves them on cart. Retires to her trailer to text on her phone/do other fun activities. Her job is done. She'll come by at the end of the day to retrieve the guns. She is not allowed inside the building - the great star Baldwin might catch Covid if such icky people were allowed near him. The shoot is set up to minimize the # of icky people that interact with Baldwin "due to Covid" but it suits him just fine. Nor is she going to stand in the open desert and watch those guns while they sit on a cart for hours. You could get heatstroke/ go nuts.

    2. During lunch, someone picks up gun, loads it with live ammo, does a bit of target shooting and returns it to the cart, but they leave 1 cartridge in the cylinder. They have done this before (not the leaving the cartridge part but the plinking) and it was fine. The gun wasn't being used for filming during lunchtime, so what's the harm? Spider Girl might or might not have been aware that it was going on. Strange that the weapons were dirtier than they should have been, but maybe she wasn't really into cleaning weapons anyway.

    3. AD returns from lunch with Baldwin, picks up gun from cart and announces that it is cold.

    4. Tragedy ensues.

    The weapons were supposed to be in the armorer's custody and control. That's what her job description is - to have custody of the weapons at all times when they are not being used on the set. She didn't do her job. She is the main person at fault.

    Secondarily, Covid foolishness - Covid is so dangerous that leaving guns lying around in the open is the safer alternative. At least no one caught Covid from Spider Girl.

    Thirdly the asshole that borrowed the gun and returned it loaded. This person deserves jailtime for sure.

    Replies: @fish, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer, @Anonymous, @Stonewall Jackson, @Paperback Writer, @Etruscan Film Star, @foxotcw, @anonymouseperson

    But pink-haired sluts aren’t always incompetent. You said so yourself.

  59. Anonymous[141] • Disclaimer says:

    1. Best practice is for the actor to check the weapon clear as a second check. Often it is demonstrated to him and he is required to view/acknowledge. See bottom of this article with comments from two name actors to that effect:

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alec-baldwin-shooting-electrician-blames-producers-rust-film/

    “This situation is not about Dave Halls. … It’s in no way one person’s fault,” she said. “It’s a bigger conversation about safety on set and what we are trying to achieve with that culture.”

    Hollywood professionals say they’re baffled by the circumstances and production crews have quickly stepped up safety measures.

    Jeffrey Wright, who has worked on projects including the James Bond franchise and the upcoming movie “The Batman,” was acting with a weapon on the set of “Westworld” when news broke of the shooting Thursday at a New Mexico ranch. “We were all pretty shocked. And it informed what we did from that moment on,” he said in an interview Sunday at the Newport Beach Film Festival.

    “I don’t recall ever being handed a weapon that was not cleared in front of me – meaning chamber open, barrel shown to me, light flashed inside the barrel to make sure that it’s cleared,” Wright said. “Clearly, that was a mismanaged set.”

    Actor Ray Liotta agreed with Wright that the checks on firearms are usually extensive.

    “They always – that I know of – they check it so you can see,” Liotta said. “They give it to the person you’re pointing the gun at, they do it to the producer, they show whoever is there that it doesn’t work.”

    2. Note the comment about not just being a single person. Serious safety systems are designed so that multiple people have to screw up for a fault. That’s why rig for dive is checked by two people on a submarine. The producer, director, actor, armorer (maybe even the DP, who died) all were participating on a set that had a poor safety culture (e.g. the previous misfires). That ended up biting them in the ass. If you go to being “single point safe”, when that point fails the system fails overall.

    3. There is another article describing how safe Baldwin was (e.g. sending a child away when a shooting scene occurred). But he clearly wasn’t so safety conscious as to examine the weapon or require someone to open it and show him it clear.

    4. There are various safety precautions taken when a shot is done towards camera. Tricked angles, shields. However these do not seem to have been done. Perhaps they felt less need given they were rehearsing, but clearly they should have done so.

    5. Not clear to me if the rehearsal required a shot at camera or if Baldwin ad libbed. Rehearsals can be more loose in terms of working out framing and trying things. But that is not an excuse to drop safety. But the atmosphere may have affected it.

    6 Not clear to me how drawing the weapon made it fire. Probably only Baldwin can tell us if he pulled the trigger or it happened from the rapid draw. However, revolvers are not really prone to this effect, some force usually required. Also, I guess we need the specifics of the weapon. And perhaps if it was cocked, half cocked (doubtful). I guess it’s possible that the draw somehow snagged something and created the shooting. But I find it an extremely unlikely set of coincidences (round in the gun AND inadvertent action of the weapon). Most likely is that Baldwin pulled the trigger.

    7. There appears to have been overall lack of safety discipline. This sort of thing ends up biting you in the ass. It’s one of the reasons why nuclear incidents rip ass for failure to do repeatbacks, have the procedure out even when that was not a proximate cause of the incident. It’s likely to cause problems in the future and shows an overall poor safety culture. It’s basically wrong on its own. I will bet some serious Bayesian odds that a detailed incident investigation would show various aspects of poor safety and control on that set.

    • Replies: @Polistra
    @Anonymous


    There appears to have been overall lack of safety discipline. This sort of thing ends up biting you in the ass. It’s one of the reasons why nuclear incidents rip ass for failure to do repeatbacks...
     
    Also reminds me of medical errors, which are rife. There are procedures in place, everyone knows them (more or less) and everyone practices them, more or less. But after a few hundred times, and with sleep-deprived staff...well, people are people and prone to short cuts or just plain carelessness.

    Of course, some 'people are people' more than others, if you catch my drift, and the new regime is insistent that any recourse to standards and responsibilities is ipso facto white supremacy. There's more of this sort of thing in our future. Much more. Gonna be fun.

  60. Both Fox and LA Times have stories based on the local sheriff’s office “search warrant.” But I can’t find the search warrant itself, and I’m not spending 6 hours combing 4chan or Kiwi farms to find it.

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-accidental-shooting-details-halyna-hutchins-death

  61. There have been some rumors that the weapon was a cap and ball black powder revolver. If so, that leads to a number of “Aw crap” options in handling the weapon.

    1. CB revolvers typically have the cylinder mouths greased after loading to prevent chain fires. Once the grease is applied it is basically impossible to check if a lead projectile is loaded by visual inspection.
    2. Did the armorer use the correct type and charge of powder. Should she have used a reduced charge? Finer granulations of powders burn faster and require a reduction in the powder load from more coarse grades.
    3. Were the chambers loaded normally, but had the percussion caps left off. Easy to see if they were on or off, and usually the firearm would be safe without the caps. BUT in rare cases primer compound from a percussion cap that was loaded, not fired and unloaded can still cause the powder charge to go off if the hammer is dropped. It is rare, but it can happen.
    4. Did the armorer load wax bullets or larger fiber wads over a full charge thinking they were safer than lead bullets? A wax bullet over a full charge will penetrate at least 1/2″ of MDF or a paint can. The Hexum guy was killed by a paper wad, but that was at contact range.

    This is all just speculation, until we have more facts released it is hard to say what happened.

    • Thanks: That Would Be Telling
    • Replies: @Rob McX
    @Chris Mallory


    CB revolvers typically have the cylinder mouths greased after loading to prevent chain fires. Once the grease is applied it is basically impossible to check if a lead projectile is loaded by visual inspection.
     
    In real life they're greased. But in movies they're probably not (I can't recall any, so I can't say for sure). Viewers expect to see bullets in the chambers, and movie makers will give them what they want. So even if the caps are off, there's a danger of chain fire.

    Using lead bullets in front loaded guns means you have live rounds, because the armourer would usually have to put in enough powder to shoot them out again.

    , @Jack D
    @Chris Mallory

    I doubt it was a cap and ball revolver. It was most likely a single action Colt which would have been period authentic to the movie they were making.

    Such a gun takes cartridges. Unlike a modern double action revolver, the cylinder does not tilt out for loading/inspection. Rather it remains in place. There is a loading gate which has to be folded down and this reveals the back of the cylinder one chamber at a time. When you half cock the weapon, the cylinder is free to spin. You manually spin the cylinder and check to see that all 6 chambers are empty. This takes longer to describe than it does to do and you could be taught how to do this safely in a one minute lesson.

    If the armorer did not reinspect the weapons after they had been left out of her control, then the AD should have reinspected them. SOMEONE should have reinspected them. Maybe it didn't occur to them how it was possible for an unloaded gun to magically become loaded but as we can see, it can - this is why custody/inspection is necessary.

    Baldwin was probably not legally obligated (in his actor's role) to personally inspect the gun but he had every right to do so. That's what I would have done. If I'm being asked to point a gun in another human being's face, I'm not taking someone else's word for the fact that it's not loaded when I could verify that for myself in 30 seconds. Maybe it's a low budget movie and the clock is running, but how much is a human being's life worth, even if they are just some crew member and not a star?

    There was no reason for the gun to be loaded, even with blanks, because it was a rehearsal.

    Replies: @Chris Mallory

  62. Anonymous[141] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D
    @Altai

    1. Apparently the guns were left outside on a cart in order to minimize the number of people going into the location as a result of Covid protocols.

    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set. Movie sets can be incredibly boring places when nothing is happening for you. This is the kind of fun thing that Spider Girl might allow. Her dad - NFW are you going to do that on my set. If you touch my guns I'll punch you out and then have you fired.

    This is my guess:

    1. Before lunch, Spider Girl checks the guns, tells AD they are cold, leaves them on cart. Retires to her trailer to text on her phone/do other fun activities. Her job is done. She'll come by at the end of the day to retrieve the guns. She is not allowed inside the building - the great star Baldwin might catch Covid if such icky people were allowed near him. The shoot is set up to minimize the # of icky people that interact with Baldwin "due to Covid" but it suits him just fine. Nor is she going to stand in the open desert and watch those guns while they sit on a cart for hours. You could get heatstroke/ go nuts.

    2. During lunch, someone picks up gun, loads it with live ammo, does a bit of target shooting and returns it to the cart, but they leave 1 cartridge in the cylinder. They have done this before (not the leaving the cartridge part but the plinking) and it was fine. The gun wasn't being used for filming during lunchtime, so what's the harm? Spider Girl might or might not have been aware that it was going on. Strange that the weapons were dirtier than they should have been, but maybe she wasn't really into cleaning weapons anyway.

    3. AD returns from lunch with Baldwin, picks up gun from cart and announces that it is cold.

    4. Tragedy ensues.

    The weapons were supposed to be in the armorer's custody and control. That's what her job description is - to have custody of the weapons at all times when they are not being used on the set. She didn't do her job. She is the main person at fault.

    Secondarily, Covid foolishness - Covid is so dangerous that leaving guns lying around in the open is the safer alternative. At least no one caught Covid from Spider Girl.

    Thirdly the asshole that borrowed the gun and returned it loaded. This person deserves jailtime for sure.

    Replies: @fish, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer, @Anonymous, @Stonewall Jackson, @Paperback Writer, @Etruscan Film Star, @foxotcw, @anonymouseperson

    I don’t know if Covid worries were part of the deal here, but wouldn’t surprise me. Saw a lot of silly things last year. At a big mine site and was told by safety officer that he didn’t hold the handrail on stairs because of Covid. (Holding handrail is drummed into you at a certain oval chemical company…number one danger on industrial sites is slips trips and falls…not the SAG mill, not the cyanide, not the trucks, not the explosives.)

  63. The larger context for this “armorer” mishap is that, in the US, proficient/conscientious/fastidious has unraveled into “get it basically okay.” (Yes, this has been my broken-record comment for a few years now.) Examples of failures both large and small abound, and everyone here could readily compile a list. For once a mainstream newspaper got it right when it recently wrote “lower your expectations.” But I will say, I have total confidence in my electrician, whom I will call “John Smith.”

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    @SafeNow


    The larger context for this “armorer” mishap is that, in the US, proficient/conscientious/fastidious has unraveled into “get it basically okay.”
     
    Except that's not reflected in the statistics for US gun culture.

    From 1980 to 2019, the most recent year for which there are CDC statistics we went from ~800 to 486 accidental firearms deaths per year at the same time the population increased by ~50%, the number of guns owned by it more than doubled, and there's many more gun owners and much more gun handling because they became much more useful as the nation went from 2 to 42 states with "shall issue" or better concealed carry license regimes.

    (Note my earlier reply starting with "And according to Scott Reeder" was to Paperback Writer demanding I do some research.)

    Replies: @SafeNow

  64. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rob

    I'll take your word on the movie production end of this, Rob (and, again, I don't care too much - see above*) Re: the guns, I have some corrections. Clips don't go in guns at all. They can be used to quickly load magazines, which go in handguns other than single-shotters or revolvers and some semi-auto rifles**. I would guess all FULL automatics use magazines, but I'll probably be corrected - Joe Stalin, what say you?

    .

    * Why am I on this thread then? Good question! I'm eating breakfast.

    ** The .22 Marlins, for example, hold 18 shots, but there is no magazine. They are held in a tube under the barrel.

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @That Would Be Telling, @Diversity Heretic, @Veteran Aryan

    A nit on top of your nit. Some older gun semi-auto gun designs, plus the better military bolt actions with box magazines have integral magazines, and a clip is conventionally used to put rounds directly into that from the top; in the case of the bolt actions, closing the bolt also removes the clip if you didn’t. See the 1896 Mauser C96 handgun called a “broomhandle” for its un-ergonomic grip, I remember Clint Eastwood using one of those in full auto mode in a Western. Yes, these are late 19th Century concepts, see Mauser rifles, you can argue the 1898 model perfected the concept of the infantry bolt action.

    The other gun somewhat like this you might see in WWII and Korean War movies is the M1 Garand rifle which has an eight round “en bloc” clip, the combination of clip and rounds are inserted into the magazine from the top. The clip is ejected along with the last round, one way of telling the operator to put another clip into the magazine.

    A very good concept that was not copied because of its lack of flexibility and small size compared to 20-25 round detachable box magazines used by subsequent battle rifles, but one I would choose if I had to live in a place that had a ten round magazine limit or that I feared would sooner or later. Probably no accident the New York SAFE law had a seven round maximum, but that was struck down as impractical by the courts in a rare “this is silly” decision.

    • Thanks: Achmed E. Newman
  65. Anonymous[141] • Disclaimer says:

    I had a long comment about gun safety that the Unz algorithm decided was spam (had a link to article with two actors explaining that gun should be checked clear with actor verifying it). Also, Baldwin likely pulled the trigger (what are the odds that a draw caused the revolver to fire AND it was loaded). Also, must have been a bad safety culture in general. Should not be single point safe. E.g. why wasn’t the angle cheated and a shield in place…yes, even during rehearsal, especially if a real weapon is being used.

  66. @Jack D
    @Altai

    1. Apparently the guns were left outside on a cart in order to minimize the number of people going into the location as a result of Covid protocols.

    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set. Movie sets can be incredibly boring places when nothing is happening for you. This is the kind of fun thing that Spider Girl might allow. Her dad - NFW are you going to do that on my set. If you touch my guns I'll punch you out and then have you fired.

    This is my guess:

    1. Before lunch, Spider Girl checks the guns, tells AD they are cold, leaves them on cart. Retires to her trailer to text on her phone/do other fun activities. Her job is done. She'll come by at the end of the day to retrieve the guns. She is not allowed inside the building - the great star Baldwin might catch Covid if such icky people were allowed near him. The shoot is set up to minimize the # of icky people that interact with Baldwin "due to Covid" but it suits him just fine. Nor is she going to stand in the open desert and watch those guns while they sit on a cart for hours. You could get heatstroke/ go nuts.

    2. During lunch, someone picks up gun, loads it with live ammo, does a bit of target shooting and returns it to the cart, but they leave 1 cartridge in the cylinder. They have done this before (not the leaving the cartridge part but the plinking) and it was fine. The gun wasn't being used for filming during lunchtime, so what's the harm? Spider Girl might or might not have been aware that it was going on. Strange that the weapons were dirtier than they should have been, but maybe she wasn't really into cleaning weapons anyway.

    3. AD returns from lunch with Baldwin, picks up gun from cart and announces that it is cold.

    4. Tragedy ensues.

    The weapons were supposed to be in the armorer's custody and control. That's what her job description is - to have custody of the weapons at all times when they are not being used on the set. She didn't do her job. She is the main person at fault.

    Secondarily, Covid foolishness - Covid is so dangerous that leaving guns lying around in the open is the safer alternative. At least no one caught Covid from Spider Girl.

    Thirdly the asshole that borrowed the gun and returned it loaded. This person deserves jailtime for sure.

    Replies: @fish, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer, @Anonymous, @Stonewall Jackson, @Paperback Writer, @Etruscan Film Star, @foxotcw, @anonymouseperson

    You got it. They keep saying prop gun and blanks… That was a live round. It killed one and wounded another person. That means it went through her and that means a real round. A silly little tik tok princess like that would act exactly like you said. Excellent post.

  67. anonymous[139] • Disclaimer says:

    Lefty Baldwin pretends to be a rip-snorting tough guy in movies, brandishing guns with abandon. In real life he’s a temperamental bully who’d confiscate other people’s guns. A real hypocrite, playing a gunslinger and making a buck doing so while actually knowing very little about gun handling, safety, etc. Why was it thought to be appropriate to have that nitwit as an armorer? People leaving over safety issues should have been a red flag yet those clowns continued on recklessly, an accident waiting to happen.

  68. @Altai
    @Almost Missouri

    Though she was apparently brought in to replace the union guy who walked off along with others due to apparent poor gun safety on set. (As well as the little matter of not being paid on time and broken promises on accommodation) They talk about the gun going off accidentally before this but I don't know if it was a blank misfiring or real bullets. (How do you end up with a dead DP after 2 separate accidents involving loaded guns?)

    What's interesting is the scale of the blame game, she left out a loaded gun. AD took it up and didn't do the last check he was obliged to to make sure it wasn't loaded. Never spoke to the girl in charge of the guns either and gave it to Baldwin while announcing it was a 'cold gun'. (They were miles from anywhere, where else would she be before shooting scenes?)

    Baldwin then proceeds to somehow shoot at the DP and director while practicing a gun trick despite that also being a big no in terms of pointing, let alone pulling the trigger in the direction of anything you don't intend to shoot.

    Lots of targets for the lawyers to get to their paydays.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @stillCARealist, @Jack D, @Redmen, @JimDandy

    Definitely a lot of spinning going on. Res ipsa loquitorwould seem to apply to Baldwin, despite the great PR efforts underway to protect him and his important status as a major Democrat media personality.

    The only question is if this rises to the level of recklessness. If so, I would expect there to be criminal charges of manslaughter as well as massive civil liability. In terms of civil liability, Baldwin is a very deep pocket. Could become one of the largest civil payouts by an individual for a tort.

    • Replies: @prosa123
    @Redmen

    The only question is if this rises to the level of recklessness. If so, I would expect there to be criminal charges of manslaughter as well as massive civil liability. In terms of civil liability, Baldwin is a very deep pocket. Could become one of the largest civil payouts by an individual for a tort.

    Dunno ... it happened at a work site, and workers' compensation provisions might prevent civil lawsuits. For example, that woman who got her face eaten by a chimpanzee in Connecticut could not bring a lawsuit against the chimp's very wealthy owner because she worked for her and the comp laws applied.

    Replies: @FPD72, @Redmen

  69. Anonymous[369] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jonathan Mason
    @Jack D

    This sounds very plausible.

    It sounds like the armorer was not qualified, did not understand what her job entailed, and was unaware of the potential risks of allowing recreational use of props.

    The whole scenario should be a real wake up call for the movie-making industry.

    This story would make a great plot for a movie.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    It sounds like the armorer was not qualified, did not understand what her job entailed, and was unaware of the potential risks of allowing recreational use of props.

    According to Altai, she was apparently put in that position after the qualified union guy, along with others, walked off the set due to poor working conditions and pay. I’m sure that guy must be feeling pretty awful if this story is correct. Along with the person(s) who instigated the walkout.

  70. @Altai
    @Almost Missouri

    Though she was apparently brought in to replace the union guy who walked off along with others due to apparent poor gun safety on set. (As well as the little matter of not being paid on time and broken promises on accommodation) They talk about the gun going off accidentally before this but I don't know if it was a blank misfiring or real bullets. (How do you end up with a dead DP after 2 separate accidents involving loaded guns?)

    What's interesting is the scale of the blame game, she left out a loaded gun. AD took it up and didn't do the last check he was obliged to to make sure it wasn't loaded. Never spoke to the girl in charge of the guns either and gave it to Baldwin while announcing it was a 'cold gun'. (They were miles from anywhere, where else would she be before shooting scenes?)

    Baldwin then proceeds to somehow shoot at the DP and director while practicing a gun trick despite that also being a big no in terms of pointing, let alone pulling the trigger in the direction of anything you don't intend to shoot.

    Lots of targets for the lawyers to get to their paydays.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @stillCARealist, @Jack D, @Redmen, @JimDandy

    Now THAT makes me consider conspiracy theories for the first time. The green haired 24 year old internet prostitute was a scab? If I was a detective, I would interview the disgruntled union guy immediately.

    BTW, why would there EVER be a live round in a movie set armory?

  71. @Paperback Writer
    @ic1000

    On that bus issue, does the fact that the LA Times has been the best on the story factor into the equation?

    Their latest,

    https://web.archive.org/web/20211025101743/https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-24/alec-baldwin-prop-gun-shooting-halyna-hutchins-search-warrant

    (Only defense Baldwin has, an actor, is that he wasn't pointing the gun at Hutchins, he was pointing the gun at the camera. As a producer, he's in deep shit.)

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling

    (Only defense Baldwin has, an actor, is that he wasn’t pointing the gun at Hutchins, he was pointing the gun at the camera. As a producer, he’s in deep shit.)

    As a “responsible gun owner” it’s worse than that based on the reporting, for he wasn’t intending to fire his gun, was just using it as a prop and pointer in rehearsal or setting up for that for a scene that required repositioning due to an encroaching shadow. That is, anti-gunner that he is, he failed basic gun safety, the discharge was in every way negligent.

    But as you note he’s also one of the film’s producers, and I’ll add was on the set (is that normal for producers who aren’t also actors?). After the first reported live round discharge by a stuntman who thought he had a gun loaded with blanks, there should have been a stand down of the whole affair while the armorer figured out what happened and took steps to make sure it never would happen again.

    Including telling everyone the guns nominally under her control were not toys to be played with, bring your own if you want to plink in downtime. And doing the same to the replacement crew. And as noted above, the guns in the “cart” should have been locked down with a key only she had unless she was personally overseeing their use. That negligent discharges are reported to have happened twice before the third occurrence resulted in two people being shot is on every executive involved starting with Baldwin as a producer. I suspect this has been realized by Baldwin or those advising him, based on the careful wording of the statement that he made.

    So I agree the question now assuming the reported facts are correct is will be be given a pass or thrown under the bus by our betters?

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @That Would Be Telling


    That negligent discharges are reported to have happened twice before the third occurrence resulted in two people being shot is on every executive involved starting with Baldwin as a producer. I suspect this has been realized by Baldwin or those advising him, based on the careful wording of the statement that he made.
     
    This is probably another way that Baldwin's anti-gun politics became his undoing.

    The way that leftists write and talk about firearms, you'd believe that they believe that firearms regularly just kind of "go off" while being handled. If firearms regularly "go off," then a few negligent discharges on set are just de rigueur because that's what guns do.

    But to people with experience in firearms a single breach of safety protocols (like, say, actors horsing around on set with "cold" guns and muzzle sweeping people - let alone a single negligent discharge) would be ample grounds to shut everything down, figure out exactly what happened, and re-impose the safety protocols top to bottom and perhaps introduce additional safety redundancies. It's considered the minimum of firearms etiquette to chamber check a firearm immediately before handing it to another person, and that person is supposed to do their own chamber check upon receipt, and so forth when the firearm is handed back to the first person. What this trains into people is: 1) individual responsibility to maintain a safe, unloaded firearm while handling and not to take anyone's word that the firearm is safe; and, 2) safety redundancy - even though I just saw that the firearm is unloaded 90 seconds ago, I'm going to do my own redundant check.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    , @Chris Mallory
    @That Would Be Telling


    But as you note he’s also one of the film’s producers, and I’ll add was on the set (is that normal for producers who aren’t also actors?).
     
    Not uncommon, but in large part it will depend on the production. If a director starts running wild being over budget and/or off schedule a producer will be on set to keep things on track.
    , @Paperback Writer
    @That Would Be Telling

    I agree with everything you say, I was just pointing out, for the record, a niggling little detail that I had gotten wrong previously.


    And as noted above, the guns in the “cart” should have been locked down with a key only she had unless she was personally overseeing their use.

     

    I'm also appalled by this. They just leave live guns out on a "cart" - like a dessert cart? -- WTF?

    See my response to Jack about the chain of command. I am not at all excusing the armorer but it seems to me she's not responsible for this tragedy. The Assistant Director handed a hot gun to an actor. He had a responsibility to see that the gun was safe. My own guess is that he wouldn't know a gun from a taco.

    Film sets are totally hierarchical. The director (in this case, the AD) has dictatorial control. If you cough and ruin a scene, he can fire you on the spot, don't tell me about union rules, I've heard of this.

    Perhaps, maybe, an older male armorer would have put his foot down and insisted on better safety procedures to secure the guns when not in use. But according to what we know - this is on Halls and Baldwin's shoulders.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Abolish_public_education

    , @ic1000
    @That Would Be Telling

    Scott Reeder is a freelance "Prop Master" based in Texas, seems legit (his LinkedIn page). Sunday, he posted a 3 minute video and makes these claims, identifying "breaches of protocol":

    * Terminology confusion in some reports -- a "misfire" is when a gun doesn't fire when it should, in contrast to an "accidental discharge."
    * Live ammo on a movie set is a breach.
    * Once the cart is set up with the guns, it is watched at all times. An unattended cart is a breach.
    * Grabbing a gun from an unattended cart (as the Asst. Director did) is a breach.
    * Only the Armorer or the Prop Master may handle a gun [aside from actors], the AD holding a gun is a breach.
    * Reeder works with revolvers on the sets of Westerns, follows a prescribed protocol to ensure they are unloaded. Not doing so is a breach.
    * Close-ups of a revolver may require "dummy rounds" where the powder charge is replaced by a couple of bb's. The Prop Master or Armorer loads the gun in the presence of the AD; they confirm to each other that each dummy round rattles when shaken. Not doing so... breach.

  72. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rob

    I'll take your word on the movie production end of this, Rob (and, again, I don't care too much - see above*) Re: the guns, I have some corrections. Clips don't go in guns at all. They can be used to quickly load magazines, which go in handguns other than single-shotters or revolvers and some semi-auto rifles**. I would guess all FULL automatics use magazines, but I'll probably be corrected - Joe Stalin, what say you?

    .

    * Why am I on this thread then? Good question! I'm eating breakfast.

    ** The .22 Marlins, for example, hold 18 shots, but there is no magazine. They are held in a tube under the barrel.

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @That Would Be Telling, @Diversity Heretic, @Veteran Aryan

    Clips do go in guns; they hold the cartridges and then are ejected or fall out when the last shot is fired. The device you describe is a charger, which holds the ammunition but which is not inserted into the gun. A magazine is different in that it contains its own spring. The Marlin .22 uses a tubular magazine. Some handguns were clip fed, but they are not common. The M14 rifle uses a box magazine, but the shooter could also use a 5-round charger to insert cartridges into the magazine when the bolt was back. Clip and magazine are often used interchangeably, but there is a difference.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Diversity Heretic

    For you, Mr. Mallory, and TWBT: Thank you all for the corrections. However, I am most familiar with non-military and current guns (sorry V.A.!). I have never used a clip and don't know anyone else who has. What I see all the time is people using the word "clip" for what are obviously modern magazines.

    At the gun show one time, a guy selling all kinds of magazines had a sign advertising "Clips". I asked him about this, and he told me that since this was the erroneous wording being used so much, he was just going with the flow.

    OK, "tubular magazine" on the .22, but that is just bad terminology, IMO, because it is not removable.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling, @HenryA

  73. middle aged dads with non-ironic mustaches and eagle-globe-anchor tattoos who don’t mind telling people, “No, you’re doing that wrong” all day.

    When firearms and explosives/pyrotechnics are involved, you want people (yes, more than one) with low tolerance for error and who are sticklers for procedure.

    Otherwise, it gets bloody sooner or later. It’s just a matter of when, not if.

    • Agree: AceDeuce
  74. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rob

    I'll take your word on the movie production end of this, Rob (and, again, I don't care too much - see above*) Re: the guns, I have some corrections. Clips don't go in guns at all. They can be used to quickly load magazines, which go in handguns other than single-shotters or revolvers and some semi-auto rifles**. I would guess all FULL automatics use magazines, but I'll probably be corrected - Joe Stalin, what say you?

    .

    * Why am I on this thread then? Good question! I'm eating breakfast.

    ** The .22 Marlins, for example, hold 18 shots, but there is no magazine. They are held in a tube under the barrel.

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @That Would Be Telling, @Diversity Heretic, @Veteran Aryan

    Clips don’t go in guns at all.

    Here’s a little Marine Corps meme for you: “Guns” are artillery pieces, i.e. ‘The Guns Of Navarone’. During USMC boot camp I observed several different unfortunate fellows who made the mistake of using the term “gun.” They were then required to stand on top of their footlocker, pull down their pants, and yell “This is my rifle, this is my gun; this is for fighting, this is for fun.”

    Assume the position.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    @Veteran Aryan

    I recall reading that in high school, in Norman Mailer's The Naked and the Dead. It was assigned reading, and caused much hilarity among us 15 year olds.

    , @El Dato
    @Veteran Aryan

    Now, referring to submarines as "ships" instead of "boats" would be unnatural, but this is pointlessly taking it too far. Artillery is "cannon".

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Veteran Aryan

    , @Catdog
    @Veteran Aryan

    I don't care what the marines say. In English we have called them "handgonnes" among other names since the 15th century.

  75. @That Would Be Telling
    @Paperback Writer


    (Only defense Baldwin has, an actor, is that he wasn’t pointing the gun at Hutchins, he was pointing the gun at the camera. As a producer, he’s in deep shit.)
     
    As a "responsible gun owner" it's worse than that based on the reporting, for he wasn't intending to fire his gun, was just using it as a prop and pointer in rehearsal or setting up for that for a scene that required repositioning due to an encroaching shadow. That is, anti-gunner that he is, he failed basic gun safety, the discharge was in every way negligent.

    But as you note he's also one of the film's producers, and I'll add was on the set (is that normal for producers who aren't also actors?). After the first reported live round discharge by a stuntman who thought he had a gun loaded with blanks, there should have been a stand down of the whole affair while the armorer figured out what happened and took steps to make sure it never would happen again.

    Including telling everyone the guns nominally under her control were not toys to be played with, bring your own if you want to plink in downtime. And doing the same to the replacement crew. And as noted above, the guns in the "cart" should have been locked down with a key only she had unless she was personally overseeing their use. That negligent discharges are reported to have happened twice before the third occurrence resulted in two people being shot is on every executive involved starting with Baldwin as a producer. I suspect this has been realized by Baldwin or those advising him, based on the careful wording of the statement that he made.

    So I agree the question now assuming the reported facts are correct is will be be given a pass or thrown under the bus by our betters?

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Chris Mallory, @Paperback Writer, @ic1000

    That negligent discharges are reported to have happened twice before the third occurrence resulted in two people being shot is on every executive involved starting with Baldwin as a producer. I suspect this has been realized by Baldwin or those advising him, based on the careful wording of the statement that he made.

    This is probably another way that Baldwin’s anti-gun politics became his undoing.

    The way that leftists write and talk about firearms, you’d believe that they believe that firearms regularly just kind of “go off” while being handled. If firearms regularly “go off,” then a few negligent discharges on set are just de rigueur because that’s what guns do.

    But to people with experience in firearms a single breach of safety protocols (like, say, actors horsing around on set with “cold” guns and muzzle sweeping people – let alone a single negligent discharge) would be ample grounds to shut everything down, figure out exactly what happened, and re-impose the safety protocols top to bottom and perhaps introduce additional safety redundancies. It’s considered the minimum of firearms etiquette to chamber check a firearm immediately before handing it to another person, and that person is supposed to do their own chamber check upon receipt, and so forth when the firearm is handed back to the first person. What this trains into people is: 1) individual responsibility to maintain a safe, unloaded firearm while handling and not to take anyone’s word that the firearm is safe; and, 2) safety redundancy – even though I just saw that the firearm is unloaded 90 seconds ago, I’m going to do my own redundant check.

    • Agree: Buzz Mohawk
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    Go to any gun range and there will be a range master there watching what is going on. He will throw you out if he sees you acting unsafely.

    I know lots of gun owners and they all follow two simple rules:
    1) Any gun is presumed loaded until you check it yourself.
    2) Never point a gun at someone unless you intend to kill them.

  76. Guns Don’t Kill People, Alec Baldwin Kills People.

  77. In the Old Style lefty analysis, Baldwin is clearly a bad guy here.

    The working conditions were far worse than advertised.
    There were serious safety concerns which were never addressed.
    Union workers were replaced by non-union workers.

    The Nee Style lefty analysis is probably the same because Baldwin, the victim and the armorer are all white.

    The Realism analysis points out that Baldwin is popular on the left. People are far more likely to forgive those in their own camp.

    In the end — if this goes to court, Baldwin may be in bad shape. Both as the shooter and the producer. His career is at best on hold for a few years. With the proper settlements and NDAs, he may be able to salvage something of his career eventually

  78. @That Would Be Telling
    @Paperback Writer


    (Only defense Baldwin has, an actor, is that he wasn’t pointing the gun at Hutchins, he was pointing the gun at the camera. As a producer, he’s in deep shit.)
     
    As a "responsible gun owner" it's worse than that based on the reporting, for he wasn't intending to fire his gun, was just using it as a prop and pointer in rehearsal or setting up for that for a scene that required repositioning due to an encroaching shadow. That is, anti-gunner that he is, he failed basic gun safety, the discharge was in every way negligent.

    But as you note he's also one of the film's producers, and I'll add was on the set (is that normal for producers who aren't also actors?). After the first reported live round discharge by a stuntman who thought he had a gun loaded with blanks, there should have been a stand down of the whole affair while the armorer figured out what happened and took steps to make sure it never would happen again.

    Including telling everyone the guns nominally under her control were not toys to be played with, bring your own if you want to plink in downtime. And doing the same to the replacement crew. And as noted above, the guns in the "cart" should have been locked down with a key only she had unless she was personally overseeing their use. That negligent discharges are reported to have happened twice before the third occurrence resulted in two people being shot is on every executive involved starting with Baldwin as a producer. I suspect this has been realized by Baldwin or those advising him, based on the careful wording of the statement that he made.

    So I agree the question now assuming the reported facts are correct is will be be given a pass or thrown under the bus by our betters?

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Chris Mallory, @Paperback Writer, @ic1000

    But as you note he’s also one of the film’s producers, and I’ll add was on the set (is that normal for producers who aren’t also actors?).

    Not uncommon, but in large part it will depend on the production. If a director starts running wild being over budget and/or off schedule a producer will be on set to keep things on track.

  79. @Altai
    And yet how do you know it wasn't just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?

    https://twitter.com/Villavelius/status/1451499563903242242

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @Almost Missouri, @Joe S.Walker, @Jack Armstrong, @Charlotte, @Wade Hampton, @Reg Cæsar, @Buffalo Joe, @EdwardM

    I found it kind of Adlai Stevensonian.

  80. @Jack D
    @Altai

    1. Apparently the guns were left outside on a cart in order to minimize the number of people going into the location as a result of Covid protocols.

    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set. Movie sets can be incredibly boring places when nothing is happening for you. This is the kind of fun thing that Spider Girl might allow. Her dad - NFW are you going to do that on my set. If you touch my guns I'll punch you out and then have you fired.

    This is my guess:

    1. Before lunch, Spider Girl checks the guns, tells AD they are cold, leaves them on cart. Retires to her trailer to text on her phone/do other fun activities. Her job is done. She'll come by at the end of the day to retrieve the guns. She is not allowed inside the building - the great star Baldwin might catch Covid if such icky people were allowed near him. The shoot is set up to minimize the # of icky people that interact with Baldwin "due to Covid" but it suits him just fine. Nor is she going to stand in the open desert and watch those guns while they sit on a cart for hours. You could get heatstroke/ go nuts.

    2. During lunch, someone picks up gun, loads it with live ammo, does a bit of target shooting and returns it to the cart, but they leave 1 cartridge in the cylinder. They have done this before (not the leaving the cartridge part but the plinking) and it was fine. The gun wasn't being used for filming during lunchtime, so what's the harm? Spider Girl might or might not have been aware that it was going on. Strange that the weapons were dirtier than they should have been, but maybe she wasn't really into cleaning weapons anyway.

    3. AD returns from lunch with Baldwin, picks up gun from cart and announces that it is cold.

    4. Tragedy ensues.

    The weapons were supposed to be in the armorer's custody and control. That's what her job description is - to have custody of the weapons at all times when they are not being used on the set. She didn't do her job. She is the main person at fault.

    Secondarily, Covid foolishness - Covid is so dangerous that leaving guns lying around in the open is the safer alternative. At least no one caught Covid from Spider Girl.

    Thirdly the asshole that borrowed the gun and returned it loaded. This person deserves jailtime for sure.

    Replies: @fish, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer, @Anonymous, @Stonewall Jackson, @Paperback Writer, @Etruscan Film Star, @foxotcw, @anonymouseperson

    Nope. This is the Assistant Director’s fault.

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-accidental-shooting-details-halyna-hutchins-death

    However, he [Souza] stated that firearms are supposed to be checked by the armorer followed by the assistant director before handing them to the actor.

    Even Jack admits that the AD gave the gun to Baldwin.

    The armorer can’t be blamed if she checked the guns, put them where she was instructed to, and was either prevented by dumb rules or was not called by the AD to come and re-check the guns before filming.

    AD’s have power. Halls was apparently a nasty prick not averse to using his power, so don’t tell me he couldn’t have broken the Covid rules and done this. But he didn’t, apparently. If she was off-limits to the guns, that’s not her fault.

    AND the AD was supposed to check the gun before handing it to Baldwin.

    So there are two crucial steps where the AD fucked up.

    Yesterday Jack pretended to be all patient and rational because it was in opposition to something I wrote. So, paraphrasing him, this will all be sorted out eventually. But going from what we know now, David Hall is in deep shit, Alec Baldwin in deeper shit. But not Hannah Gutierrez Reed.

    The worst the armorer can be accused of is not protesting the stupid rules. Maybe her father would have said, “I’m not letting those weapons on to the set until I check them AGAIN, before they go to the AD, and then Mr. AD, you check them. No gun under my supervision goes onto a set after lying around for an hour.” That, IMO, is fair. But as the rules stand, this is David Hall’s fuck up.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    @Paperback Writer

    We can't be sure that claim the assistant director was responsible for double checking the armorer's work is correct. Although given sufficient gun safety experience, which should be mandatory for an assistant director (AD) in such a work, it obviously would be a very good idea, double checking never hurts for safety if you personally can do that safely and correctly so the gun is functioning when you hand it to the actor. If not the AD, have at least one other person on the set who's proficient and tasked with this.

    Another factor is the more credible claim the AD declared the gun safe before handing it to Baldwin, he failed in his overall duty to assure that. Based on what you're saying, he and everyone above him had a responsibility to make sure all this was being done correctly, even if they were not technically proficient in loading and unloading guns and knowing the difference between blanks and live rounds.

    I disagree WRT to the armorer, it was her responsibility to see all this was was done correctly and if she couldn't quit like those other crew members. COVID restrictions would not seem to cover the claims the guns were being used for plinking with live rounds, and keeping them locked on the cart until turned over to the AD (who should then have an assistant keep them in view) would seem to be minimal precautions. Certainly she should have quit after the first discharge with a live round by a stuntman unless she was allowed to take corrective measures. That that happened twice before the fatal instance is utterly damning for all involved.

    Anyone have any idea if the heirs of the cinematographer are part of the film community or otherwise subject to pressure to deter them from filing a lawsuit or limiting its scope or claimed damages?

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Jack D

    , @Catdog
    @Paperback Writer

    It seems obvious to me that a prop gun should NEVER be loaded with live rounds.

    Replies: @Boomthorkell

  81. @Almost Missouri
    @Altai

    The armorer from Rust:

    https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/10/NINTCHDBPICT000688664971-1.jpg

    https://www.the-sun.com/news/3926657/who-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed/

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Lurker, @The Wild Geese Howard, @JackOH, @ic1000, @Altai, @Dumbo, @Jack Armstrong, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Mike Tre

    To quote the philosopher … What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

  82. @That Would Be Telling
    @Paperback Writer


    (Only defense Baldwin has, an actor, is that he wasn’t pointing the gun at Hutchins, he was pointing the gun at the camera. As a producer, he’s in deep shit.)
     
    As a "responsible gun owner" it's worse than that based on the reporting, for he wasn't intending to fire his gun, was just using it as a prop and pointer in rehearsal or setting up for that for a scene that required repositioning due to an encroaching shadow. That is, anti-gunner that he is, he failed basic gun safety, the discharge was in every way negligent.

    But as you note he's also one of the film's producers, and I'll add was on the set (is that normal for producers who aren't also actors?). After the first reported live round discharge by a stuntman who thought he had a gun loaded with blanks, there should have been a stand down of the whole affair while the armorer figured out what happened and took steps to make sure it never would happen again.

    Including telling everyone the guns nominally under her control were not toys to be played with, bring your own if you want to plink in downtime. And doing the same to the replacement crew. And as noted above, the guns in the "cart" should have been locked down with a key only she had unless she was personally overseeing their use. That negligent discharges are reported to have happened twice before the third occurrence resulted in two people being shot is on every executive involved starting with Baldwin as a producer. I suspect this has been realized by Baldwin or those advising him, based on the careful wording of the statement that he made.

    So I agree the question now assuming the reported facts are correct is will be be given a pass or thrown under the bus by our betters?

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Chris Mallory, @Paperback Writer, @ic1000

    I agree with everything you say, I was just pointing out, for the record, a niggling little detail that I had gotten wrong previously.

    And as noted above, the guns in the “cart” should have been locked down with a key only she had unless she was personally overseeing their use.

    I’m also appalled by this. They just leave live guns out on a “cart” – like a dessert cart? — WTF?

    See my response to Jack about the chain of command. I am not at all excusing the armorer but it seems to me she’s not responsible for this tragedy. The Assistant Director handed a hot gun to an actor. He had a responsibility to see that the gun was safe. My own guess is that he wouldn’t know a gun from a taco.

    Film sets are totally hierarchical. The director (in this case, the AD) has dictatorial control. If you cough and ruin a scene, he can fire you on the spot, don’t tell me about union rules, I’ve heard of this.

    Perhaps, maybe, an older male armorer would have put his foot down and insisted on better safety procedures to secure the guns when not in use. But according to what we know – this is on Halls and Baldwin’s shoulders.

    • Thanks: That Would Be Telling
    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Paperback Writer


    See my response to Jack about the chain of command. I am not at all excusing the armorer but it seems to me she’s not responsible for this tragedy. The Assistant Director handed a hot gun to an actor. He had a responsibility to see that the gun was safe. My own guess is that he wouldn’t know a gun from a taco.

    Film sets are totally hierarchical. The director (in this case, the AD) has dictatorial control. If you cough and ruin a scene, he can fire you on the spot, don’t tell me about union rules, I’ve heard of this.

    Perhaps, maybe, an older male armorer would have put his foot down and insisted on better safety procedures to secure the guns when not in use. But according to what we know – this is on Halls and Baldwin’s shoulders.
     
    From a legal perspective what will need to be established is everyone's duty of care, and that would entail knowing what the established duties of an armorer are on a film set.

    Is it expected that the armorer simply inspects firearms and then transfers the inspected firearms over to the custody and control of the AD? Or do armorers retain custody and control over the firearms at all times?

    If it's the latter and the armorer actually completed an inspection and the live, complete cartridge was introduced by one of the crew who had taken the firearm plinking, then the armorer would seem to be in the clear. If the latter, then probably not. I don't pretend to know the details of the duties of armorer and AD (although here is a point where redundancy would be useful - if both are 100% responsible for the firearms as they are introduced to the actors).
    , @Abolish_public_education
    @Paperback Writer

    Film sets are totally hierarchical.

    Think what you will of those youngish, leftist dominated, hi-tech firms, but when it comes to culture, they're very democratic. Floor plans are wide open. It's easy to speak (not just text!) with someone, that sort of thing. By comparison, in stodgy old (Latin American!) firms, to speak with a director (who's typically officed in a separate, executive suite) a worker needs to set up an appointment, if he'd even dare to seek such a meeting in the first place.

    The darn Hollywood, movie-set culture is beyond ridiculous, what with marquee actors given exclusive access to luxury trailers and on-set, fold-up chairs (with their names stitched on them), the arrogant, temperamental directors blusteringly firing low-level staffers for minor mistakes, etc. And then those buzzards presume to lecture the rest of us about being bad people.

  83. @Rob
    You would think that with green screen tech, they could do prop guns in a way that they could not be loaded with real bullets.

    They spend umpteen million dollars on movies, would it be so hard to make a green prop gun with a grid pattern that could be automatically “turned into” a realistic gun in post-production? Once they have the program done once, they could use it on every movie gun.

    Blanks have a “wad” at the end, right? Something that takes the place of the actual metal bullet at the end of the cartridge. They should get rid of that, even if, for some reason, green guns are not realistic.

    For automatics (i think that is the right term — guns with clips) there is no reason a real bullet should even fit in the gun. Make the space in the clip short enough that a cartridge with a bullet at the tip does not fit.

    The same thing would apply to rifley guns and shotgunny guns.

    For spinny-wheel guns, have shorter cartridges too. The spinny thing’s cylindrical holes should have a constriction in the middle with normal-gun openings at either end, so it still looks realistic.

    Why do they even have to work like real guns? Have multiple powder charges in the barrel, so that there’s not even a place for the bullets to go.

    For all types of prop guns, make the barrel with a constriction in the middle, so a real bullet won’t fire. I guess that’s not really better, because a gun that explodes in the actor’s hand is not really better.

    Make prop “bullets” fire differently than real bullets. Real guns have a hammer that smacks into a primer charge, which then causes the “gunpowder” to react right? Well, have prop blanks fire using an electric charge to set off a different kind of primer deeper in the cartridge that won’t fire when a hammer hits it. You don’t much want a real gun to be battery-powered. What if you need to protect yourself, but the battery is dead? With a prop gun that is not a problem. Just yell “cut” and get another prop gun from the prop gun guy, and then yell at him for not keeping his guns charged. What a jackass, right?

    With simple changes, alone or in combination, there would be no way a prop gun could ever have a bullet in it. If the character needs to put a bullet in the gun, and then shoot, would having to have a cut really ruin the auteur’s vision? They do cuts in violent scenes all the time to make fake violence look somewhat realistic.

    In principle, that’s kind of how other weapons work in tv and movies, right? Like, they have a rubber machete, so actors are not hacking at each other with real weapons, right? If they need to use a real machete to hack through the underbrush, they just switch out real for fake machetes, right? Do the same with guns. If they need to shoot real bullets at something, use a real gun. If they need to shoot people, use the in-bullet-able prop gun.

    Come on prop guys and special effects dudes. I’m a mentally ill shut-in. If I can figure this shit out, then you can too. Prop makers, you could sell special effects guns and electric bullets for a lot more than regular guns and blanks. Directors and studios would pay higher prices without too much grumbling because they could pay lower insurance premiums.

    Replies: @El Dato, @bomag, @Alec Leamas (working from home), @Achmed E. Newman, @Achmed E. Newman, @Chris Mallory, @Sick 'n Tired

    Reading what you wrote tells me you know absolutely nothing about guns.

    • Agree: Chris Mallory
    • Replies: @TWS
    @Sick 'n Tired

    Yup nothing. Weird how everyone who has never been exposed to anything except entertainment regarding firearms suddenly becomes an expert on the subject when they are in the news.

    , @Rob
    @Sick 'n Tired

    I do know next to nothing about guns. But I do know that, when one is playing pretend, having a type of prop that requires very few people be able to access them, everyone handling them must check to make sure they aren’t in deadly mode, etc then those things one is playing pretend with are too dangerous, and need to be re-engineered.

    Take hypodermic needles and the concern over needle sticks after HIV became common. Did hospitals emphasize needle safety, put biohazard boxes in every room, etc. Sure they did but people are human. They make mistakes. If you just say “add another layer of people checking the dangerous thing” you are not being realistic. If one person is checking, he will make the occasional mistake. Two people check? More reliable. So ten people check? That might even be less reliable than two. Every checker will say “no way a mistake could have gotten past the x people before me, and be laxer. He will also think “any mistake I make will be caught by one of the people who check it after me” and be even laxer.

    So, what happened to reduce needle sticks? Safer needles. Single-use needles, and could be irreversibly covered by a one-handed motion. To draw blood, they don’t stick you, draw blood, and then stick you again with a new syringe for the next vial. They stick you once and then draw blood into multiple tubes through that one needle.

    I think one thing gun people like about guns is that they are fairly dangerous to handle. They get a feeling of “I am being responsible with a dangerous thing. I am reliable and can be trusted with responsibility.” But people make mistakes.

    I have read that endless training of chemical workers that you don’t use hose A for chemical B did not work. There were always accidents. Only by re-engineering the connections, so that hose A did not fit the spigot on the barrel that chemical B was in eliminated accidents.

    While you may think that the fact that I could not come up with revolver means I don’t know enough about guns to know that props can be re-engineered, it is precisely because I don’t come from a “respect the great power and responsibility this deadly penis substitute gives me” that I realize dangerous tech should not be used when re-engineering the tech for safety is a possibility.

    Prop guns should not be loadable with real ammunition? If somehow they are loaded with real ammunition, they should not be able to fire it. How is that not an obvious takeaway? The Crow was a great movie when I was 13. Brandon Lee living could have meant a The Crow 2. So many girls and gay boys would have had happier teenage years.

    Look how endless harangues about driving more safely paled compared to mandated seat belt installation.

    Let’s say a company’s warehouse employees get into wrecks driving their forklifts at 40 mph. Is it a better idea to constantly be paying workers comp/wrongful death to people the forklift drivers hurt or is it a better idea to have the forklifts modified so that their maximum speed is lower?

    Making blank guns that cannot be loaded with live ammunition, cannot fire live ammunition, and can be visually distinguished from real guns in a way that can be reversed with special effects tech is really a no-brainer.

    I realize that in the grand scheme of things, very few people get hurt with misloaded prop guns on film sets. But the general principle that tech and systems should be redesigned rather than people being more personally responsibilityer shows up throughout American life. The unwillingness of the elite to re-engineer buildings and building operations to reduce colds and flu is a much bigger one.

    Some things can be best prevented by redesign rather than just ameliorated by paying wergeld to injured people or their next of kin.

    Replies: @borfwink, @anon, @Fhjjjkjcdddbb, @Muggles

  84. @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    Nope. This is the Assistant Director's fault.

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-accidental-shooting-details-halyna-hutchins-death


    However, he [Souza] stated that firearms are supposed to be checked by the armorer followed by the assistant director before handing them to the actor.
     
    Even Jack admits that the AD gave the gun to Baldwin.

    The armorer can't be blamed if she checked the guns, put them where she was instructed to, and was either prevented by dumb rules or was not called by the AD to come and re-check the guns before filming.

    AD's have power. Halls was apparently a nasty prick not averse to using his power, so don't tell me he couldn't have broken the Covid rules and done this. But he didn't, apparently. If she was off-limits to the guns, that's not her fault.

    AND the AD was supposed to check the gun before handing it to Baldwin.

    So there are two crucial steps where the AD fucked up.

    Yesterday Jack pretended to be all patient and rational because it was in opposition to something I wrote. So, paraphrasing him, this will all be sorted out eventually. But going from what we know now, David Hall is in deep shit, Alec Baldwin in deeper shit. But not Hannah Gutierrez Reed.

    The worst the armorer can be accused of is not protesting the stupid rules. Maybe her father would have said, "I'm not letting those weapons on to the set until I check them AGAIN, before they go to the AD, and then Mr. AD, you check them. No gun under my supervision goes onto a set after lying around for an hour." That, IMO, is fair. But as the rules stand, this is David Hall's fuck up.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling, @Catdog

    We can’t be sure that claim the assistant director was responsible for double checking the armorer’s work is correct. Although given sufficient gun safety experience, which should be mandatory for an assistant director (AD) in such a work, it obviously would be a very good idea, double checking never hurts for safety if you personally can do that safely and correctly so the gun is functioning when you hand it to the actor. If not the AD, have at least one other person on the set who’s proficient and tasked with this.

    Another factor is the more credible claim the AD declared the gun safe before handing it to Baldwin, he failed in his overall duty to assure that. Based on what you’re saying, he and everyone above him had a responsibility to make sure all this was being done correctly, even if they were not technically proficient in loading and unloading guns and knowing the difference between blanks and live rounds.

    I disagree WRT to the armorer, it was her responsibility to see all this was was done correctly and if she couldn’t quit like those other crew members. COVID restrictions would not seem to cover the claims the guns were being used for plinking with live rounds, and keeping them locked on the cart until turned over to the AD (who should then have an assistant keep them in view) would seem to be minimal precautions. Certainly she should have quit after the first discharge with a live round by a stuntman unless she was allowed to take corrective measures. That that happened twice before the fatal instance is utterly damning for all involved.

    Anyone have any idea if the heirs of the cinematographer are part of the film community or otherwise subject to pressure to deter them from filing a lawsuit or limiting its scope or claimed damages?

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @That Would Be Telling


    We can’t be sure that claim the assistant director was responsible for double checking the armorer’s work is correct
     
    It is. Do some research.
    , @Jack D
    @That Would Be Telling

    Her husband is also an actor. Baldwin has personally apologized to him and they seem to be on friendly terms (seen hugging, etc.).

    If this was a film noir, Baldwin would have conspired with the husband to get rid of his wife and have the AD or the armorer take the rap. The husband would be Baldwin's gay lover.

  85. @Paperback Writer
    @That Would Be Telling

    I agree with everything you say, I was just pointing out, for the record, a niggling little detail that I had gotten wrong previously.


    And as noted above, the guns in the “cart” should have been locked down with a key only she had unless she was personally overseeing their use.

     

    I'm also appalled by this. They just leave live guns out on a "cart" - like a dessert cart? -- WTF?

    See my response to Jack about the chain of command. I am not at all excusing the armorer but it seems to me she's not responsible for this tragedy. The Assistant Director handed a hot gun to an actor. He had a responsibility to see that the gun was safe. My own guess is that he wouldn't know a gun from a taco.

    Film sets are totally hierarchical. The director (in this case, the AD) has dictatorial control. If you cough and ruin a scene, he can fire you on the spot, don't tell me about union rules, I've heard of this.

    Perhaps, maybe, an older male armorer would have put his foot down and insisted on better safety procedures to secure the guns when not in use. But according to what we know - this is on Halls and Baldwin's shoulders.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Abolish_public_education

    See my response to Jack about the chain of command. I am not at all excusing the armorer but it seems to me she’s not responsible for this tragedy. The Assistant Director handed a hot gun to an actor. He had a responsibility to see that the gun was safe. My own guess is that he wouldn’t know a gun from a taco.

    Film sets are totally hierarchical. The director (in this case, the AD) has dictatorial control. If you cough and ruin a scene, he can fire you on the spot, don’t tell me about union rules, I’ve heard of this.

    Perhaps, maybe, an older male armorer would have put his foot down and insisted on better safety procedures to secure the guns when not in use. But according to what we know – this is on Halls and Baldwin’s shoulders.

    From a legal perspective what will need to be established is everyone’s duty of care, and that would entail knowing what the established duties of an armorer are on a film set.

    Is it expected that the armorer simply inspects firearms and then transfers the inspected firearms over to the custody and control of the AD? Or do armorers retain custody and control over the firearms at all times?

    If it’s the latter and the armorer actually completed an inspection and the live, complete cartridge was introduced by one of the crew who had taken the firearm plinking, then the armorer would seem to be in the clear. If the latter, then probably not. I don’t pretend to know the details of the duties of armorer and AD (although here is a point where redundancy would be useful – if both are 100% responsible for the firearms as they are introduced to the actors).

    • Agree: Paperback Writer
  86. @That Would Be Telling
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Look more closely at the gun's barrel, you can see the underside of it but not the top side. I think that guy or whomever coached him just before the photo knows enough gun safety to have it angled up so it's unlikely to hit the photographer. I'm not certain because the photo does not have him using the sights, that would likely cover too much of his face for the desired photo.

    We can't know about the handling of the gun before or after, but from what we can tell this is not a gross violation of Rule 2 of gun safety although that's by a hair, and I wouldn't do it myself without personally emptying the gun, double checking that, abd keeping my trigger finger in the trigger guard but touching the forward part of it, not the trigger. But see below, we can assume most of the people on the set weren't taught gun safety starting when they were three (by example, that's when my father would start taking me and my siblings out hunting with him).

    The discussion so far here is excellent, I give particular thanks to ic1000 for bringing us up to date on the facts as they are believed to be known, they allow us to figure out ways this could have happened as Jack D has done (except for the gun being visibly dirty after plinking, smokeless power is pretty clean stuff). However Altai's point, and our general points about people downstream of the armorer double checking the latter's work are iffy because the difference between a regular and blank round is only apparent at the forward end of it.

    So depending on the action type, checking safety for a semi-auto would require removing the magazine and then the round in the chamber, for revolvers based on lighting and such maybe looking at the front of the cylinder, spinning it if single action, or removing all the rounds. And then, not being a specialist armorer, restoring the gun and its blank ammo back to the condition it was in so the film shooting will go right, you don't want to ruin a take because the gun doesn't fire. And all this keeping the barrel pointed in a safe direction, all blanks are deadly at contact range, those with wadding somewhat further, and I assume wadding plus light springs are used make semi-autos cycle new rounds into the chamber.

    So it would make sense for the guns to be completely under the control of the armorer, directly in his physical possession, or locked away with a key only he has, and everyone downstream assuming the armorer is doing his job properly. Which obviously wasn't happening if as said the armorer is allowing the guns to used for plinking, mixing of blank and real ammo should never be allowed except for the rare situations where you want to film that that. In which case the armorer would directly hand the gun to the actor, who he'd previously vetted for being sufficiently experienced and responsible in using guns for real.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Ben Kurtz, @Polistra, @dimples

    There is no reason that shot cannot be made with a properly prepared movie gun — straight-on — with a long enough lens, from a sufficient distance to prevent the cinematographer from getting killed.

    If you force the actor to angle his barrel up and away (such that it looks like he is shooting over the viewer’s left ear) then you destroy the suspension of disbelief, upon which all film depends.

    • Replies: @Mr Mox
    @Buzz Mohawk

    There is no reason that shot cannot be made with a properly prepared movie gun — straight-on — with a long enough lens, from a sufficient distance to prevent the cinematographer from getting killed.

    Heck! They could do it in 1903.

    https://i.imgur.com/4iqsu9R.jpg

    Replies: @Paul Mendez

  87. I have great doubts that Alec Baldwin could hammer a nail straight…..But there have been persistent rumors over the years about Alec’s exemplary technical skills in servicing Jewish Hollywood Producers…especially in getting his foot in the door in that Industry in the early part of his career….

    • Replies: @Ralph L
    @War for Blair Mountain

    Alec’s exemplary technical skills in servicing Jewish Hollywood Producers…especially in getting his foot in the door

    Foot in the back door? Yikes. I'd rather have gerbils.

    Several insurance companies will have to shell out, Baldwin's and the studio's at a minimum. Baldwin, Hall, and Reed won't be insurable in the future. Perhaps Baldwin will appear in amateur or indie films, never as a producer, but the other two will have a career change.

    , @War for Blair Mountain
    @War for Blair Mountain

    True story…

    Alec was shooting a remake and updated version of THE DEVIL AND DANIEL WEBSTER downtown Huntington on Wall Street….short walking distance to John Derbyshire’s home…

    A section of Wall St was closed off..You could see all the trailers….right across from Starbucks……It was a very bad snow storm for the week of shooting…..Alec’s co-stars were Anthony Hopkins and big tits Jennifer Love Hewitt……….Alec was shooting a scene in the very expensive Men’s Clothing Store across the street from StarBucks……….On Saturday morning, Alec walks across the street goes into StarBucks…orders a couple of large Starbucks placed in the cardboard tray…out he goes…….I was so disappointed that BIG TITS JENNIFER didn’t make an appearance at Starbucks that Saturday Morning….perhaps the walk across the street would have frozen Jennifer’s nipples…..

    The rest of the movie was filmed at the old Gruman Corp…the ol LEM building to be precise….the surrounding area now colonized by the Punjab State of India…..But how did all those White Men place 12 Alpha White Males on the Moon without the Hindu LEGAL IMMIGRANTS?…back when America was 90 percent Huwhite….This is one of the great mysteries of American History…..

    Alec Baldwin does know a thing or two about selling his soul to the Devil…now doesn’t he….

  88. OT but super iStevey:
    Doctors worldwide are seeing a wave of reported Tourette’s Syndrome that is actually a social contagion being spread by TikTok.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/teen-girls-are-developing-tics-doctors-say-tiktok-could-be-a-factor-11634389201?mod=e2fb&fbclid=IwAR3LcAMaatnXG7Sc6AIeQaiulSLLw5jDUZuCU7z3UsLHDp_rHBW0uNiJAaI

    Just wait until they realize the Transgender Craze has a lot of similarities.

    • Agree: Buzz Mohawk
    • Thanks: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @TWS
    @Veteran Aryan

    Seems obvious in retrospect

    , @Expletive Deleted
    @Veteran Aryan


    Doctors worldwide are seeing a wave of reported Tourette’s Syndrome
     
    You merely adopted the pottymouth. I was born in it, molded by it.
    I did not hear civility until I was already a man, and by then it was nothing to me but "acting all English an'at".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John's_Not_Mad
    Homeboy, two towns over. A very good lad, sound as a pound, and doing fairly well now by all accounts, but the consanguinity here is something fierce. We just soldier on, how the devil can you tell?
    The shepherd up the track spends his days (and nights) screaming ten times worse, as does The Farmer (who has pretences to gentry). Even in front of their own little children and wives. And they are not that inbred, relatively
    (I checked around. The rustics do like a chat and a drink. And a chance of doing down the landlord etc.).

    Once the missus tried to get The Farmer to ca' canny in front of our weans.
    B'God I thought she was going to get shot. Totally lost it, a wumman gobbing off at him?
    So I had to go over and 'smile' at him. He understood.
    , @Almost Missouri
    @Veteran Aryan

    I think Steve made some comments on this on his Twitter feed.

  89. @Curle
    At least he has no record of poor impulse control as might be suggested by calling little girls names.

    Replies: @El Dato

    Agree.

  90. Simple question: why can’t they use plastic toy guns? Even in real life, they can be hard to tell from the real thing (ask Tamir Rice). And this wasn’t real life, it was a movie, cinematographers being experts at all kinds of fakery.

    If an extreme closeup shot of a gun is ever needed, well then you can do that in a separate take with no one downrange, and the hand on the gun that of someone — not Alec Baldwin for sure — who knows what he’s doing.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @International Jew

    Part of the problem is actors. You need to get the right reactions from them, both emotional and physical. If you have them pretending to shoot each other with plastic guns, well then, they are going to look on film like they are pretending to shoot each other with plastic guns.

    Actors are actually not that good at acting, at least not as good as you imagine them to be. It's not their fault. It's just how humans behave. So, the best way to make a shootout look real is to have your "actors" fire weapons that act and feel as real to them as possible.

    Directors know this. There are wonderful stories about them surprising actors one way or another just to get the desired response or look in film.

  91. @That Would Be Telling
    @Paperback Writer


    (Only defense Baldwin has, an actor, is that he wasn’t pointing the gun at Hutchins, he was pointing the gun at the camera. As a producer, he’s in deep shit.)
     
    As a "responsible gun owner" it's worse than that based on the reporting, for he wasn't intending to fire his gun, was just using it as a prop and pointer in rehearsal or setting up for that for a scene that required repositioning due to an encroaching shadow. That is, anti-gunner that he is, he failed basic gun safety, the discharge was in every way negligent.

    But as you note he's also one of the film's producers, and I'll add was on the set (is that normal for producers who aren't also actors?). After the first reported live round discharge by a stuntman who thought he had a gun loaded with blanks, there should have been a stand down of the whole affair while the armorer figured out what happened and took steps to make sure it never would happen again.

    Including telling everyone the guns nominally under her control were not toys to be played with, bring your own if you want to plink in downtime. And doing the same to the replacement crew. And as noted above, the guns in the "cart" should have been locked down with a key only she had unless she was personally overseeing their use. That negligent discharges are reported to have happened twice before the third occurrence resulted in two people being shot is on every executive involved starting with Baldwin as a producer. I suspect this has been realized by Baldwin or those advising him, based on the careful wording of the statement that he made.

    So I agree the question now assuming the reported facts are correct is will be be given a pass or thrown under the bus by our betters?

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Chris Mallory, @Paperback Writer, @ic1000

    Scott Reeder is a freelance “Prop Master” based in Texas, seems legit (his LinkedIn page). Sunday, he posted a 3 minute video and makes these claims, identifying “breaches of protocol”:

    * Terminology confusion in some reports — a “misfire” is when a gun doesn’t fire when it should, in contrast to an “accidental discharge.”
    * Live ammo on a movie set is a breach.
    * Once the cart is set up with the guns, it is watched at all times. An unattended cart is a breach.
    * Grabbing a gun from an unattended cart (as the Asst. Director did) is a breach.
    * Only the Armorer or the Prop Master may handle a gun [aside from actors], the AD holding a gun is a breach.
    * Reeder works with revolvers on the sets of Westerns, follows a prescribed protocol to ensure they are unloaded. Not doing so is a breach.
    * Close-ups of a revolver may require “dummy rounds” where the powder charge is replaced by a couple of bb’s. The Prop Master or Armorer loads the gun in the presence of the AD; they confirm to each other that each dummy round rattles when shaken. Not doing so… breach.

  92. @International Jew
    Simple question: why can't they use plastic toy guns? Even in real life, they can be hard to tell from the real thing (ask Tamir Rice). And this wasn't real life, it was a movie, cinematographers being experts at all kinds of fakery.

    If an extreme closeup shot of a gun is ever needed, well then you can do that in a separate take with no one downrange, and the hand on the gun that of someone — not Alec Baldwin for sure — who knows what he's doing.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Part of the problem is actors. You need to get the right reactions from them, both emotional and physical. If you have them pretending to shoot each other with plastic guns, well then, they are going to look on film like they are pretending to shoot each other with plastic guns.

    Actors are actually not that good at acting, at least not as good as you imagine them to be. It’s not their fault. It’s just how humans behave. So, the best way to make a shootout look real is to have your “actors” fire weapons that act and feel as real to them as possible.

    Directors know this. There are wonderful stories about them surprising actors one way or another just to get the desired response or look in film.

  93. REAL bullets? On a MOVIE set?

    • Replies: @Charon
    @Prester John

    It's pretty funny when you consider that real cigarettes are never used, even in period pieces. Too dangerous!

  94. @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    Nope. This is the Assistant Director's fault.

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alec-baldwin-accidental-shooting-details-halyna-hutchins-death


    However, he [Souza] stated that firearms are supposed to be checked by the armorer followed by the assistant director before handing them to the actor.
     
    Even Jack admits that the AD gave the gun to Baldwin.

    The armorer can't be blamed if she checked the guns, put them where she was instructed to, and was either prevented by dumb rules or was not called by the AD to come and re-check the guns before filming.

    AD's have power. Halls was apparently a nasty prick not averse to using his power, so don't tell me he couldn't have broken the Covid rules and done this. But he didn't, apparently. If she was off-limits to the guns, that's not her fault.

    AND the AD was supposed to check the gun before handing it to Baldwin.

    So there are two crucial steps where the AD fucked up.

    Yesterday Jack pretended to be all patient and rational because it was in opposition to something I wrote. So, paraphrasing him, this will all be sorted out eventually. But going from what we know now, David Hall is in deep shit, Alec Baldwin in deeper shit. But not Hannah Gutierrez Reed.

    The worst the armorer can be accused of is not protesting the stupid rules. Maybe her father would have said, "I'm not letting those weapons on to the set until I check them AGAIN, before they go to the AD, and then Mr. AD, you check them. No gun under my supervision goes onto a set after lying around for an hour." That, IMO, is fair. But as the rules stand, this is David Hall's fuck up.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling, @Catdog

    It seems obvious to me that a prop gun should NEVER be loaded with live rounds.

    • Replies: @Boomthorkell
    @Catdog

    It seems obvious to me that you're just no fun.

    ; D

  95. Plus side: The SNL cold opening on this will be a riot of laughter!

    Will Baldwin play himself?

    • Thanks: Old Prude
    • LOL: Danindc
  96. Anon[295] • Disclaimer says:

    OT: Tax on Billionaires’ Unrealized Gains Will Likely Be in Budget Package, Democrats Say

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/tax-on-billionaires-unrealized-gains-will-likely-be-in-budget-package-democrats-say-11635096384?mod=hp_lead_pos2

    They say it will only zap around 1,000 people. If 1,000 billionaires are forced to pay 1 billion apiece each year to the government, that would raise 1 trillion a year. Yeah, you could pay off the deficit with around 10 years of taxes like that.

    But the problem is, once the principle has been established that it’s okay to tax unrealized capital gains, taxes creep down to nail ordinary people. Let’s say you live on the coasts, and your piddling little house is worth 1 million because property values in your area are crazy. Well, you’re a millionaire in net worth. So if it’s okay to tax your unrealized gains, you’re going to be hit with a second tax on your real estate.

    What about retirement funds that are owned by companies for their employees? They have huge amounts of money socked away in them. These will be taxable for their unrealized gains, and thus your retirement payout will end up being smaller because the funds are being taxed every year.

    What about the stock market? It will become a lot more volatile if major shareholders are forced to sell off billions of stock every year. What would that do to the price of stock if all the funds that rely on a few big stock names like Amazon, Apple, etc., to show a positive gain for their fund at the end of a year? A lot of stocks already go sideways in price because the companies that have issued them are middle-aged and are no longer growth companies. Only a small number of stocks at any point in time are big gainers because their companies are in the young, massive growth stage. If a lot of stock has to be sold to pay taxes, this could drive down the stock market and keep it down for a decade. Middle-class people who own stocks, but not much in the way of other assets are going to be hit.

    However, I have to grant that taxing Mackenzie Bezos for billions would be better than her donating billions to organizations like BLM, where it only goes into their (ahem) organizers’ pockets. Taxing Jeff Bezos would be better than him throwing away billions on space jaunts. I’d rather have a balanced budget than see Jeff go up in his stupid rocket again.

    But there is no getting around that this is a white people tax. Whites have assets, and to bribe a voting base of browns and blacks and kept them in line, Democrats have decided to steal white wealth to pass it on to minorities.

    But you can’t tax billionaires forever if you Don’t Stop Spending. Eventually, we’ll run out of rich people to tax if Democrats will NOT roll back their out-of-control spending on their favorite voter base, shoving welfare at blacks and browns that allows them never to work in their lives, and giving massive salaries and retirement payouts for city workers whose pay is automatically docked to put donations into Democratic campaign funds. There’s no way to break this cycle unless we put Democrats on a diet.

  97. @Achmed E. Newman
    Who cares? It's just Hollywood. I don't care if they all wipe each other off the face of the earth with their stupidity.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @J1234, @Kylie, @Prof. Woland

    I want to agree with you in spirit, but there’s a nine year old child left without a mom due to Alec Baldwin and his production company’s lack 0f professionalism. Their armorer should’ve been fired when guns used in filming were also used by the crew for target practice off set after hours. IMO, the only armorers that should be employed by any industry are those who’ve seen or experienced gun shot wounds first hand. That’s something that would stay with you for a while.

    I wonder if any of Rust was filmed or scheduled to be filmed in Kansas (where a significant part of the story apparently takes place) or if – like all of those old school westerns – they decided to film it all in the Southwest and figure nobody can tell the difference. It could be that part of the story takes place in NM. Or it could be Santa Fe is a more pleasant place for stars to stay than Colby or Dodge City.

    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
    @J1234

    They were filming on a "movie ranch" where several westerns have been filmed in the past.

    I suspect that since this was a low budget production New Mexico had better tax incentives than Kansas or California. That was one reason Breaking Bad was set in New Mexico, tax breaks. I have read about other productions that filmed outside California because it was easier to use non union crew. Most of the movie unions are based in California so if you go outside the state their influence isn't as strong. If the union crew that walked off this production (supposedly) could have made a phone call and had a picket line set up in an hour this shooting may not have happened.

    , @Jack D
    @J1234


    I wonder if any of Rust was filmed or scheduled to be filmed in Kansas (where a significant part of the story apparently takes place)
     
    There is a famous story about the making of Marathon Man. Dustin Hoffman is a "method" actor - when a scene called for him to be sleep deprived he would stay up for 48 hours and so on. One day when Laurence Olivier saw Hoffman on the set looking particular worn out, he said to him something like , "Have you considered acting, my dear boy?"

    The same thing is true of movie sets. Just because a movie is set in Kansas doesn't mean you have to actually BE in Kansas. Maybe the 5 people from that part of Kansas who see the movie will notice that the dirt is the wrong shade for Kansas (but 3 of them won't care) and everyone else won't know the difference.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Stebbing Heuer, @Anonymous Jew, @J1234

    , @Hibernian
    @J1234

    The terrain in Gunsmoke was mostly not very Kansan, although I've read that there's some rough terrain in parts of Kansas.

  98. Anon[203] • Disclaimer says:

    I think we need to wait until the facts are in. I’ve been reading widely on this, and the story keeps morphing. Media, including LAT snd NYT, doesn’t bother to trace down original sources anymore (The police court documents that AP obtained are a breath of fresh air, but still speculative.)

    For instance…

    We are hearing that there was a walkout by staff on account of safety violations hours before the incident. Had you read the early reports of this you would know that some camera staff, but obviously not the DP, walked out because of a missed payroll, and nonpayment of their hotel rooms. This was the original report. And this happens a lot with indie films, juggling insufficient money.

    Next it morphed into the story that staff (not camera, but the vaguer “staff”) walked out because the production was “in chaos” and there were safety violations. What safety violations? Well, there was an “official compliant” filed. What does that even mean in the context of a film? OSHA? Well, that was walked out. Someone claimed to have sent a text around complaining of safety. In this day and age everyone is sending bitchy complaints around all the time. In retrospect you could search the everybody’s texts and prove anything.

    We heard the same gun had the same problems the day before. The original version of that was that somebody reported hearing a couple of loud reports coming from one inside one of the shacks. Maybe they were from a gun. This went through the Chinese telephone speculation FOAF mixmaster, turning into the “same gun went off” story.

    Beware anything coming from a union. They get stories out there, and then walk them back, and the walk back is never reported in the media. You need to keep a close eye on Deadline.com, the HR, and The Wrap. Also, disregard anything without a named source.

    • Thanks: ic1000
    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    @Anon


    Beware anything coming from a union in the middle of nasty contract negotiations.
     
    FITY, here's a start from Wikipedia.

    TL;DR: Strikes overwhelmingly authorized in an October 1st-3rd vote, adverted on the 16th, but "On October 17, it was reported that many IATSE members would vote against the proposed agreement as it did not address their work conditions adequately." Variety said "which many find to be inhumane and unsustainable." And now of course the safety aspect is being stressed, but it's implicit in what they are arguing over. Tired people make mistakes, and that's where iron protocols as we've been discussing are all the more important.

    For example, from Massad Ayoob's very good safety video, every time you clear your semi-auto gun, with the slide locked back, stick your pinky into the chamber to make sure it's empty, and then into the magazine well to make sure that's also empty. Ingrain this habit and you'll do it properly when your tired, in an almost empty parking lot on a rainy night and your nerves and concentration are messed up because you just had to use the gun to defend yourself.

    (You do this if you think you're now safe and before the police show up, nothing good will come from your gun being loaded when they do.)
  99. @War for Blair Mountain
    I have great doubts that Alec Baldwin could hammer a nail straight…..But there have been persistent rumors over the years about Alec’s exemplary technical skills in servicing Jewish Hollywood Producers…especially in getting his foot in the door in that Industry in the early part of his career….

    Replies: @Ralph L, @War for Blair Mountain

    Alec’s exemplary technical skills in servicing Jewish Hollywood Producers…especially in getting his foot in the door

    Foot in the back door? Yikes. I’d rather have gerbils.

    Several insurance companies will have to shell out, Baldwin’s and the studio’s at a minimum. Baldwin, Hall, and Reed won’t be insurable in the future. Perhaps Baldwin will appear in amateur or indie films, never as a producer, but the other two will have a career change.

  100. @Joe S.Walker
    @Altai

    Somebody's been watching too many Dick Wolf TV shows.

    Replies: @Ben tillman

    Surely Altai was joking.

  101. @J1234
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I want to agree with you in spirit, but there's a nine year old child left without a mom due to Alec Baldwin and his production company's lack 0f professionalism. Their armorer should've been fired when guns used in filming were also used by the crew for target practice off set after hours. IMO, the only armorers that should be employed by any industry are those who've seen or experienced gun shot wounds first hand. That's something that would stay with you for a while.

    I wonder if any of Rust was filmed or scheduled to be filmed in Kansas (where a significant part of the story apparently takes place) or if - like all of those old school westerns - they decided to film it all in the Southwest and figure nobody can tell the difference. It could be that part of the story takes place in NM. Or it could be Santa Fe is a more pleasant place for stars to stay than Colby or Dodge City.

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @Jack D, @Hibernian

    They were filming on a “movie ranch” where several westerns have been filmed in the past.

    I suspect that since this was a low budget production New Mexico had better tax incentives than Kansas or California. That was one reason Breaking Bad was set in New Mexico, tax breaks. I have read about other productions that filmed outside California because it was easier to use non union crew. Most of the movie unions are based in California so if you go outside the state their influence isn’t as strong. If the union crew that walked off this production (supposedly) could have made a phone call and had a picket line set up in an hour this shooting may not have happened.

  102. @#56 Telling:

    checking safety for a semi-auto would require removing the magazine and then the round in the chamber

    Many years ago I was at home with a friend. Another friend came over to show-off his recently acquired, 9mm semi-auto pistol. Handling the weapon with great pride and aplomb, he took us through its features.

    (Though strongly pro #2, I’m not a gun person, so my technical details might be a little off:) Look, it’s got a this, a that. Blah blah blah. The other friend (anti- #2) remarked that the demo was making it nervous. The gunslinger told us not to worry, since he had already checked (cleaned?) the gun. “See, nothing in the magazine.” Then, he pulled on the [bolt action?].”See, nothing in the chamber.” A round popped out on to the floor.

    [MORE]

    The totally crappy, Albuquerque Public School District is back. It’s currently seeking [early] voter approval for a \$630M tax and GO bond whopper; the usual, political criminal gang supports it. This despite the fact that APS enrollment has dropped by 20% over the past ten years, and continues to fall. (Any number of district schools have low warm-body count, but APS purports to use some of the money for construction projects.)

    It’s always something how the tax leeches come back time after time. In 1/20 APS voters overwhelmingly rejected its request for \$900M. That proposition would have boosted property taxes by 5%. This year the schoolies are playing defense: The measures try to prolong existing school taxes that are due to expire soon.

    FYI, A_p_e has known about this APS school tax thing for a week, and was eager to comment about it, but it was waiting (praying!) for the blogger to post something, anything related to NM, so as to make its comment somewhat on-topic. A_p_e did not hold out much hope, however, that the blogger would have something timely to say about that quiet part of the country. What, HBD related to the Apache & Comanche? The gods really came through with this Baldwin thing.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
    @Abolish_public_education


    (Though strongly pro #2, I’m not a gun person, so my technical details might be a little off:) Look, it’s got a this, a that. Blah blah blah. The other friend (anti- #2) remarked that the demo was making it nervous. The gunslinger told us not to worry, since he had already checked (cleaned?) the gun. “See, nothing in the magazine.” Then, he pulled on the [bolt action?].”See, nothing in the chamber.” A round popped out on to the floor.
     
    [bolt action?] = Slide or sometimes "Dust cover" (A Colt M1911 has a slide/dust cover but a Beretta M92 has a slide, presumably.)

    If it's old, a Mauser 1896 or a Steyr 1907, for example, you could be pulling the bolt.

    If it's a TEC-9, it's a bolt.
  103. @Buzz Mohawk
    @That Would Be Telling

    There is no reason that shot cannot be made with a properly prepared movie gun -- straight-on -- with a long enough lens, from a sufficient distance to prevent the cinematographer from getting killed.

    If you force the actor to angle his barrel up and away (such that it looks like he is shooting over the viewer's left ear) then you destroy the suspension of disbelief, upon which all film depends.

    Replies: @Mr Mox

    There is no reason that shot cannot be made with a properly prepared movie gun — straight-on — with a long enough lens, from a sufficient distance to prevent the cinematographer from getting killed.

    Heck! They could do it in 1903.

    • Replies: @Paul Mendez
    @Mr Mox


    Heck! They could do it in 1903
     
    .

    I seem to recall that in the early days of movie-making they used to shoot real bullets near actors to kick up dirt for misses.
  104. @That Would Be Telling
    @Paperback Writer

    We can't be sure that claim the assistant director was responsible for double checking the armorer's work is correct. Although given sufficient gun safety experience, which should be mandatory for an assistant director (AD) in such a work, it obviously would be a very good idea, double checking never hurts for safety if you personally can do that safely and correctly so the gun is functioning when you hand it to the actor. If not the AD, have at least one other person on the set who's proficient and tasked with this.

    Another factor is the more credible claim the AD declared the gun safe before handing it to Baldwin, he failed in his overall duty to assure that. Based on what you're saying, he and everyone above him had a responsibility to make sure all this was being done correctly, even if they were not technically proficient in loading and unloading guns and knowing the difference between blanks and live rounds.

    I disagree WRT to the armorer, it was her responsibility to see all this was was done correctly and if she couldn't quit like those other crew members. COVID restrictions would not seem to cover the claims the guns were being used for plinking with live rounds, and keeping them locked on the cart until turned over to the AD (who should then have an assistant keep them in view) would seem to be minimal precautions. Certainly she should have quit after the first discharge with a live round by a stuntman unless she was allowed to take corrective measures. That that happened twice before the fatal instance is utterly damning for all involved.

    Anyone have any idea if the heirs of the cinematographer are part of the film community or otherwise subject to pressure to deter them from filing a lawsuit or limiting its scope or claimed damages?

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Jack D

    We can’t be sure that claim the assistant director was responsible for double checking the armorer’s work is correct

    It is. Do some research.

  105. @Almost Missouri
    @Altai

    The armorer from Rust:

    https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/10/NINTCHDBPICT000688664971-1.jpg

    https://www.the-sun.com/news/3926657/who-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed/

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Lurker, @The Wild Geese Howard, @JackOH, @ic1000, @Altai, @Dumbo, @Jack Armstrong, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Mike Tre

    That photo clarifies a lot. The key question now becomes how was this ditzy tart ever allowed on a movie set, let alone given a responsible position on that set.

    • Replies: @The Real World
    @Jus' Sayin'...


    ....how was this ditzy tart ever allowed on a movie set,
     
    Seems clear that you've never seen film crews. This chick fits right in.
    , @Alden
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    Men’s and women’s, teens and children’s clothing hair footwear hair style all fashions have changed since 1950 when you were young.
    Are you aware men don’t wear crew cuts any more? That lipstick and nail polish come in more than 4 shades of red? That workplace dress codes allow beards and mustaches and women's hair longer than jaw length?

  106. @Altai
    And yet how do you know it wasn't just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?

    https://twitter.com/Villavelius/status/1451499563903242242

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @Almost Missouri, @Joe S.Walker, @Jack Armstrong, @Charlotte, @Wade Hampton, @Reg Cæsar, @Buffalo Joe, @EdwardM

    I actually wondered about a psycho crew member pissed off at Baldwin. There was that walkout the very same day.

  107. Good point about competence and professionalism, but you know where I’m going to go with this. That’s right, there was a Mannix episode where they’re filming a Western shootout — with Robert Conrad playing the smug asshole star that everybody hates — and the crew suddenly realizes that the ammo is live.

    So … Smug, asshole star? Check. Maybe someone even hoped he would playfully point the gun at himself.

  108. @Mike Tre
    "“Armorer” is one of those jobs where you want to lean hard into stereotype accuracy and only hire middle aged dads with non-ironic mustaches and eagle-globe-anchor tattoos who don’t mind telling people, “No, you’re doing that wrong” all day.

    This description fits me to a T, except the non-ironic mustache (what's an ironic mustache?).

    I only spent about 30 seconds thinking about it, but what job do we NOT want someone like the above doing? Editor?

    Replies: @Hypnotoad666, @Expletive Deleted

    what’s an ironic mustache?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Hypnotoad666


    what’s an ironic mustache?
     
    http://thelifepile.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Abdal%C3%A1-Bucaram-e1511963971122-768x455.jpg
  109. Off topic, yet related to the zeitgeist, a Politico article talks about how Biden’s hand-picked (presumably for wokeness) medical advisers advise against booster shots so that the US can vaccinate the world. A Trump adviser (predictably) points out that there remains a real need for Americans to keep their antibody levels up that would seem to support booster shots:

    A former Harvard Medical School professor and founder of the university’s cancer and HIV/AIDS research departments, William Haseltine, said those who oppose a broad booster rollout are “pitting their hopes against the unknown.”

    “If you don’t have a high level of antibodies and you are relying on [immune cell] memory, it isn’t going to stop you from getting sick. It may prevent you from dying, but it won’t stop transmission,” Haseltine said. “They are guessing about how well memory will protect you. It is something they will come to regret. If you are in a situation like we’re in now, is it better to prepare for the worst or prepare for the best?”

    My guess is that Biden understands having more Americans die on his watch from the China virus than under Trump is not doing anything for his polls, and that is why he came down on the side of booster shot approval. The glaring reality is that the vaccine was not available during Trump’s tenure except during his lame duck post-election phase, and yet more Americans have died under Biden. That’s a fact the GOP might be able to use as 2022 election fodder.

    • Thanks: HA
    • Troll: Je Suis Omar Mateen
  110. @Altai
    And yet how do you know it wasn't just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?

    https://twitter.com/Villavelius/status/1451499563903242242

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @Almost Missouri, @Joe S.Walker, @Jack Armstrong, @Charlotte, @Wade Hampton, @Reg Cæsar, @Buffalo Joe, @EdwardM

    I am sure the FBI is investigating that theory as we speak.

  111. @Altai
    And yet how do you know it wasn't just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?

    https://twitter.com/Villavelius/status/1451499563903242242

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @Almost Missouri, @Joe S.Walker, @Jack Armstrong, @Charlotte, @Wade Hampton, @Reg Cæsar, @Buffalo Joe, @EdwardM

    And yet how do you know it wasn’t just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?

    One intriguing suggestion in the comments on another site is that it may have been union sabotage. They wanted to teach the reckless producers a lesson. Unfortunately for them, it cost the life of one of their own.

    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    @Reg Cæsar


    One intriguing suggestion in the comments on another site is that it may have been union sabotage.
     
    This is entirely plausible.

    U.S. v. Enmons, 410 US. 396 (1973) held that the Hobbs Act (the Federal Anti-Racketeering Act of 1934), did not apply to union violence in pursuit of a union's objectives. Wikipedia summarizes -

    The case involved a labor strike in which members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) fired rifles at three utility company transformers, drained the oil from another, and blew up a company substation. The labor union in question was seeking a higher-pay contract and other benefits from their employer, the Gulf States Utilities Company which is now part of Entergy. The federal government tried the defendants under the Hobbs Act.

    The Court ruled that 'The Hobbs Act, which makes it a federal crime to obstruct interstate commerce by robbery or extortion, does not reach the use of violence (which is readily punishable under state law) to achieve legitimate union objectives, such as higher wages in return for genuine services that the employer seeks.'
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Enmons
  112. @Hypnotoad666
    @Mike Tre


    what’s an ironic mustache?
     
    https://wellgroomedgentleman.com/media/images/2._A_curled_mustache_with_the_most_genuine_hip.width-800.jpg

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    what’s an ironic mustache?

  113. And according to Scott Reeder “a freelance ‘Prop Master’” who ic1000 brought to our attention it isn’t the duty of the assistant director (AD) to even handle a gun, that’s a protocol breach. That’s I assume why there are specialties like Armorer and Prop Master who have the required technical skill sets, check each other’s work, and are the only people allowed to handle the guns other than the actor.

    This makes more sense than demanding that every AD have these skill sets, especially since as this discussion has revealed and reminded me, there are many details. Did you remember how cap and ball revolvers are loaded to avoid chain fires? See Serge Svetnoy’s Facebook posting linked off the CBS item below, he points out there must be one seasoned professional in these positions, someone who’s been on sets enough times all the safety protocols are second nature. Rather like how my father would take nine years before allowing my siblings and myself to hold a gun while hunting (turtledove from concealment, so he was within arms reach).

    But it is the AD’s job to make sure the protocols are being followed, and he should know the one of Armorer -> Prop Master -> actor and no one else. And if not done by anyone above him, call a safety stand down after the first negligent but not fatal discharge, let alone the second. He should also generally know the safety protocol mentioned in this CBS piece brought to our attention by Anonymous[141]:

    [Early on mentions the scene was inside a church and “did not call for the use of live rounds.”]

    Jeffrey Wright, who has worked on projects including the James Bond franchise and the upcoming movie “The Batman,” was acting with a weapon on the set of “Westworld” when news broke of the shooting Thursday at a New Mexico ranch….

    “I don’t recall ever being handed a weapon that was not cleared in front of me – meaning chamber open, barrel shown to me, light flashed inside the barrel to make sure that it’s cleared,” Wright said. “Clearly, that was a mismanaged set.”

    Actor Ray Liotta agreed with Wright that the checks on firearms are usually extensive.

    “They always – that I know of – they check it so you can see,” Liotta said. “They give it to the person you’re pointing the gun at, they do it to the producer, they show whoever is there that it doesn’t work.”

    And this “shine a light” protocol works for everything real I can think of, old revolvers would have light visible behind the cylinder, older stuff it would shine up through the hole used to touch it off with anything from a percussion cap to a fuze.

    Beware, CBS also bought an industrial washing machine to spin the news, that item goes out of its way to exonerate Baldwin when he unambiguously pressed the trigger in a situation where he never should have had in finger in the trigger guard, and to blame especially the armorer, an easy target who hasn’t established herself much yet, and the AD who in a previous film “disregarded safety protocols for weapons and pyrotechnics and tried to continue filming after the supervising pyrotechnician lost consciousness on set.” (Shouldn’t have to remind people that pyrotechnics are if anything more dangerous and harder to use safely.)

    Also implies Baldwin wasn’t one of the producers while blaming them. We’ll have to see what the narrative congeals into.

  114. @Chris Mallory
    There have been some rumors that the weapon was a cap and ball black powder revolver. If so, that leads to a number of "Aw crap" options in handling the weapon.

    1. CB revolvers typically have the cylinder mouths greased after loading to prevent chain fires. Once the grease is applied it is basically impossible to check if a lead projectile is loaded by visual inspection.
    2. Did the armorer use the correct type and charge of powder. Should she have used a reduced charge? Finer granulations of powders burn faster and require a reduction in the powder load from more coarse grades.
    3. Were the chambers loaded normally, but had the percussion caps left off. Easy to see if they were on or off, and usually the firearm would be safe without the caps. BUT in rare cases primer compound from a percussion cap that was loaded, not fired and unloaded can still cause the powder charge to go off if the hammer is dropped. It is rare, but it can happen.
    4. Did the armorer load wax bullets or larger fiber wads over a full charge thinking they were safer than lead bullets? A wax bullet over a full charge will penetrate at least 1/2" of MDF or a paint can. The Hexum guy was killed by a paper wad, but that was at contact range.

    This is all just speculation, until we have more facts released it is hard to say what happened.

    Replies: @Rob McX, @Jack D

    CB revolvers typically have the cylinder mouths greased after loading to prevent chain fires. Once the grease is applied it is basically impossible to check if a lead projectile is loaded by visual inspection.

    In real life they’re greased. But in movies they’re probably not (I can’t recall any, so I can’t say for sure). Viewers expect to see bullets in the chambers, and movie makers will give them what they want. So even if the caps are off, there’s a danger of chain fire.

    Using lead bullets in front loaded guns means you have live rounds, because the armourer would usually have to put in enough powder to shoot them out again.

  115. @SafeNow
    The larger context for this “armorer” mishap is that, in the US, proficient/conscientious/fastidious has unraveled into “get it basically okay.” (Yes, this has been my broken-record comment for a few years now.) Examples of failures both large and small abound, and everyone here could readily compile a list. For once a mainstream newspaper got it right when it recently wrote “lower your expectations.” But I will say, I have total confidence in my electrician, whom I will call “John Smith.”

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling

    The larger context for this “armorer” mishap is that, in the US, proficient/conscientious/fastidious has unraveled into “get it basically okay.”

    Except that’s not reflected in the statistics for US gun culture.

    From 1980 to 2019, the most recent year for which there are CDC statistics we went from ~800 to 486 accidental firearms deaths per year at the same time the population increased by ~50%, the number of guns owned by it more than doubled, and there’s many more gun owners and much more gun handling because they became much more useful as the nation went from 2 to 42 states with “shall issue” or better concealed carry license regimes.

    (Note my earlier reply starting with “And according to Scott Reeder” was to Paperback Writer demanding I do some research.)

    • Replies: @SafeNow
    @That Would Be Telling

    I completely agree that my argument about reduced proficiency does not apply to gun owners. I meant to direct the reduced-proficiency argument only to the “armorer.” I am sorry if I implied that gun owners are not conscientious. Thank you for clarifying this.

  116. @Dumbo
    @Almost Missouri

    I know Hollywood is built on nepotism, but whose brilliant idea was it to put this dumb daughter-of-someone as head armorer?

    Hire her as a production intern, or to fellate Mr. Baldwin during the breaks (although from the pic she's probably a lesbian), but not in charge of a job that puts everyone on danger if you don't do it well.

    Also, already two other gun incidents in the same movie? And they didn't stop?

    This is a really weird story, there must be more to it.

    Replies: @kaganovitch

    Also, already two other gun incidents in the same movie?

    Wouldn’t the other gun incidents be best understood as an emergent property of the choice of armorer?

    • LOL: acementhead
    • Replies: @El Dato
    @kaganovitch

    Or an extremely bad chain of command.

  117. @Robert Weissberg
    My son is currently directing a movie in Hollywood with lots of gun action (mainly AK-47's). He told me that it is far easier to add the shot electronically after the scene is completed. Not only is this 100% safe, but the loud noise from the blank shot is distracting to the actors. All of his many guns have solid barrels. He also told me that Baldwin is push his crew far too hard to save some money. Stupidity all the way around.

    Replies: @Anonymous Jew, @Danindc, @Reg Cæsar, @That Would Be Telling

    What about achieving realistic recoil? Fake recoil might look like those old Hollywood slap punches. I dunno.

  118. Anonymous[950] • Disclaimer says:
    @stillCARealist
    @Altai

    As soon as my retired performer husband heard that the union guys had walked off the set he was suspicious that one of them had sabotaged the prop. He had experience with the unions doing nasty stuff to get revenge when they don't get their way during his career... speaking specifically about the stagehand unions.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Mikeja

    As soon as my retired performer husband heard that the union guys had walked off the set he was suspicious that one of them had sabotaged the prop. He had experience with the unions doing nasty stuff to get revenge when they don’t get their way during his career… speaking specifically about the stagehand unions.

    I’ve worked on non-union film sets, and your husband is, unfortunately correct.

    A film set is like a kids summer camp. The participants are in a bubble. Anything outside the immediate wants and needs of the film cast and crew no longer seems real. A non-union film set can easily become a mini “Lord of the Flies.” I’ve seen it happen. I’ve seen a producer threaten a poorly performing director with murder. That producer had the ways and means to make it happen. It made for quite an intense few weeks of filming. Crazy shit on non-union films is highly possible, if not probable, since the money for production can often come from amazingly sleazy places, bringing amazingly sleazy people into the mix, including hiring non-union type folks below the line.

    Unions are intended to weed those kind of people out of the creative process. A non-union project gives skeezy people a big say in things. And then stupid low-brow shit can happen. Like getting a woman shot dead for no fucking reason. Some area’s of below-the-line expertise, Union or not, tends to bring in what the average person might call, “white trash,” many of whom are only in the game thanks to nepotism. Explosives “experts,” as well as stunt people weigh heavily in that category. Hire them carefully, or inherit a very shittious wind.

    I’m looking at you, “producer” Alec Baldwin.

  119. anon[390] • Disclaimer says:

    Was the armorer anywhere on the set? I’m betting no. The part that shocks me is that the guns were used for target practice!!!

    And more people are murdered with guns on television than in real life. So this has been done safely more or less forever, all the time. With only the handful of accidents that are constantly referenced. So it isn’t that hard. And nepotism has its issues, but the girl is probably more than good enough.

    I pretty much blame Baldwin. But it looks like the AD is going take the blame. The girl would have if she could have.

    If prop guns were a real danger, there would be lots of dead actors. Always plenty of incompetence to go around.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    @anon


    If prop guns were a real danger, there would be lots of dead actors. Always plenty of incompetence to go around.
     
    Indeed to the latter, but prop guns are a real danger as has been extensively discussed, but as has also been extensively discussed, this being a more than century old business, culture, protocols etc. have been established to use them safely. At their best, you show everyone who matters, the actor and the people he's going to be pointing the gun at that it is empty as this one was supposed to be prior to actually filming the gunfight in the church. It's not hard with a light, but takes a few minutes and this production was cutting corners left and right.

    As Jack D noted, the protocols were being cargo culted, for example the assistant director we believe (Jack D. is more careful) "called 'cold gun' as tradition requires, but without actually checking to see if it was a cold gun." Baldwin who's really eager to take our guns did not practice proper gun safety, the gun didn't "go off" without him taking one or more specific actions including one you never do in such a circumstance or dropping it, which I hope I don't have to note you try really hard to avoid, especially for non-modern designs that you'd expect on an movie set in the 1880s.
  120. @That Would Be Telling
    @Paperback Writer

    We can't be sure that claim the assistant director was responsible for double checking the armorer's work is correct. Although given sufficient gun safety experience, which should be mandatory for an assistant director (AD) in such a work, it obviously would be a very good idea, double checking never hurts for safety if you personally can do that safely and correctly so the gun is functioning when you hand it to the actor. If not the AD, have at least one other person on the set who's proficient and tasked with this.

    Another factor is the more credible claim the AD declared the gun safe before handing it to Baldwin, he failed in his overall duty to assure that. Based on what you're saying, he and everyone above him had a responsibility to make sure all this was being done correctly, even if they were not technically proficient in loading and unloading guns and knowing the difference between blanks and live rounds.

    I disagree WRT to the armorer, it was her responsibility to see all this was was done correctly and if she couldn't quit like those other crew members. COVID restrictions would not seem to cover the claims the guns were being used for plinking with live rounds, and keeping them locked on the cart until turned over to the AD (who should then have an assistant keep them in view) would seem to be minimal precautions. Certainly she should have quit after the first discharge with a live round by a stuntman unless she was allowed to take corrective measures. That that happened twice before the fatal instance is utterly damning for all involved.

    Anyone have any idea if the heirs of the cinematographer are part of the film community or otherwise subject to pressure to deter them from filing a lawsuit or limiting its scope or claimed damages?

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Jack D

    Her husband is also an actor. Baldwin has personally apologized to him and they seem to be on friendly terms (seen hugging, etc.).

    If this was a film noir, Baldwin would have conspired with the husband to get rid of his wife and have the AD or the armorer take the rap. The husband would be Baldwin’s gay lover.

  121. @NickG
    4 rules of firearm safety:

    1) Treat all guns as if they are loaded with live rounds, all the time, even if you 'know' they are not.

    2) Do not point the muzzle at anything you are not prepared to destroy.

    3) Keep your finger off the trigger and outside and above the trigger guard until you are on target and ready to fire.

    4) Be aware of your backstop — where the bullet will stop, what it could pass through.

    That said, in the military rules 1 and 2 are routinely broken when using blank cartridges. Automatic and semi automatic weapons require a blank firing attachment over the muzzle or for machine guns, usually a blank firing barrel, to cycle. Protocols for keeping live rounds separate from blanks are in place. And besides, blanks look quite different, they don't have a bullet.

    Back to this case, in addition to the 'armourer', and others. I suspect Baldwin is going to face a rather large claim. Whatever protocols were not in place or were ignored, the guy operating the weapon is the last line of defence and he — Baldwin — should have checked.

    Replies: @John Henry, @SaneClownPosse, @Catdompanj

    I never see this one: “Clear every firearm when you pick it up or it is handed to you. It doesn’t matter if you just handed it to someone else, they did the same thing, and they gave it right back.” What I’ve always done and taught my children to do.

    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
    @John Henry


    What I’ve always done and taught my children to do
     
    Unless you've been on a movie set, this advice is meaningless.

    Replies: @John Henry

  122. @That Would Be Telling
    @SafeNow


    The larger context for this “armorer” mishap is that, in the US, proficient/conscientious/fastidious has unraveled into “get it basically okay.”
     
    Except that's not reflected in the statistics for US gun culture.

    From 1980 to 2019, the most recent year for which there are CDC statistics we went from ~800 to 486 accidental firearms deaths per year at the same time the population increased by ~50%, the number of guns owned by it more than doubled, and there's many more gun owners and much more gun handling because they became much more useful as the nation went from 2 to 42 states with "shall issue" or better concealed carry license regimes.

    (Note my earlier reply starting with "And according to Scott Reeder" was to Paperback Writer demanding I do some research.)

    Replies: @SafeNow

    I completely agree that my argument about reduced proficiency does not apply to gun owners. I meant to direct the reduced-proficiency argument only to the “armorer.” I am sorry if I implied that gun owners are not conscientious. Thank you for clarifying this.

    • Thanks: That Would Be Telling
  123. @Dr. X
    Until now, the fictions of affirmative action and "equality" have been maintained having enough competent white men on hand to carry the dead weight of the stupid and the incompetent. But we're rapidly approaching -- if not already at -- the point where white men have been purged to the extent that this is no longer possible. Having clueless little girls LARPing as armorers -- and as sailors, cops, journalists, professors, senators, and vice-presidents -- is starting to have negative real-world consequences.

    I made this point to a retired corrections officer once, and he related a story where they had to do a "cell extraction" on a big, muscular black inmate who was freaking out in his cell (possibly on drugs). The guy had trashed his cell, stripped naked, covered himself with soap to make himself slippery, snarling and foaming at the mouth, and wanted to fight the COs.

    Three male COs and a female CO with a reputation for being incompetent responded. One of the male COs said "OK, here's what we're going to do." To the female he said "You go in there first, and then we'll go in and grab his arms and legs."

    The female CO blanched. "I'm not going in there!" The male looked at her and said "You make the same paycheck as me, don't you?"

    Ultimately the male COs, who were all big, dumb football player types able (and willing) to fight, handled the situation.

    Moral of the story: Once guys like that are are gone... reality will kick in and it won't be pretty.

    Replies: @Colin Wright, @Colin Wright, @2BR

    ‘Three male COs and a female CO with a reputation for being incompetent responded. One of the male COs said “OK, here’s what we’re going to do.” To the female he said “You go in there first, and then we’ll go in and grab his arms and legs.”

    The female CO blanched. “I’m not going in there!” The male looked at her and said “You make the same paycheck as me, don’t you?”…’

    More routinely, we had a house fire close to twenty years back now. Nothing horrific, but a year of bullshit thereafter.

    Anyway, the fire department shows up with three guys and three gals. It worked — but it was hard not to notice something.

    The three guys fought the fire. The three gals consoled the family.

    This — if it’s understood, and matters are arranged accordingly — actually isn’t too bad a system. However, the pretense is otherwise.

  124. @Chris Mallory
    There have been some rumors that the weapon was a cap and ball black powder revolver. If so, that leads to a number of "Aw crap" options in handling the weapon.

    1. CB revolvers typically have the cylinder mouths greased after loading to prevent chain fires. Once the grease is applied it is basically impossible to check if a lead projectile is loaded by visual inspection.
    2. Did the armorer use the correct type and charge of powder. Should she have used a reduced charge? Finer granulations of powders burn faster and require a reduction in the powder load from more coarse grades.
    3. Were the chambers loaded normally, but had the percussion caps left off. Easy to see if they were on or off, and usually the firearm would be safe without the caps. BUT in rare cases primer compound from a percussion cap that was loaded, not fired and unloaded can still cause the powder charge to go off if the hammer is dropped. It is rare, but it can happen.
    4. Did the armorer load wax bullets or larger fiber wads over a full charge thinking they were safer than lead bullets? A wax bullet over a full charge will penetrate at least 1/2" of MDF or a paint can. The Hexum guy was killed by a paper wad, but that was at contact range.

    This is all just speculation, until we have more facts released it is hard to say what happened.

    Replies: @Rob McX, @Jack D

    I doubt it was a cap and ball revolver. It was most likely a single action Colt which would have been period authentic to the movie they were making.

    Such a gun takes cartridges. Unlike a modern double action revolver, the cylinder does not tilt out for loading/inspection. Rather it remains in place. There is a loading gate which has to be folded down and this reveals the back of the cylinder one chamber at a time. When you half cock the weapon, the cylinder is free to spin. You manually spin the cylinder and check to see that all 6 chambers are empty. This takes longer to describe than it does to do and you could be taught how to do this safely in a one minute lesson.

    If the armorer did not reinspect the weapons after they had been left out of her control, then the AD should have reinspected them. SOMEONE should have reinspected them. Maybe it didn’t occur to them how it was possible for an unloaded gun to magically become loaded but as we can see, it can – this is why custody/inspection is necessary.

    Baldwin was probably not legally obligated (in his actor’s role) to personally inspect the gun but he had every right to do so. That’s what I would have done. If I’m being asked to point a gun in another human being’s face, I’m not taking someone else’s word for the fact that it’s not loaded when I could verify that for myself in 30 seconds. Maybe it’s a low budget movie and the clock is running, but how much is a human being’s life worth, even if they are just some crew member and not a star?

    There was no reason for the gun to be loaded, even with blanks, because it was a rehearsal.

    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
    @Jack D

    The report I saw said a Colt 3rd Dragoon. No mention on if it had been converted to cartridge or not.
    Until a definitive report comes out, we won't know for sure.

    I know what a 1873 Colt SAA is.

  125. @Sick 'n Tired
    @Rob

    Reading what you wrote tells me you know absolutely nothing about guns.

    Replies: @TWS, @Rob

    Yup nothing. Weird how everyone who has never been exposed to anything except entertainment regarding firearms suddenly becomes an expert on the subject when they are in the news.

    • Agree: Paul Mendez, Catdompanj
  126. @That Would Be Telling
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Look more closely at the gun's barrel, you can see the underside of it but not the top side. I think that guy or whomever coached him just before the photo knows enough gun safety to have it angled up so it's unlikely to hit the photographer. I'm not certain because the photo does not have him using the sights, that would likely cover too much of his face for the desired photo.

    We can't know about the handling of the gun before or after, but from what we can tell this is not a gross violation of Rule 2 of gun safety although that's by a hair, and I wouldn't do it myself without personally emptying the gun, double checking that, abd keeping my trigger finger in the trigger guard but touching the forward part of it, not the trigger. But see below, we can assume most of the people on the set weren't taught gun safety starting when they were three (by example, that's when my father would start taking me and my siblings out hunting with him).

    The discussion so far here is excellent, I give particular thanks to ic1000 for bringing us up to date on the facts as they are believed to be known, they allow us to figure out ways this could have happened as Jack D has done (except for the gun being visibly dirty after plinking, smokeless power is pretty clean stuff). However Altai's point, and our general points about people downstream of the armorer double checking the latter's work are iffy because the difference between a regular and blank round is only apparent at the forward end of it.

    So depending on the action type, checking safety for a semi-auto would require removing the magazine and then the round in the chamber, for revolvers based on lighting and such maybe looking at the front of the cylinder, spinning it if single action, or removing all the rounds. And then, not being a specialist armorer, restoring the gun and its blank ammo back to the condition it was in so the film shooting will go right, you don't want to ruin a take because the gun doesn't fire. And all this keeping the barrel pointed in a safe direction, all blanks are deadly at contact range, those with wadding somewhat further, and I assume wadding plus light springs are used make semi-autos cycle new rounds into the chamber.

    So it would make sense for the guns to be completely under the control of the armorer, directly in his physical possession, or locked away with a key only he has, and everyone downstream assuming the armorer is doing his job properly. Which obviously wasn't happening if as said the armorer is allowing the guns to used for plinking, mixing of blank and real ammo should never be allowed except for the rare situations where you want to film that that. In which case the armorer would directly hand the gun to the actor, who he'd previously vetted for being sufficiently experienced and responsible in using guns for real.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Ben Kurtz, @Polistra, @dimples

    because the difference between a regular and blank round is only apparent at the forward end of it.

    This was a rehearsal. The gun was not supposed to be loaded with ANYTHING. It was supposed to be “cold”.

    If you are shooting blanks at the camera(man) you still have to take precautions – You can use a right angle prism on the lens so that the cameraman is off to the side. You can install a plexiglass shield. At close range even blanks can be dangerous as you point out. But they weren’t taking any of those precautions (the plexiglass would not have stopped a bullet anyway) because they were just rehearsing and the gun was supposed to be “cold”.

    Why they needed a real weapon during a rehearsal is another question – ideally you use the least lethal prop that is suitable. For a rehearsal a non-functional replica would have been just as good.

  127. @Paperback Writer
    @That Would Be Telling

    I agree with everything you say, I was just pointing out, for the record, a niggling little detail that I had gotten wrong previously.


    And as noted above, the guns in the “cart” should have been locked down with a key only she had unless she was personally overseeing their use.

     

    I'm also appalled by this. They just leave live guns out on a "cart" - like a dessert cart? -- WTF?

    See my response to Jack about the chain of command. I am not at all excusing the armorer but it seems to me she's not responsible for this tragedy. The Assistant Director handed a hot gun to an actor. He had a responsibility to see that the gun was safe. My own guess is that he wouldn't know a gun from a taco.

    Film sets are totally hierarchical. The director (in this case, the AD) has dictatorial control. If you cough and ruin a scene, he can fire you on the spot, don't tell me about union rules, I've heard of this.

    Perhaps, maybe, an older male armorer would have put his foot down and insisted on better safety procedures to secure the guns when not in use. But according to what we know - this is on Halls and Baldwin's shoulders.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Abolish_public_education

    Film sets are totally hierarchical.

    Think what you will of those youngish, leftist dominated, hi-tech firms, but when it comes to culture, they’re very democratic. Floor plans are wide open. It’s easy to speak (not just text!) with someone, that sort of thing. By comparison, in stodgy old (Latin American!) firms, to speak with a director (who’s typically officed in a separate, executive suite) a worker needs to set up an appointment, if he’d even dare to seek such a meeting in the first place.

    The darn Hollywood, movie-set culture is beyond ridiculous, what with marquee actors given exclusive access to luxury trailers and on-set, fold-up chairs (with their names stitched on them), the arrogant, temperamental directors blusteringly firing low-level staffers for minor mistakes, etc. And then those buzzards presume to lecture the rest of us about being bad people.

  128. Here’s a somewhat disturbing video of Baldwin, likely drunk, comparing getting vaccinated to the rationing efforts of WWII. The comparison is not so much disturbing as is Baldwin himself. He’s clearly not well. His eyes are puffy, swollen and little more than slits on his face, like those of a long time hardcore drunkard (think Harry Carry of Chicago Cubs fame).

    https://leakedreality.com/video/25490/alec-baldwin-talks-about-vaccine-compares-it-to-ww2

  129. @That Would Be Telling
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Look more closely at the gun's barrel, you can see the underside of it but not the top side. I think that guy or whomever coached him just before the photo knows enough gun safety to have it angled up so it's unlikely to hit the photographer. I'm not certain because the photo does not have him using the sights, that would likely cover too much of his face for the desired photo.

    We can't know about the handling of the gun before or after, but from what we can tell this is not a gross violation of Rule 2 of gun safety although that's by a hair, and I wouldn't do it myself without personally emptying the gun, double checking that, abd keeping my trigger finger in the trigger guard but touching the forward part of it, not the trigger. But see below, we can assume most of the people on the set weren't taught gun safety starting when they were three (by example, that's when my father would start taking me and my siblings out hunting with him).

    The discussion so far here is excellent, I give particular thanks to ic1000 for bringing us up to date on the facts as they are believed to be known, they allow us to figure out ways this could have happened as Jack D has done (except for the gun being visibly dirty after plinking, smokeless power is pretty clean stuff). However Altai's point, and our general points about people downstream of the armorer double checking the latter's work are iffy because the difference between a regular and blank round is only apparent at the forward end of it.

    So depending on the action type, checking safety for a semi-auto would require removing the magazine and then the round in the chamber, for revolvers based on lighting and such maybe looking at the front of the cylinder, spinning it if single action, or removing all the rounds. And then, not being a specialist armorer, restoring the gun and its blank ammo back to the condition it was in so the film shooting will go right, you don't want to ruin a take because the gun doesn't fire. And all this keeping the barrel pointed in a safe direction, all blanks are deadly at contact range, those with wadding somewhat further, and I assume wadding plus light springs are used make semi-autos cycle new rounds into the chamber.

    So it would make sense for the guns to be completely under the control of the armorer, directly in his physical possession, or locked away with a key only he has, and everyone downstream assuming the armorer is doing his job properly. Which obviously wasn't happening if as said the armorer is allowing the guns to used for plinking, mixing of blank and real ammo should never be allowed except for the rare situations where you want to film that that. In which case the armorer would directly hand the gun to the actor, who he'd previously vetted for being sufficiently experienced and responsible in using guns for real.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Ben Kurtz, @Polistra, @dimples

    You can also snap a photo using a cable shutter release so the photographer does not stand directly behind the camera.

    Line up the model and the photo with the real gun pointed straight up or down; use a rubber prop gun to compose and set up the shot in advance if needed; photographer steps away from camera; model aims real gun at camera; snap photo from remote position using cable; safe the gun and check your work.

  130. @Almost Missouri
    @Altai

    The armorer from Rust:

    https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/10/NINTCHDBPICT000688664971-1.jpg

    https://www.the-sun.com/news/3926657/who-armorer-hannah-gutierrez-reed/

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Lurker, @The Wild Geese Howard, @JackOH, @ic1000, @Altai, @Dumbo, @Jack Armstrong, @Jus' Sayin'..., @Mike Tre

  131. @kaganovitch
    @Dumbo

    Also, already two other gun incidents in the same movie?

    Wouldn't the other gun incidents be best understood as an emergent property of the choice of armorer?

    Replies: @El Dato

    Or an extremely bad chain of command.

  132. @J1234
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I want to agree with you in spirit, but there's a nine year old child left without a mom due to Alec Baldwin and his production company's lack 0f professionalism. Their armorer should've been fired when guns used in filming were also used by the crew for target practice off set after hours. IMO, the only armorers that should be employed by any industry are those who've seen or experienced gun shot wounds first hand. That's something that would stay with you for a while.

    I wonder if any of Rust was filmed or scheduled to be filmed in Kansas (where a significant part of the story apparently takes place) or if - like all of those old school westerns - they decided to film it all in the Southwest and figure nobody can tell the difference. It could be that part of the story takes place in NM. Or it could be Santa Fe is a more pleasant place for stars to stay than Colby or Dodge City.

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @Jack D, @Hibernian

    I wonder if any of Rust was filmed or scheduled to be filmed in Kansas (where a significant part of the story apparently takes place)

    There is a famous story about the making of Marathon Man. Dustin Hoffman is a “method” actor – when a scene called for him to be sleep deprived he would stay up for 48 hours and so on. One day when Laurence Olivier saw Hoffman on the set looking particular worn out, he said to him something like , “Have you considered acting, my dear boy?”

    The same thing is true of movie sets. Just because a movie is set in Kansas doesn’t mean you have to actually BE in Kansas. Maybe the 5 people from that part of Kansas who see the movie will notice that the dirt is the wrong shade for Kansas (but 3 of them won’t care) and everyone else won’t know the difference.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Jack D

    Yes. For example, this great scene from North by Northwest supposedly happens in Indiana, but it was shot north of Bakersfield, California. Nobody complained:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIY7BQkbIT8

    , @Stebbing Heuer
    @Jack D

    Less than halfway into the first episode of the first season of The Man in the High Castle I completely lost interest in the whole thing.

    I was so looking forward to the series. Having Juliana be an aikidoka was the cherry on top. Then it came out and I saw it.

    The aikido was completely wrong - the poorly-tied hakama, the stance, the mind-set, the execution, the way the receiving student takes the falls hard (aikidoka LOVE getting thrown around, rolling out of a fall, and being smashed into the mat - learning how fall safely with a smile on your face is part of the training), the students sitting in a circle where they were guaranteed to get crushed by a flying student, the 'aikido philosophy' espoused by the sensei, dammit even the paper coverings on the doors, which would last maybe three minutes before a flying student breached them with an arm or leg, to universal acclaim.

    https://youtu.be/tWrxpI0LZdI?t=13

    It told me the producers and director didn't care about getting the little details right. The show's failure was presaged in the first twenty minutes of the first episode.

    Aikido isn't about the techniques, they are just the path. That's why it takes years to learn and can't be faked. They should have stuck with judo, as in PKD's novel. Judo is a superb art that teaches everything in that sensei's 'philosophy' and is much more practical, and so is much more relevant to the storyline.

    Just appalling. I can't even!

    I'll shut up now. My friends know not to start me talking about aikido.

    Replies: @anon

    , @Anonymous Jew
    @Jack D

    Bosch. I’m still mad about Mt Baker appearing in what is supposedly rural Pennsylvania in The Deer Hunter. There are no real mountains anywhere on the East Coast! (I’m a Washington native and have climbed Baker thrice).

    Regarding all the comments here about adding gun fire with computer animation, I imagine one of the primary reasons - if not the reason - for using blanks is recoil. Like many other types of visual effects in movies, sometimes there’s no substitute for the real thing.

    , @J1234
    @Jack D

    There's a long history of Hollywood making movies about Kansas or the Dakotas out in California with little regard for topographical accuracy, so you'd get things like cacti and giant rock formations in a scene that's supposed to take place near of Abilene, KS. Believe it or not, that's silly to an awful lot of people. That would be like someone from Iowa filming scenes about Detroit or Chicago in Des Moines and saying "what difference does it make?" That lack of sophistication was fine for the 1940's, but now Hollywood sells itself to the world as reality, in one fashion or another. That "reality" is generally a big lie, of course, but they usually try to make it more believable than they did in the 1940's.

    Other than a lack of trees, I've seen little on I-25 between Santa Fe and Albuquerque that bears much resemblance to Kansas, and most everything north of Santa Fe is Rocky Mountains, so that doesn't work either. Maybe they found a little patch of KS in NM, or maybe cinematography flattens out topography or maybe part of the story takes place in NM, and that's what they were filming. If not, they could've changed the story or the location pretty easily. I'm sure there were other considerations, though, and a production company that can't even afford to keep its firearms safe probably isn't going to pay a lot of attention to geographical accuracy either.

    Replies: @Muggles, @Curle

  133. @Expletive Deleted
    @Altai

    And John Kennedy was murdered by the guy who gave LHO the rifle.

    It was one of 3 guns laid out on a cart, I read. The gofer grabbed one when his choleric master barked, allegedly stating "cold gun!". Were they all set up for Russian roulette?
    Why did Ol' Powder Finger point it down camera or whatever (least culpable scenario) while there was anyone in line?
    It's not 1935 anymore, squinting through the eyepiece; monitors are a thing.

    I understand the whole production was a shambles, and the fellow knows nothing about firearms (maybe a bit more now), but there's a lot of digging to be done here.

    Replies: @Corn

    Why did Ol’ Powder Finger point it down camera or whatever (least culpable scenario) while there was anyone in line?

    I can’t be certain but I read he wasn’t intentionally aiming or pointing the gun at anyone. He was supposedly holstering or unholstering the gun.

    Still, if so, he should have kept the gun pointed down.

  134. @Robert Weissberg
    My son is currently directing a movie in Hollywood with lots of gun action (mainly AK-47's). He told me that it is far easier to add the shot electronically after the scene is completed. Not only is this 100% safe, but the loud noise from the blank shot is distracting to the actors. All of his many guns have solid barrels. He also told me that Baldwin is push his crew far too hard to save some money. Stupidity all the way around.

    Replies: @Anonymous Jew, @Danindc, @Reg Cæsar, @That Would Be Telling

    A Weissberg directing a movie?? Ok, I’ll take your word for it…

  135. Did the guy who used the weapon for target practice own the weapon and was it licensed to him.
    Using weapons supplied by crew would save money and earn bragging rights for owner.
    If he did own the weapon then that explains why film crew were using it for target practice and why live ammo was on set.

    Who owned the weapon and where did it come from.It was obviously a fully functioning weapon and not a dummy.

  136. @Achmed E. Newman
    Who cares? It's just Hollywood. I don't care if they all wipe each other off the face of the earth with their stupidity.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @J1234, @Kylie, @Prof. Woland

    B”Who cares? It’s just Hollywood. I don’t care if they all wipe each other off the face of the earth with their stupidity.”

    I care. Very much. So much, in fact, that recently, I’ve been hoping DeNiro decides to do a western, with Angelina Jolie as his costar and Meghan Markle and Jane Fonda in brief cameos.

    • LOL: Achmed E. Newman
  137. All this effort and subsequent tragedy for what will undoubtedly be a shitty movie.

    • LOL: Harry Baldwin
  138. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rob

    BTW, how are you mentally ill, Rob? You read as much more lucid and sane than 90% of the people in government, education, big business, ... etc., etc... etc.....

    Replies: @Polistra

    More like 99٪ imho. But mental illness takes so many forms. Depression, for instance is correlated with intelligence for some reason. Turns out ignorance really is bliss.

    Meanwhile just imagine the self-reflection going on with Mr. Baldwin

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/baseball/#comment-4971238

    Just kidding…

  139. @Jack D
    @Chris Mallory

    I doubt it was a cap and ball revolver. It was most likely a single action Colt which would have been period authentic to the movie they were making.

    Such a gun takes cartridges. Unlike a modern double action revolver, the cylinder does not tilt out for loading/inspection. Rather it remains in place. There is a loading gate which has to be folded down and this reveals the back of the cylinder one chamber at a time. When you half cock the weapon, the cylinder is free to spin. You manually spin the cylinder and check to see that all 6 chambers are empty. This takes longer to describe than it does to do and you could be taught how to do this safely in a one minute lesson.

    If the armorer did not reinspect the weapons after they had been left out of her control, then the AD should have reinspected them. SOMEONE should have reinspected them. Maybe it didn't occur to them how it was possible for an unloaded gun to magically become loaded but as we can see, it can - this is why custody/inspection is necessary.

    Baldwin was probably not legally obligated (in his actor's role) to personally inspect the gun but he had every right to do so. That's what I would have done. If I'm being asked to point a gun in another human being's face, I'm not taking someone else's word for the fact that it's not loaded when I could verify that for myself in 30 seconds. Maybe it's a low budget movie and the clock is running, but how much is a human being's life worth, even if they are just some crew member and not a star?

    There was no reason for the gun to be loaded, even with blanks, because it was a rehearsal.

    Replies: @Chris Mallory

    The report I saw said a Colt 3rd Dragoon. No mention on if it had been converted to cartridge or not.
    Until a definitive report comes out, we won’t know for sure.

    I know what a 1873 Colt SAA is.

  140. @Tono Bungay
    Accidents happen. That I understand. But how does a real cartridge get anywhere near a film set?

    Replies: @Colin Wright, @Buffalo Joe

    ‘Accidents happen. That I understand. But how does a real cartridge get anywhere near a film set?’

    Look up some pictures of the armorer.

    • LOL: PaceLaw
  141. Can you give us advice on hiring your Assistant Director?

    Thanks to commenter who linked to Scott Reeder video. The last 30 seconds are devastating to Assistant Director.

    Here is the search warrant:

    https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/RUST-MOVIE-SEARCH-WARRANT-OCT-22.pdf

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Paperback Writer

    This is getting weird.

    The armorer was there (p. 4, bottom) and removed the spent casing.

    Concealing evidence?

    In the presence of her bosses?

    Replies: @Polistra

  142. @The Wild Geese Howard
    @Almost Missouri

    I can practically smell the multiple STDs through my phone.

    Replies: @TWS, @bomag

    Hepatitis-Z

  143. @That Would Be Telling
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Look more closely at the gun's barrel, you can see the underside of it but not the top side. I think that guy or whomever coached him just before the photo knows enough gun safety to have it angled up so it's unlikely to hit the photographer. I'm not certain because the photo does not have him using the sights, that would likely cover too much of his face for the desired photo.

    We can't know about the handling of the gun before or after, but from what we can tell this is not a gross violation of Rule 2 of gun safety although that's by a hair, and I wouldn't do it myself without personally emptying the gun, double checking that, abd keeping my trigger finger in the trigger guard but touching the forward part of it, not the trigger. But see below, we can assume most of the people on the set weren't taught gun safety starting when they were three (by example, that's when my father would start taking me and my siblings out hunting with him).

    The discussion so far here is excellent, I give particular thanks to ic1000 for bringing us up to date on the facts as they are believed to be known, they allow us to figure out ways this could have happened as Jack D has done (except for the gun being visibly dirty after plinking, smokeless power is pretty clean stuff). However Altai's point, and our general points about people downstream of the armorer double checking the latter's work are iffy because the difference between a regular and blank round is only apparent at the forward end of it.

    So depending on the action type, checking safety for a semi-auto would require removing the magazine and then the round in the chamber, for revolvers based on lighting and such maybe looking at the front of the cylinder, spinning it if single action, or removing all the rounds. And then, not being a specialist armorer, restoring the gun and its blank ammo back to the condition it was in so the film shooting will go right, you don't want to ruin a take because the gun doesn't fire. And all this keeping the barrel pointed in a safe direction, all blanks are deadly at contact range, those with wadding somewhat further, and I assume wadding plus light springs are used make semi-autos cycle new rounds into the chamber.

    So it would make sense for the guns to be completely under the control of the armorer, directly in his physical possession, or locked away with a key only he has, and everyone downstream assuming the armorer is doing his job properly. Which obviously wasn't happening if as said the armorer is allowing the guns to used for plinking, mixing of blank and real ammo should never be allowed except for the rare situations where you want to film that that. In which case the armorer would directly hand the gun to the actor, who he'd previously vetted for being sufficiently experienced and responsible in using guns for real.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Ben Kurtz, @Polistra, @dimples

    The discussion so far here is excellent

    Have to agree. Entertaining without any real insults to the intelligence. What’s not to like? But seriously, the commentariat has done itself justice today.

    • Agree: JackOH
  144. @Anonymous
    1. Best practice is for the actor to check the weapon clear as a second check. Often it is demonstrated to him and he is required to view/acknowledge. See bottom of this article with comments from two name actors to that effect:

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alec-baldwin-shooting-electrician-blames-producers-rust-film/

    "This situation is not about Dave Halls. ... It's in no way one person's fault," she said. "It's a bigger conversation about safety on set and what we are trying to achieve with that culture."

    Hollywood professionals say they're baffled by the circumstances and production crews have quickly stepped up safety measures.

    Jeffrey Wright, who has worked on projects including the James Bond franchise and the upcoming movie "The Batman," was acting with a weapon on the set of "Westworld" when news broke of the shooting Thursday at a New Mexico ranch. "We were all pretty shocked. And it informed what we did from that moment on," he said in an interview Sunday at the Newport Beach Film Festival.

    "I don't recall ever being handed a weapon that was not cleared in front of me - meaning chamber open, barrel shown to me, light flashed inside the barrel to make sure that it's cleared," Wright said. "Clearly, that was a mismanaged set."

    Actor Ray Liotta agreed with Wright that the checks on firearms are usually extensive.

    "They always - that I know of - they check it so you can see," Liotta said. "They give it to the person you're pointing the gun at, they do it to the producer, they show whoever is there that it doesn't work."

    2. Note the comment about not just being a single person. Serious safety systems are designed so that multiple people have to screw up for a fault. That's why rig for dive is checked by two people on a submarine. The producer, director, actor, armorer (maybe even the DP, who died) all were participating on a set that had a poor safety culture (e.g. the previous misfires). That ended up biting them in the ass. If you go to being "single point safe", when that point fails the system fails overall.

    3. There is another article describing how safe Baldwin was (e.g. sending a child away when a shooting scene occurred). But he clearly wasn't so safety conscious as to examine the weapon or require someone to open it and show him it clear.

    4. There are various safety precautions taken when a shot is done towards camera. Tricked angles, shields. However these do not seem to have been done. Perhaps they felt less need given they were rehearsing, but clearly they should have done so.

    5. Not clear to me if the rehearsal required a shot at camera or if Baldwin ad libbed. Rehearsals can be more loose in terms of working out framing and trying things. But that is not an excuse to drop safety. But the atmosphere may have affected it.

    6 Not clear to me how drawing the weapon made it fire. Probably only Baldwin can tell us if he pulled the trigger or it happened from the rapid draw. However, revolvers are not really prone to this effect, some force usually required. Also, I guess we need the specifics of the weapon. And perhaps if it was cocked, half cocked (doubtful). I guess it's possible that the draw somehow snagged something and created the shooting. But I find it an extremely unlikely set of coincidences (round in the gun AND inadvertent action of the weapon). Most likely is that Baldwin pulled the trigger.

    7. There appears to have been overall lack of safety discipline. This sort of thing ends up biting you in the ass. It's one of the reasons why nuclear incidents rip ass for failure to do repeatbacks, have the procedure out even when that was not a proximate cause of the incident. It's likely to cause problems in the future and shows an overall poor safety culture. It's basically wrong on its own. I will bet some serious Bayesian odds that a detailed incident investigation would show various aspects of poor safety and control on that set.

    Replies: @Polistra

    There appears to have been overall lack of safety discipline. This sort of thing ends up biting you in the ass. It’s one of the reasons why nuclear incidents rip ass for failure to do repeatbacks…

    Also reminds me of medical errors, which are rife. There are procedures in place, everyone knows them (more or less) and everyone practices them, more or less. But after a few hundred times, and with sleep-deprived staff…well, people are people and prone to short cuts or just plain carelessness.

    Of course, some ‘people are people’ more than others, if you catch my drift, and the new regime is insistent that any recourse to standards and responsibilities is ipso facto white supremacy. There’s more of this sort of thing in our future. Much more. Gonna be fun.

  145. @Harry Baldwin
    Here is a TikTok video posted by the set armorer Hannah Gutierrez-rReed. As iSteve commenter Nimrod said regarding the picture of Admiral Rachel Levine, "I would not be able to take that person seriously in any professional setting."

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ARmastrangelo/status/1452022179621638144?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Rob McX

    Further down that thread – is this a ‘joke’ or did she really post that?

    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal
    @YetAnotherAnon

    99.99% sure it is fake.

    , @Anonymous
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Obvious fake. Still funny.

  146. @Veteran Aryan
    OT but super iStevey:
    Doctors worldwide are seeing a wave of reported Tourette's Syndrome that is actually a social contagion being spread by TikTok.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/teen-girls-are-developing-tics-doctors-say-tiktok-could-be-a-factor-11634389201?mod=e2fb&fbclid=IwAR3LcAMaatnXG7Sc6AIeQaiulSLLw5jDUZuCU7z3UsLHDp_rHBW0uNiJAaI

    Just wait until they realize the Transgender Craze has a lot of similarities.

    Replies: @TWS, @Expletive Deleted, @Almost Missouri

    Seems obvious in retrospect

  147. Yes. For example, this great scene from North by Northwest supposedly happens in Indiana, but it was shot north of Bakersfield, California. Nobody complained:

    • Replies: @prosa123
    @Buzz Mohawk

    A clever filming technique in North by Northwest was in the scene where Cary Grant's character walks into the United Nations. Going through official channels wasn't possible because the UN flatly prohibited commercial filming. So Alfred Hitchcock and a cameraman hid in a parked van and surreptitiously filmed Grant as he strolled onto the UN grounds, hoping against hope that no one would recognize him (no one did).

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Rohirrimborn, @J1234

  148. Woke pronoun usage from the NY Post:

    A hiker lost on a mountain in Colorado ignored repeated calls from rescuers — later explaining that they had been unfamiliar with the phone number, authorities said.

    Of course, these days, it’s hard to tell the difference between wokeness and illiteracy.

    • Thanks: Etruscan Film Star
    • Replies: @Polistra
    @Johann Ricke

    I took that to mean that the hiker was female.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @res

    , @PiltdownMan
    @Johann Ricke

    I was helping PiltdownChild2 fill out a form for college, and the pronoun "they" is all over the parents section, referring to her mother and father both individually and collectively, and is ambiguous in places. The form also allows her to enter more than two parents, and, of course, allows parents to be the same sex, or, "other."

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted

  149. @Altai
    And yet how do you know it wasn't just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?

    https://twitter.com/Villavelius/status/1451499563903242242

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @Almost Missouri, @Joe S.Walker, @Jack Armstrong, @Charlotte, @Wade Hampton, @Reg Cæsar, @Buffalo Joe, @EdwardM

    Altai, baldwin was playing Gabby Hayes ?

  150. @Tono Bungay
    Accidents happen. That I understand. But how does a real cartridge get anywhere near a film set?

    Replies: @Colin Wright, @Buffalo Joe

    Tono, was it a real cartridge? Or did the wadding do the damage? On the range we used to fire cartridges call ‘wad cutters.’ The wax or plastic wad would certainly damage you if fired close range. Wasn’t Bruce Lee’s son killed by a ‘blank’ on a set?

    • Replies: @Sean
    @Buffalo Joe

    it went through one person and injured another, brandon herrera says that indicated a live (full powder charge plus bullet) cartridge was fired The Brandon Lee incident was extremely complex and involved a series of mistakes, that led to a live round left in the barrel being propelled by a blank. Suffice it to say that live rounds are NEVER permitted on a movie set. Live rounds have not been used for films since the 1930s.

    The curious thing about Brandon Lee is that his father Bruce died while making a film "GAME OF DEATH" that was later completed without him by the plot device of having the Bruce Lee character suffer assassination attempt on a movie set by putting a live round in a prop gun.

    The girl did not project authority as a man would have, that is why this accident happened.


    “The fact that the Nazis constructed “polarized identities for males and females” and did not accept the feminist dogma about men and women being similar in every respect was said to be one of their worst misdeeds.”
    ― Martin van Creveld, The Privileged Sex
     

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    , @Crawfurdmuir
    @Buffalo Joe


    Tono, was it a real cartridge? Or did the wadding do the damage? On the range we used to fire cartridges call ‘wad cutters.’
     
    A wadcutter is not a blank load. It is a bulleted cartridge. Wadcutter refers to the bullet's shape, which except for the lube grooves is basically cylindrical, without a round-nosed or spitzer point. Wadcutter bullets are used in target shooting because they are thought to punch a clean hole in a paper target. Henslet & Gibbs mould no. 9 is a good example; scroll through the photos below to see the shape of the mould cavity.

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/324846186888?hash=item4ba2577188:g:Hm8AAOSwUQZgEeKa

  151. @Paperback Writer
    Can you give us advice on hiring your Assistant Director?

    Thanks to commenter who linked to Scott Reeder video. The last 30 seconds are devastating to Assistant Director.

    Here is the search warrant:

    https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/RUST-MOVIE-SEARCH-WARRANT-OCT-22.pdf

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    This is getting weird.

    The armorer was there (p. 4, bottom) and removed the spent casing.

    Concealing evidence?

    In the presence of her bosses?

    • Replies: @Polistra
    @Paperback Writer

    We are now entering the O.J. zone.

  152. @Achmed E. Newman
    Who cares? It's just Hollywood. I don't care if they all wipe each other off the face of the earth with their stupidity.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @J1234, @Kylie, @Prof. Woland

    I feel bad for the woman that was killed. Alec Baldwin, no so much but it is harder to care when considering the fact that I could not work there due to my politics. You could swing a dead cat anywhere in the movie industry and not hit a ‘conservative’ or any based person for that matter.

    I had a bit of schadenfreude when old Harvey Weinstein and the others were rousted out of Hollywood. You knew that every single one of them hated people like me and mine.

    I am looking forward to Baldwin getting his just deserts. It could not have happened to a bigger prick.

    • Agree: Old Prude, HammerJack
    • Replies: @PaceLaw
    @Prof. Woland

    Other than paying a hefty settlement in a civil suit, I don’t think much else will happen to Baldwin. Based upon what I heard, there really is no strong basis for a criminal charge. He was told the firearm that he had was “cold“ and safe to use. Some other negligent person was responsible for the live round that was in the firearm.

    Replies: @Prof. Woland

  153. Anyone interested in a replica of the Colt Single Action Army revolver that might be at the center of this imbroglio should take a look at the Heritage Rough Rider line. It is to the original what a Mattel toy vehicle is to the real thing, except in one respect – unlike Mattel scale replicas, the Heritage Rough Rider is a functional gun that fires real bullets. While they’re .22’s more useful against squirrels than larger quarry, they did give Al Haig occasion to utter the infamous words: “I am in control here in the White House”.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    @Johann Ricke

    Ummm, no, as a single action pistol the Heritage Rough Rider would have been an even worse choice for Hinckley than the double action Röhm RG-14 in .22LR he used.

    For those not familiar with the terminology, while I'm not sure of the etymology, single action means pulling the trigger does exactly one thing, it drops the hammer. Such guns must be cocked by something else, for old handguns the hammer had to be manually pulled back. Ideally without accidentally letting go before the motion is finished, although there's a "half-cock" notch to hopefully catch it if you do.

    Double action referrers to a long and heavy trigger pull that pulls back the hammer until it's far enough and then it's released. This is not good for accuracy, so double action revolvers generally can be fired in the two motion manner single action ones require.

    (There's double action only (DAO) ones to simply things a lot, and semi-auto handguns come in all three of these modes as well, including the ergonomically bad first round double action, successive rounds single action, the cycling of the gun cocks the hammer. Lever actions need cocking for the first round, working the level recocks it for the next round.)

    This is supposed to take place in the 1880s, so the assumption it was a single action revolver is sound, meaning it would be even harder for Baldwin to make this negligent discharge, unless the gun was handed cocked to him and he and everyone else who could see were complete idiots to not notice. Or it's of old design and he accidentally dropped the gun and it landed on its hammer. Some modern renditions of old single action revolvers add a feature to prevent this, I've read it was standard way back when to carry "six shooters" with five rounds in the cylinder, with an empty chamber under the hammer.

    Back to the incident, and note this is in the context of a general union strike action where one of the complaints is unsafe working conditions.

    Just lookup up the incident on Wikipedia and they're of course dishing dirt out on the armorer:


    It was Gutierrez-Reed's second film serving as lead armorer after The Old Way, where she had reportedly handed a weapon to child actress Ryan Kiera Armstrong without properly checking it. In September 2021, Reed said loading a prop gun with blank cartridges was "the scariest thing" to her.
     
    From further reading there are innocent explanations for the latter detail, like she learned how to do it from her father, spent plenty of time on sets while growing up. From the linked The Daily Beast article:

    “She was a bit careless with the guns, waving it around every now and again,” said a source, who worked alongside armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed on the upcoming Nicolas Cage film, The Old Way. “There were a couple times she was loading the blanks and doing it in a fashion that we thought was unsafe.”
     
    But such anonymous talk is cheap today. Although this is interesting for protocol:

    In a heartbreaking 911 call, script supervisor Mamie Mitchell also seemed to reference [assistant director] Halls as she urgently asked a dispatcher to send an ambulance to the set at Bonanza Creek Ranch, on the outskirts of Santa Fe.

    Mitchell can be overheard telling someone nearby, “this fucking AD that yelled at me at lunch asking about revisions, this motherfucker. Did you see him lean over my desk and yell at me? He’s supposed to check the guns. He’s responsible for what happened.”
     
    This could be very bad:

    The most troubling incident [in the filming of The Old Way] occurred when Gutierrez-Reed allegedly loaded a gun on the ground where the area was filled with pebbles, then without properly checking the weapon, handed it to child actress Ryan Kiera Armstrong, both sources told The Daily Beast.

    Concerned crew members intervened, demanding filming be stopped until Gutierrez-Reed had properly checked the firearm, the two sources said.

    “She was reloading the gun on the ground, where there were pebbles and stuff. We didn’t see her check it, we didn’t know if something got in the barrel or not,” one source said, explaining the crew waited until she double checked the gun for barrel obstruction.
     
    This is too specific, does not sound like it would have been made up just now to dirty her reputation. And if you're experienced with guns as some of the other people on the set claimed to be, they'd know barrel obstructions are a big deal, "pebbles" would be bad in the context of a movie where one could make a blank round a lot more dangerous.

    Also some allegations and after the fact details about the previous negligent discharges. There are more details, contradictory with the about account as well as internally in this LA Times item where I got some of the above.

    Back to Wikipedia, it says the whole thing was going to be a gunfight in the church, whatever that clip of film was supposed to show. And "In the film industry, a live round refers to a gun loaded with any material, usually a blank." which I believe, as we've mentioned blanks can be very deadly. Also:

    On October 24, it was reported that [assistant director] Halls had faced complaints about his behavior on two episodes of Into the Dark, in which he disregarded safety protocols, and ignored blocked exits and lanes.
     
    Also mentions a 1915 Cecil B. DeMille movie where an extra was accidentally shot and killed in addition to the other two more modern era accidents that have been discussed here.

    Replies: @Rouetheday

  154. @Jack D
    @J1234


    I wonder if any of Rust was filmed or scheduled to be filmed in Kansas (where a significant part of the story apparently takes place)
     
    There is a famous story about the making of Marathon Man. Dustin Hoffman is a "method" actor - when a scene called for him to be sleep deprived he would stay up for 48 hours and so on. One day when Laurence Olivier saw Hoffman on the set looking particular worn out, he said to him something like , "Have you considered acting, my dear boy?"

    The same thing is true of movie sets. Just because a movie is set in Kansas doesn't mean you have to actually BE in Kansas. Maybe the 5 people from that part of Kansas who see the movie will notice that the dirt is the wrong shade for Kansas (but 3 of them won't care) and everyone else won't know the difference.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Stebbing Heuer, @Anonymous Jew, @J1234

    Yes. For example, this great scene from North by Northwest supposedly happens in Indiana, but it was shot north of Bakersfield, California. Nobody complained:

  155. @Diversity Heretic
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Clips do go in guns; they hold the cartridges and then are ejected or fall out when the last shot is fired. The device you describe is a charger, which holds the ammunition but which is not inserted into the gun. A magazine is different in that it contains its own spring. The Marlin .22 uses a tubular magazine. Some handguns were clip fed, but they are not common. The M14 rifle uses a box magazine, but the shooter could also use a 5-round charger to insert cartridges into the magazine when the bolt was back. Clip and magazine are often used interchangeably, but there is a difference.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    For you, Mr. Mallory, and TWBT: Thank you all for the corrections. However, I am most familiar with non-military and current guns (sorry V.A.!). I have never used a clip and don’t know anyone else who has. What I see all the time is people using the word “clip” for what are obviously modern magazines.

    At the gun show one time, a guy selling all kinds of magazines had a sign advertising “Clips”. I asked him about this, and he told me that since this was the erroneous wording being used so much, he was just going with the flow.

    OK, “tubular magazine” on the .22, but that is just bad terminology, IMO, because it is not removable.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I did own an M1 Garand for a while, so clip vs. magazine is not academic to me or the person I sold it to.


    OK, “tubular magazine” on the .22, but that is just bad terminology, IMO, because it is not removable.
     
    Per etymonline.com "magazine" in its usage of storing military ammo in bulk goes back to the 1580s, those are of course rooms or buildings and not detachable as such.... In more modern times there were plenty of non-detachable magazines before detachable ones become common, like the modern late 19th Century bolt action rifles I mentioned, including tubular ones like the Lebel Model 1886 rifle which the French were still using through the end of WWI.
    , @HenryA
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Prior to the 1980s the words clip and magazine were interchangeable terms for the boxy device that feeds cartridges into a gun even among experts and many gun writers. It's only since the politicization of guns in the past forty years that language tyrants on the right will denounce any poor soul who says clip to describe a magazine.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling, @Achmed E. Newman

  156. @Buffalo Joe
    @Tono Bungay

    Tono, was it a real cartridge? Or did the wadding do the damage? On the range we used to fire cartridges call 'wad cutters.' The wax or plastic wad would certainly damage you if fired close range. Wasn't Bruce Lee's son killed by a 'blank' on a set?

    Replies: @Sean, @Crawfurdmuir

    it went through one person and injured another, brandon herrera says that indicated a live (full powder charge plus bullet) cartridge was fired The Brandon Lee incident was extremely complex and involved a series of mistakes, that led to a live round left in the barrel being propelled by a blank. Suffice it to say that live rounds are NEVER permitted on a movie set. Live rounds have not been used for films since the 1930s.

    The curious thing about Brandon Lee is that his father Bruce died while making a film “GAME OF DEATH” that was later completed without him by the plot device of having the Bruce Lee character suffer assassination attempt on a movie set by putting a live round in a prop gun.

    The girl did not project authority as a man would have, that is why this accident happened.

    “The fact that the Nazis constructed “polarized identities for males and females” and did not accept the feminist dogma about men and women being similar in every respect was said to be one of their worst misdeeds.”
    ― Martin van Creveld, The Privileged Sex

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Sean

    Sean, thank you for the reply and not to argue but a gut shot could penetrate one victim, exit and wound a second. Again thank you.

    Replies: @Sean

  157. @Reg Cæsar
    @Altai


    And yet how do you know it wasn’t just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?
     
    One intriguing suggestion in the comments on another site is that it may have been union sabotage. They wanted to teach the reckless producers a lesson. Unfortunately for them, it cost the life of one of their own.

    Replies: @Crawfurdmuir

    One intriguing suggestion in the comments on another site is that it may have been union sabotage.

    This is entirely plausible.

    U.S. v. Enmons, 410 US. 396 (1973) held that the Hobbs Act (the Federal Anti-Racketeering Act of 1934), did not apply to union violence in pursuit of a union’s objectives. Wikipedia summarizes –

    The case involved a labor strike in which members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) fired rifles at three utility company transformers, drained the oil from another, and blew up a company substation. The labor union in question was seeking a higher-pay contract and other benefits from their employer, the Gulf States Utilities Company which is now part of Entergy. The federal government tried the defendants under the Hobbs Act.

    The Court ruled that ‘The Hobbs Act, which makes it a federal crime to obstruct interstate commerce by robbery or extortion, does not reach the use of violence (which is readily punishable under state law) to achieve legitimate union objectives, such as higher wages in return for genuine services that the employer seeks.’

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Enmons

  158. @Mr Mox
    Until we have heard the rest or the story, we can only guess what happened - and my best guess is that the shooting wasn't part of the script in any way. No matter what they were trying to do - a close-up of Baldwin shooting the gun, or a wide shot of him taking out a bad guy, there's absolutely no reason the poor woman should be in the line of fire.

    Sometimes you see a movie where you can tell they're shooting the real thing, but then it's a close-up taken from a safe angle (better than trying to simulate recoil from an automatic pistol watered down to function with blanks)

    Since the movie was supposed to be a western, the gun was probably a Colt 1873 revolver. It only takes a glance at the front of the cylinder to check if the gun is loaded. And you can instantly tell if it's loaded with blanks or real ammo - that is, if you know your business around guns.

    Some idiot handed another idiot a gun loaded with live ammo, and the second idiot then killed somebody.

    Replies: @Boy the way Glenn Miller played

    Since the movie was supposed to be a western, the gun was probably a Colt 1873 revolver. It only takes a glance at the front of the cylinder to check if the gun is loaded. And you can instantly tell if it’s loaded with blanks or real ammo – that is, if you know your business around guns.

    I’m trying to find out what model firearm was involved. That would be telling.

    Does anyone know for sure? If not, why is the information being hidden?

  159. @Mike Tre
    "“Armorer” is one of those jobs where you want to lean hard into stereotype accuracy and only hire middle aged dads with non-ironic mustaches and eagle-globe-anchor tattoos who don’t mind telling people, “No, you’re doing that wrong” all day.

    This description fits me to a T, except the non-ironic mustache (what's an ironic mustache?).

    I only spent about 30 seconds thinking about it, but what job do we NOT want someone like the above doing? Editor?

    Replies: @Hypnotoad666, @Expletive Deleted

    Relationship counselor.
    Workplace mediator (except in a King Solomon way).
    Art critic.

  160. @Buffalo Joe
    @Tono Bungay

    Tono, was it a real cartridge? Or did the wadding do the damage? On the range we used to fire cartridges call 'wad cutters.' The wax or plastic wad would certainly damage you if fired close range. Wasn't Bruce Lee's son killed by a 'blank' on a set?

    Replies: @Sean, @Crawfurdmuir

    Tono, was it a real cartridge? Or did the wadding do the damage? On the range we used to fire cartridges call ‘wad cutters.’

    A wadcutter is not a blank load. It is a bulleted cartridge. Wadcutter refers to the bullet’s shape, which except for the lube grooves is basically cylindrical, without a round-nosed or spitzer point. Wadcutter bullets are used in target shooting because they are thought to punch a clean hole in a paper target. Henslet & Gibbs mould no. 9 is a good example; scroll through the photos below to see the shape of the mould cavity.

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/324846186888?hash=item4ba2577188:g:Hm8AAOSwUQZgEeKa

  161. @Sean
    @Buffalo Joe

    it went through one person and injured another, brandon herrera says that indicated a live (full powder charge plus bullet) cartridge was fired The Brandon Lee incident was extremely complex and involved a series of mistakes, that led to a live round left in the barrel being propelled by a blank. Suffice it to say that live rounds are NEVER permitted on a movie set. Live rounds have not been used for films since the 1930s.

    The curious thing about Brandon Lee is that his father Bruce died while making a film "GAME OF DEATH" that was later completed without him by the plot device of having the Bruce Lee character suffer assassination attempt on a movie set by putting a live round in a prop gun.

    The girl did not project authority as a man would have, that is why this accident happened.


    “The fact that the Nazis constructed “polarized identities for males and females” and did not accept the feminist dogma about men and women being similar in every respect was said to be one of their worst misdeeds.”
    ― Martin van Creveld, The Privileged Sex
     

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    Sean, thank you for the reply and not to argue but a gut shot could penetrate one victim, exit and wound a second. Again thank you.

    • Replies: @Sean
    @Buffalo Joe

    That might happen with a full load of propellant but though full strength blanks look realer, they entailed massive blast and were always a rarity, some actors using them on Westerns in the 60's were permanently deafened. With a revolver they sometimes have completely inert rounds loaded for filming where the chambers would otherwise be seen to be empty.

  162. @Redmen
    @Altai

    Definitely a lot of spinning going on. Res ipsa loquitorwould seem to apply to Baldwin, despite the great PR efforts underway to protect him and his important status as a major Democrat media personality.

    The only question is if this rises to the level of recklessness. If so, I would expect there to be criminal charges of manslaughter as well as massive civil liability. In terms of civil liability, Baldwin is a very deep pocket. Could become one of the largest civil payouts by an individual for a tort.

    Replies: @prosa123

    The only question is if this rises to the level of recklessness. If so, I would expect there to be criminal charges of manslaughter as well as massive civil liability. In terms of civil liability, Baldwin is a very deep pocket. Could become one of the largest civil payouts by an individual for a tort.

    Dunno … it happened at a work site, and workers’ compensation provisions might prevent civil lawsuits. For example, that woman who got her face eaten by a chimpanzee in Connecticut could not bring a lawsuit against the chimp’s very wealthy owner because she worked for her and the comp laws applied.

    • Replies: @FPD72
    @prosa123


    it happened at a work site, and workers’ compensation provisions might prevent civil lawsuits.
     
    There are a number of factors that may penetrate the supposed exclusive remedy of workers’ compensation. Was the cinematographer an employee of the same production company as Baldwin? Was she an employee or contractor? Was she hired in New Mexico or California? Do Baldwin’s actions constitute foreseeable consequences to the degree that the 2002 Delgado NM Supreme Court decision could be invoked (If Delgado is still applicable; I haven’t worked in NM for over ten years)?

    I don’t know the answer to any of these questions but I’m sure that the cinematographer’s estate attorney is looking into them. On multiple employer sites such as movie sets there are many work arounds to the sole remedy status of WC, especially third party over claims against higher tier entities.
    , @Redmen
    @prosa123

    Possibly. I don't know about NM, but in NY there's an exemption for wrongful death cases under the workers comp statute.

  163. @NickG
    4 rules of firearm safety:

    1) Treat all guns as if they are loaded with live rounds, all the time, even if you 'know' they are not.

    2) Do not point the muzzle at anything you are not prepared to destroy.

    3) Keep your finger off the trigger and outside and above the trigger guard until you are on target and ready to fire.

    4) Be aware of your backstop — where the bullet will stop, what it could pass through.

    That said, in the military rules 1 and 2 are routinely broken when using blank cartridges. Automatic and semi automatic weapons require a blank firing attachment over the muzzle or for machine guns, usually a blank firing barrel, to cycle. Protocols for keeping live rounds separate from blanks are in place. And besides, blanks look quite different, they don't have a bullet.

    Back to this case, in addition to the 'armourer', and others. I suspect Baldwin is going to face a rather large claim. Whatever protocols were not in place or were ignored, the guy operating the weapon is the last line of defence and he — Baldwin — should have checked.

    Replies: @John Henry, @SaneClownPosse, @Catdompanj

    Basically, the movie company is running a “Producers” scam, making a money losing production for the backers, meanwhile pocketing untaxed cash.

    Blanks can kill, e.g. Brandon Lee on “The Crow” set.

    Is anyone sure this happened as they say it happened? Or is this yet just another hoax event involving firearms?

    Displaying the use of firearms on screen to be banned? Similar to the on screen smoking ban.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @SaneClownPosse

    Brandon Lee was not killed by a blank. Like you, I had mixed up the Brandon Lee story with an earlier one, that of Jon-Erik Hexum, who shot himself in the head with a .44-caliber blank while clowning around playing Russian roulette on the set of Cover Up in 1984.

    Brandon Lee was tragically killed through no fault of his own. There is a detailed account on his Wikipedia page. The entry contains an explanation of the difference between blank rounds and dummy rounds, which are used to give the impression of a loaded revolver when it is seen from the front.

    On March 31, 1993, Lee was filming a scene in The Crow where his character is shot and killed by thugs. In the scene, Lee's character walks into his apartment and discovers his fiancée being beaten and raped, and a thug played by actor Michael Massee fires a Smith & Wesson Model 629 .44 Magnum revolver at Lee's character as he walks into the room.

    In the film shoot preceding the fatal scene, the prop gun (which was a real revolver) was loaded with improperly-made dummy rounds, improvised from live cartridges that had the powder charges removed by the special effects crew, so in close-ups the revolver would show normal-looking ammunition. However, the crew neglected to remove the primers from the cartridges, and at some point before the fatal event, one of the rounds had been fired. Although there was no powder charges, the energy from the ignited primer was enough to separate the bullet from the casing and push it part-way into the gun barrel, where it got stuck — a dangerous condition known as a squib load. During the fatal scene, which called for the revolver to be fired at Lee from a distance of 3.6–4.5 meters (12–15 ft), the dummy cartridges were replaced with blank rounds, which contained a powder charge and the primer, but no solid bullet, allowing the gun to be fired with sound and flash effects without the risk of an actual projectile. However, the gun was not properly checked and cleared before the blank was fired, and the dummy bullet previously lodged in the barrel was then propelled forward by the blank's propellant and shot out the muzzle with almost the same force as if the round were live, striking Lee in the abdomen.

    After Massee pulled the trigger and shot Lee, Lee fell backwards instead of forwards as he was supposed to. When the director said "cut", Lee did not stand up and the crew thought he was either still acting or kidding around. Jeff Imada, who immediately checked Lee, noticed something wrong when he came close and noted Lee was unconscious and breathing heavily. Medic Clyde Baisey went over and shook Lee to see if he was dazed by hitting his head during the fall, but did not think Lee had been shot since there was no visible bleeding. Baisey took Lee's pulse, which was regular, but within two to three minutes it slowed down dramatically, and stopped.

    Lee was rushed to the New Hanover Regional Medical Center in Wilmington, North Carolina. Attempts to save him were unsuccessful and after six hours of emergency surgery, Lee was pronounced dead at 1:03 pm on March 31, 1993.
    >>>

    Replies: @Tex

    , @Muggles
    @SaneClownPosse


    Basically, the movie company is running a “Producers” scam, making a money losing production for the backers, meanwhile pocketing untaxed cash.
     
    You appear to be making several accusations but fail to cite any actual evidence. I haven't seen or heard of any financial details of this film.

    Normally there are outside investors and/or lenders who are very careful about financial details and accountability. Lots of lawsuits in this area.

    Hollywood accounting is opaque and notorious but none of it is legally going to allow "pocketing of untaxed cash" as you say. If the accounting is honest.

    I suspect modern real time cash flow info is provided to major backers and/or studios. Online QuickBooks or similar is available.

    Only when criminals lie, steal, cheat, commit fraud, etc. is "untaxed cash" part of that. Of course there can be loan or investment repayments which are not normally taxable.

    This film project and it's financial results are likely to be merely tax loss write-offs.
  164. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Diversity Heretic

    For you, Mr. Mallory, and TWBT: Thank you all for the corrections. However, I am most familiar with non-military and current guns (sorry V.A.!). I have never used a clip and don't know anyone else who has. What I see all the time is people using the word "clip" for what are obviously modern magazines.

    At the gun show one time, a guy selling all kinds of magazines had a sign advertising "Clips". I asked him about this, and he told me that since this was the erroneous wording being used so much, he was just going with the flow.

    OK, "tubular magazine" on the .22, but that is just bad terminology, IMO, because it is not removable.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling, @HenryA

    I did own an M1 Garand for a while, so clip vs. magazine is not academic to me or the person I sold it to.

    OK, “tubular magazine” on the .22, but that is just bad terminology, IMO, because it is not removable.

    Per etymonline.com “magazine” in its usage of storing military ammo in bulk goes back to the 1580s, those are of course rooms or buildings and not detachable as such…. In more modern times there were plenty of non-detachable magazines before detachable ones become common, like the modern late 19th Century bolt action rifles I mentioned, including tubular ones like the Lebel Model 1886 rifle which the French were still using through the end of WWI.

  165. @Buzz Mohawk
    Yes. For example, this great scene from North by Northwest supposedly happens in Indiana, but it was shot north of Bakersfield, California. Nobody complained:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIY7BQkbIT8

    Replies: @prosa123

    A clever filming technique in North by Northwest was in the scene where Cary Grant’s character walks into the United Nations. Going through official channels wasn’t possible because the UN flatly prohibited commercial filming. So Alfred Hitchcock and a cameraman hid in a parked van and surreptitiously filmed Grant as he strolled onto the UN grounds, hoping against hope that no one would recognize him (no one did).

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @prosa123


    ... surreptitiously filmed Grant as he strolled onto the UN grounds, hoping against hope that no one would recognize him (no one did).
     
    That's cool. An old man I knew told me about seeing Cary Grant in Manhattan. My friend happened to be walking behind as Grant made his way along the sidewalk down 5th Avenue or something, impeccably dressed in a perfectly-fitted suit just like in the movies. My friend could see that the actor was smiling, head held high as if to say, "I'm Cary Grant, and I'm having a great day being Cary Grant." (One of my favorite actors of all time)

    Replies: @Cortes, @Anonymous

    , @Rohirrimborn
    @prosa123

    Here's an amusing clip in which Michael Caine describes Cary Grant going unrecognized in public:

    , @J1234
    @prosa123


    So Alfred Hitchcock and a cameraman hid in a parked van and surreptitiously filmed Grant as he strolled onto the UN grounds

     

    Showing that Hitchcock did care about location authenticity. The biplane-over-the-fields chase scene was plausible because that location happened to look like the Midwest. Cactus plants and distant mountains don't look like Kansas.
  166. @NickG
    4 rules of firearm safety:

    1) Treat all guns as if they are loaded with live rounds, all the time, even if you 'know' they are not.

    2) Do not point the muzzle at anything you are not prepared to destroy.

    3) Keep your finger off the trigger and outside and above the trigger guard until you are on target and ready to fire.

    4) Be aware of your backstop — where the bullet will stop, what it could pass through.

    That said, in the military rules 1 and 2 are routinely broken when using blank cartridges. Automatic and semi automatic weapons require a blank firing attachment over the muzzle or for machine guns, usually a blank firing barrel, to cycle. Protocols for keeping live rounds separate from blanks are in place. And besides, blanks look quite different, they don't have a bullet.

    Back to this case, in addition to the 'armourer', and others. I suspect Baldwin is going to face a rather large claim. Whatever protocols were not in place or were ignored, the guy operating the weapon is the last line of defence and he — Baldwin — should have checked.

    Replies: @John Henry, @SaneClownPosse, @Catdompanj

    I can’t stand the sight of Baldwin. But let’s wait for a completed investigation and please with all the protocols. Are you experts saying that in all those Westerns the gun safety and final checks or “protocols” were John Wayne or Clint Eastwood’s responsibility???? Stop already. It’s one thing to suggest that MAYBE Baldwin had some responsibility for set safety, but that depends on exactly what his job was other than being an actor. Did he do the hiring? I don’t know, you don’t know but to flat out say its an actors job to check his gun is bs.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @NickG
    @Catdompanj


    Are you experts saying that in all those Westerns the gun safety and final checks or "protocols" were John Wayne or Clint Eastwood's responsibility????
     
    That is exactly what I am saying.

    He pointed a real firearm at somebody and discharged it killing them — rule 1 &2.
  167. @Batman
    Is the girl armorer a moron who is responsible for this death? Probably. But, the swiftness that powerful people threw her under the bus should give you pause. The playbook for corporate America is to conduct an internal investigation while "cooperating with authorities" (yeah, right). Immediately assigning blame makes my Spidey senses tingle.

    Replies: @Redman

    I thought you would have “bat” senses. But I agree wholeheartedly.

    I’m not entirely sure what the responsibilities of an “armorer” in Hollywood are. But I’ve seen probably over 1000 films with lots of guns fired. And I’ve never heard of an incident even close to this.

    1. Who decided from a practical
    perspective to even have guns with live ammo?
    2. Who decided it was “necessary” (from a cinematic/realism perspective) to use live ammo?
    3. Who decided to them hire a chick with one other gig on her resume as an armorer?
    4. Apparently some of the producers were involved with “True Grit” and “Fargo”. Did they use 24 y/o girls as “armorers” for those films?
    5. Was this all about cost?

    Lot of questions in this case. Similar to the Twilight Zone disaster in the 1980s with John Landis. His career was ended. But will Alec’s be? I doubt it.

    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    @Redman

    True Grit and Fargo were "very good" (according to gun-shy, woke-ish missus; she just goes along with the loudest of her idiot "mates" on social media, and I can't be arsed any more).

    She was quite the surprised bunny, because she effin' 'ates "all yore ol' rubbish cowboy fillums, fackin' grow up you spaz, wus than me dad! ".
    ("Army, sir. Just army". A very wise, educated and active man, Loo'tnt in the war, and so on).

    They had, them old fillums, well, depth, and philosophy and stuff. How can this be? More than Judy Garland movies? Are you quite mad?
    How unadjacent to the rom-coms she prizes (stupid old destitute woman scores a bright young alpha of obscure yet illimitable fortune; happy but slightly whorish ever after, however "he" don't mind).

    Have to suck much bourbon and fall "asleep" to countenance, meself.
    If I ever met Hugh (she has, but when he was a child) or Benderchute Cummingdumps (at skool with his much older cousin) I'd have to go all Yung Mental Team on them.
    Can't be corrected, and I did not choose their fate.

    I haven't dared show her The Searchers yet.

    Just some Clints, Tombstone and so on. Kids (sons) loved 'em. They still quote them (along with Bane).
    And it's a beautiful day.

  168. @Veteran Aryan
    OT but super iStevey:
    Doctors worldwide are seeing a wave of reported Tourette's Syndrome that is actually a social contagion being spread by TikTok.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/teen-girls-are-developing-tics-doctors-say-tiktok-could-be-a-factor-11634389201?mod=e2fb&fbclid=IwAR3LcAMaatnXG7Sc6AIeQaiulSLLw5jDUZuCU7z3UsLHDp_rHBW0uNiJAaI

    Just wait until they realize the Transgender Craze has a lot of similarities.

    Replies: @TWS, @Expletive Deleted, @Almost Missouri

    Doctors worldwide are seeing a wave of reported Tourette’s Syndrome

    You merely adopted the pottymouth. I was born in it, molded by it.
    I did not hear civility until I was already a man, and by then it was nothing to me but “acting all English an’at”.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John’s_Not_Mad
    Homeboy, two towns over. A very good lad, sound as a pound, and doing fairly well now by all accounts, but the consanguinity here is something fierce. We just soldier on, how the devil can you tell?
    The shepherd up the track spends his days (and nights) screaming ten times worse, as does The Farmer (who has pretences to gentry). Even in front of their own little children and wives. And they are not that inbred, relatively
    (I checked around. The rustics do like a chat and a drink. And a chance of doing down the landlord etc.).

    Once the missus tried to get The Farmer to ca’ canny in front of our weans.
    B’God I thought she was going to get shot. Totally lost it, a wumman gobbing off at him?
    So I had to go over and ‘smile’ at him. He understood.

  169. @Harry Baldwin
    Here is a TikTok video posted by the set armorer Hannah Gutierrez-rReed. As iSteve commenter Nimrod said regarding the picture of Admiral Rachel Levine, "I would not be able to take that person seriously in any professional setting."

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ARmastrangelo/status/1452022179621638144?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Rob McX

    Talking about TikTok sluttery, it’s hard to beat this. That’s her dad in his coffin behind her. Her hashtags are #dadless #veteran #ptsd #funeral #neverforgotten.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @Not Raul
    @Rob McX

    In her defense; maybe she came to the funeral straight from work.

    Replies: @Catdompanj

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Rob McX

    That is just weird. Maybe she and her dad had an understanding. I hope so.

    Perhaps the saddest thing is that she thinks she is so hot; whereas, there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of young women in America who are equally hot or hotter. This is a very typical look. She is average, but she thinks she is special.

    It's all in the tight, little dress, the pantyhose, and the heels. She is not especially hot at all, any more than any other healthy young woman is. (Nothing wrong with that, mind you.)

    There will come a day when she will be a middle-aged woman of average looks, and then things won't be so hot anymore. We can only hope that she will respect the memory of her father -- and that this photograph will make some sense for both of them, whatever it is.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @duncsbaby, @Nicholas Stix

    , @TWS
    @Rob McX

    There needs to be a, "what the hell is wrong with you?" Button

    , @Emil Nikola Richard
    @Rob McX

    Those shoes do not look comfortable. The coffin looks expensive.

    Replies: @additionalMike

  170. @Veteran Aryan
    OT but super iStevey:
    Doctors worldwide are seeing a wave of reported Tourette's Syndrome that is actually a social contagion being spread by TikTok.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/teen-girls-are-developing-tics-doctors-say-tiktok-could-be-a-factor-11634389201?mod=e2fb&fbclid=IwAR3LcAMaatnXG7Sc6AIeQaiulSLLw5jDUZuCU7z3UsLHDp_rHBW0uNiJAaI

    Just wait until they realize the Transgender Craze has a lot of similarities.

    Replies: @TWS, @Expletive Deleted, @Almost Missouri

    I think Steve made some comments on this on his Twitter feed.

  171. Hory Carp! *Pretenses.

    I’ll have FSB-anon #900735, and the Tel Aviv patrol up me harris toot sweet if’n I don’t check me spelungs.
    It’s what counts, in their payscale.

  172. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Diversity Heretic

    For you, Mr. Mallory, and TWBT: Thank you all for the corrections. However, I am most familiar with non-military and current guns (sorry V.A.!). I have never used a clip and don't know anyone else who has. What I see all the time is people using the word "clip" for what are obviously modern magazines.

    At the gun show one time, a guy selling all kinds of magazines had a sign advertising "Clips". I asked him about this, and he told me that since this was the erroneous wording being used so much, he was just going with the flow.

    OK, "tubular magazine" on the .22, but that is just bad terminology, IMO, because it is not removable.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling, @HenryA

    Prior to the 1980s the words clip and magazine were interchangeable terms for the boxy device that feeds cartridges into a gun even among experts and many gun writers. It’s only since the politicization of guns in the past forty years that language tyrants on the right will denounce any poor soul who says clip to describe a magazine.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    @HenryA


    Prior to the 1980s the words clip and magazine were interchangeable terms for the boxy device that feeds cartridges into a gun even among experts and many gun writers. It’s only since the politicization of guns in the past forty years that language tyrants on the right will denounce any poor soul who says clip to describe a magazine.
     
    Well, of course to the "language tyrants," but that's mostly because so many communications media are now two or N-way. My corner of US Gun Culture V1.0 in the 1960s-70s knew the difference, even if we didn't at the time have a whole lot of guns with detachable magazines. We would not be impressed by any so-called expert who made such a mistake in a column or whatever.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @HenryA

    Henry, that most likely comes from the many years of increasing gun control (tailing off and even reversing in the 1990s), as politicians who didn't know squat about guns kept using erroneous terms and making laws that were not only unConstitutional but vague due to that lack of knowledge.

  173. I wonder if there’s an armorer equivalent of the epigraph from “Pushing Tin” (originally “One deal, and you never hear the end of it” which the movie changes to “One little mid-air”)

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Anonymous

    Near-collisions are called “deals” in the movie dialog. A “mid-air” means contact.

    Here’s the source 1996 New York Times Magazine article:

    https://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/24/magazine/something-s-got-to-give.html


    And every year as the traffic, the equipment and the hours get worse, so, too, does the threat of operational errors -- the ultimate emblem of a controller's lack of control -- which the F.A.A. defines as a loss of the requisite separation between two planes, but is more terrifyingly known as a "near midair collision." In 1994, operational errors at the Tracon jumped threefold, from 16 to 50, most of them in the Newark sector. Operational errors occur for many reasons -- a pilot turning his plane too slowly or a radar screen going dark. All are stressful, but none more than the error judged to be a controller's fault. That, in the local argot, is called a "deal." Three deals within two and a half years means the controller is pulled off the scopes, sent back to the lab simulator for retraining and must get recertified, a process that can go on for months.

    At the Newark sector, there's actually a deal a day -- sometimes a deal an hour -- but unless a pilot or supervisor files a complaint with the F.A.A. within 15 days, the incident escapes inquiry; controllers, spotting a deal on their scopes, just look around to see if they were caught. "We don't get loud about it here," says one controller. Jughead's one deal -- a loss of separation that, he insists, occurred because a pilot turned his plane too slowly -- was caught only because the then-head of the New York Tracon happened to run into that same pilot. The pilot mentioned a close call he'd had, the Tracon manager promised to look into it and did so -- on the 14th day. "Everybody was howling," Jughead says, still peeved at his luck. "He looks into it on the 14th day, and I have to eat the deal! I don't think that has ever happened in the history of the F.A.A.!"

    Eating a deal is not a tasty experience. If it's caught immediately, the controller is pulled off the scopes and sent "downstairs," where Tracon managers examine the radar and radio data to determine whether the pilot or the controller is at fault. "It's always them against you -- they'll use any little mistake against you," complains Graz. "That's why I always tell my trainees, C.Y.A." He smiles apologetically. "Cover Your . . . Rear End."
     

  174. @Jack D
    @J1234


    I wonder if any of Rust was filmed or scheduled to be filmed in Kansas (where a significant part of the story apparently takes place)
     
    There is a famous story about the making of Marathon Man. Dustin Hoffman is a "method" actor - when a scene called for him to be sleep deprived he would stay up for 48 hours and so on. One day when Laurence Olivier saw Hoffman on the set looking particular worn out, he said to him something like , "Have you considered acting, my dear boy?"

    The same thing is true of movie sets. Just because a movie is set in Kansas doesn't mean you have to actually BE in Kansas. Maybe the 5 people from that part of Kansas who see the movie will notice that the dirt is the wrong shade for Kansas (but 3 of them won't care) and everyone else won't know the difference.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Stebbing Heuer, @Anonymous Jew, @J1234

    Less than halfway into the first episode of the first season of The Man in the High Castle I completely lost interest in the whole thing.

    I was so looking forward to the series. Having Juliana be an aikidoka was the cherry on top. Then it came out and I saw it.

    The aikido was completely wrong – the poorly-tied hakama, the stance, the mind-set, the execution, the way the receiving student takes the falls hard (aikidoka LOVE getting thrown around, rolling out of a fall, and being smashed into the mat – learning how fall safely with a smile on your face is part of the training), the students sitting in a circle where they were guaranteed to get crushed by a flying student, the ‘aikido philosophy’ espoused by the sensei, dammit even the paper coverings on the doors, which would last maybe three minutes before a flying student breached them with an arm or leg, to universal acclaim.

    It told me the producers and director didn’t care about getting the little details right. The show’s failure was presaged in the first twenty minutes of the first episode.

    Aikido isn’t about the techniques, they are just the path. That’s why it takes years to learn and can’t be faked. They should have stuck with judo, as in PKD’s novel. Judo is a superb art that teaches everything in that sensei’s ‘philosophy’ and is much more practical, and so is much more relevant to the storyline.

    Just appalling. I can’t even!

    I’ll shut up now. My friends know not to start me talking about aikido.

    • Agree: El Dato
    • Replies: @anon
    @Stebbing Heuer

    the book was silly as well.

  175. @Jack D
    @J1234


    I wonder if any of Rust was filmed or scheduled to be filmed in Kansas (where a significant part of the story apparently takes place)
     
    There is a famous story about the making of Marathon Man. Dustin Hoffman is a "method" actor - when a scene called for him to be sleep deprived he would stay up for 48 hours and so on. One day when Laurence Olivier saw Hoffman on the set looking particular worn out, he said to him something like , "Have you considered acting, my dear boy?"

    The same thing is true of movie sets. Just because a movie is set in Kansas doesn't mean you have to actually BE in Kansas. Maybe the 5 people from that part of Kansas who see the movie will notice that the dirt is the wrong shade for Kansas (but 3 of them won't care) and everyone else won't know the difference.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Stebbing Heuer, @Anonymous Jew, @J1234

    Bosch. I’m still mad about Mt Baker appearing in what is supposedly rural Pennsylvania in The Deer Hunter. There are no real mountains anywhere on the East Coast! (I’m a Washington native and have climbed Baker thrice).

    Regarding all the comments here about adding gun fire with computer animation, I imagine one of the primary reasons – if not the reason – for using blanks is recoil. Like many other types of visual effects in movies, sometimes there’s no substitute for the real thing.

    • Agree: J1234
  176. @peterike
    OT: Steve, are you going to cover BeagleGate? Granted, it's so horrifying that I can't even read any more about it, but it's the one thing that might make the normies finally realize that Fauci is a satanic monster, so we need it covered everywhere.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Anonymous

    #FauciLiedPuppiesDied

    #BeagleLivesMatter

    • Thanks: HammerJack
  177. @JackOH
    Gun discipline/gun etiquette is easy, but needs to be learned by drill/repetition so it's second nature. I'd guess set armorers/gun wranglers ought to be hired for having gun etiquette drilled into them. Ex-military, ex-police, experienced gun enthusiasts.

    A radio interview yesterday with a onetime movie guy had it there's no cinematic reason for live rounds on a set.

    (Truth in commenting notice: I'm a onetime gun owner and 2A supporter.)

    Replies: @Hibernian, @JimB

    Ex-military, ex-police, experienced gun enthusiasts.

    Can you imagine a group of producers including Baldwin hiring them?

    • Agree: JackOH
  178. The revolver in that picture is unloaded.

  179. @stillCARealist
    @Altai

    As soon as my retired performer husband heard that the union guys had walked off the set he was suspicious that one of them had sabotaged the prop. He had experience with the unions doing nasty stuff to get revenge when they don't get their way during his career... speaking specifically about the stagehand unions.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Mikeja

    I had the same thought. Accidents happen, but within hours of a walkout? The worst thing about this scenario is, we’d have to feel sorry for Baldwin

  180. @Jack D
    @Altai

    1. Apparently the guns were left outside on a cart in order to minimize the number of people going into the location as a result of Covid protocols.

    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set. Movie sets can be incredibly boring places when nothing is happening for you. This is the kind of fun thing that Spider Girl might allow. Her dad - NFW are you going to do that on my set. If you touch my guns I'll punch you out and then have you fired.

    This is my guess:

    1. Before lunch, Spider Girl checks the guns, tells AD they are cold, leaves them on cart. Retires to her trailer to text on her phone/do other fun activities. Her job is done. She'll come by at the end of the day to retrieve the guns. She is not allowed inside the building - the great star Baldwin might catch Covid if such icky people were allowed near him. The shoot is set up to minimize the # of icky people that interact with Baldwin "due to Covid" but it suits him just fine. Nor is she going to stand in the open desert and watch those guns while they sit on a cart for hours. You could get heatstroke/ go nuts.

    2. During lunch, someone picks up gun, loads it with live ammo, does a bit of target shooting and returns it to the cart, but they leave 1 cartridge in the cylinder. They have done this before (not the leaving the cartridge part but the plinking) and it was fine. The gun wasn't being used for filming during lunchtime, so what's the harm? Spider Girl might or might not have been aware that it was going on. Strange that the weapons were dirtier than they should have been, but maybe she wasn't really into cleaning weapons anyway.

    3. AD returns from lunch with Baldwin, picks up gun from cart and announces that it is cold.

    4. Tragedy ensues.

    The weapons were supposed to be in the armorer's custody and control. That's what her job description is - to have custody of the weapons at all times when they are not being used on the set. She didn't do her job. She is the main person at fault.

    Secondarily, Covid foolishness - Covid is so dangerous that leaving guns lying around in the open is the safer alternative. At least no one caught Covid from Spider Girl.

    Thirdly the asshole that borrowed the gun and returned it loaded. This person deserves jailtime for sure.

    Replies: @fish, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer, @Anonymous, @Stonewall Jackson, @Paperback Writer, @Etruscan Film Star, @foxotcw, @anonymouseperson

    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set.

    It’s the catering company that is guilty. Providing such a poor lunch that crew members retaliated by shooting the dessert.

    • LOL: Paperback Writer
    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Etruscan Film Star

    Yes, do a search for the word "cart" - that's where the gun was, between the macarons and the cheesecake.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted

  181. @Abolish_public_education
    @#56 Telling:

    checking safety for a semi-auto would require removing the magazine and then the round in the chamber

    Many years ago I was at home with a friend. Another friend came over to show-off his recently acquired, 9mm semi-auto pistol. Handling the weapon with great pride and aplomb, he took us through its features.

    (Though strongly pro #2, I'm not a gun person, so my technical details might be a little off:) Look, it's got a this, a that. Blah blah blah. The other friend (anti- #2) remarked that the demo was making it nervous. The gunslinger told us not to worry, since he had already checked (cleaned?) the gun. "See, nothing in the magazine." Then, he pulled on the [bolt action?]."See, nothing in the chamber." A round popped out on to the floor.

    The totally crappy, Albuquerque Public School District is back. It's currently seeking [early] voter approval for a $630M tax and GO bond whopper; the usual, political criminal gang supports it. This despite the fact that APS enrollment has dropped by 20% over the past ten years, and continues to fall. (Any number of district schools have low warm-body count, but APS purports to use some of the money for construction projects.)

    It's always something how the tax leeches come back time after time. In 1/20 APS voters overwhelmingly rejected its request for $900M. That proposition would have boosted property taxes by 5%. This year the schoolies are playing defense: The measures try to prolong existing school taxes that are due to expire soon.

    FYI, A_p_e has known about this APS school tax thing for a week, and was eager to comment about it, but it was waiting (praying!) for the blogger to post something, anything related to NM, so as to make its comment somewhat on-topic. A_p_e did not hold out much hope, however, that the blogger would have something timely to say about that quiet part of the country. What, HBD related to the Apache & Comanche? The gods really came through with this Baldwin thing.

    Replies: @Joe Stalin

    (Though strongly pro #2, I’m not a gun person, so my technical details might be a little off:) Look, it’s got a this, a that. Blah blah blah. The other friend (anti- #2) remarked that the demo was making it nervous. The gunslinger told us not to worry, since he had already checked (cleaned?) the gun. “See, nothing in the magazine.” Then, he pulled on the [bolt action?].”See, nothing in the chamber.” A round popped out on to the floor.

    [bolt action?] = Slide or sometimes “Dust cover” (A Colt M1911 has a slide/dust cover but a Beretta M92 has a slide, presumably.)

    If it’s old, a Mauser 1896 or a Steyr 1907, for example, you could be pulling the bolt.

    If it’s a TEC-9, it’s a bolt.

  182. @Redman
    @Batman

    I thought you would have “bat” senses. But I agree wholeheartedly.

    I’m not entirely sure what the responsibilities of an “armorer” in Hollywood are. But I’ve seen probably over 1000 films with lots of guns fired. And I’ve never heard of an incident even close to this.

    1. Who decided from a practical
    perspective to even have guns with live ammo?
    2. Who decided it was “necessary” (from a cinematic/realism perspective) to use live ammo?
    3. Who decided to them hire a chick with one other gig on her resume as an armorer?
    4. Apparently some of the producers were involved with “True Grit” and “Fargo”. Did they use 24 y/o girls as “armorers” for those films?
    5. Was this all about cost?


    Lot of questions in this case. Similar to the Twilight Zone disaster in the 1980s with John Landis. His career was ended. But will Alec’s be? I doubt it.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted

    True Grit and Fargo were “very good” (according to gun-shy, woke-ish missus; she just goes along with the loudest of her idiot “mates” on social media, and I can’t be arsed any more).

    She was quite the surprised bunny, because she effin’ ‘ates “all yore ol’ rubbish cowboy fillums, fackin’ grow up you spaz, wus than me dad! “.
    (“Army, sir. Just army”. A very wise, educated and active man, Loo’tnt in the war, and so on).

    They had, them old fillums, well, depth, and philosophy and stuff. How can this be? More than Judy Garland movies? Are you quite mad?
    How unadjacent to the rom-coms she prizes (stupid old destitute woman scores a bright young alpha of obscure yet illimitable fortune; happy but slightly whorish ever after, however “he” don’t mind).

    Have to suck much bourbon and fall “asleep” to countenance, meself.
    If I ever met Hugh (she has, but when he was a child) or Benderchute Cummingdumps (at skool with his much older cousin) I’d have to go all Yung Mental Team on them.
    Can’t be corrected, and I did not choose their fate.

    I haven’t dared show her The Searchers yet.

    Just some Clints, Tombstone and so on. Kids (sons) loved ’em. They still quote them (along with Bane).
    And it’s a beautiful day.

    • Thanks: HammerJack
  183. Leftards think that ignorance and avoidance of firearms is a viable defense. In a country with up to 420,000,000 firearms.

    How’d that work out for you, Alec?

  184. @Woodsie
    Pumpkin has it right. It may sound ageist, but a 24-year old is unqualified to be the armorer. I don't care if his or her daddy is a top guy in the industry. Like the gaffer (head electrician), armorer is a job where if you do it wrong, people die. No kids, no tyros, no wannabes.

    Replies: @Paul Mendez, @Expletive Deleted

    . It may sound ageist, but a 24-year old is unqualified to be the armorer.

    Uh, 24-year olds launch and retrieve multi-million dollar jets on aircraft carriers every day.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Paul Mendez

    That's because the procedures on a flight deck are very strictly laid out and hierarchical - they're all 24 years old (or sometimes less) but each 24 year old has one job to do and he has been drilled in that job and God help him if he deviates from his training or doesn't follow orders. It's all very choreographed and the people who did the choreography were all much older and wiser than 24 year olds. There are 24 year old NFL players but no 24 year old NFL head coaches. No improvisation allowed except in case of dire emergency. This is the only way that can work.

    In this case, not only did you have a 24 year old but she was apparently not fully trained and the discipline on the set was loose. There is supposed to be, especially when shooting (no pun intended) in Hollywood, a similar degree of training and discipline which has been worked out after many decades of unionization and government regulation and tradition. Remember the movie business is an old business now - they have been doing this for over a century. They have (supposedly) learned from past mistakes. There are dozens (sometimes hundreds) of people on a set and there aren't just guns, there are high voltage cables and cranes swinging around and lights that are hot enough to set flammable scenery and costumes on fire and heavy enough to kill you if they fall from above and dangerous stunts and so on. Unless you have a high degree of hierarchy and structure and ritual and rules you are going to have anarchy and even death one way or another.

    On this set, they were doing what Feynman called cargo cult science. They were observing (some of) the forms and rituals of Hollywood movie making but without the substance. There was someone called an "armorer" but she didn't maintain custody and control of the weapons. Someone called "cold gun" as tradition requires, but without actually checking to see if it was a cold gun. If you did this on an aircraft carrier, tragedy would likewise ensue in short order.

    Replies: @Paul Mendez, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    , @anon
    @Paul Mendez

    uh, 24 year olds with red hair and a belly ring?

    , @EdwardM
    @Paul Mendez

    Agree, let's not get carried away here and say that the job of armorer is rocket science. It entails a very narrow scope for which a few simple protocols should suffice. A 24-year-old nurse, cop, or truck driver could also easily create death and destruction in more complex jobs.

    This girl may have been an idiot unsuited for the job but it's a bit much no say that the average 24-year-old couldn't possibly be trusted.

    Replies: @we, @Alden

  185. @Etruscan Film Star
    @Jack D


    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set.
     
    It's the catering company that is guilty. Providing such a poor lunch that crew members retaliated by shooting the dessert.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    Yes, do a search for the word “cart” – that’s where the gun was, between the macarons and the cheesecake.

    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    @Paperback Writer

    I assume they had been given carte blanche?

  186. @J1234
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I want to agree with you in spirit, but there's a nine year old child left without a mom due to Alec Baldwin and his production company's lack 0f professionalism. Their armorer should've been fired when guns used in filming were also used by the crew for target practice off set after hours. IMO, the only armorers that should be employed by any industry are those who've seen or experienced gun shot wounds first hand. That's something that would stay with you for a while.

    I wonder if any of Rust was filmed or scheduled to be filmed in Kansas (where a significant part of the story apparently takes place) or if - like all of those old school westerns - they decided to film it all in the Southwest and figure nobody can tell the difference. It could be that part of the story takes place in NM. Or it could be Santa Fe is a more pleasant place for stars to stay than Colby or Dodge City.

    Replies: @Chris Mallory, @Jack D, @Hibernian

    The terrain in Gunsmoke was mostly not very Kansan, although I’ve read that there’s some rough terrain in parts of Kansas.

  187. @YetAnotherAnon
    @Harry Baldwin

    Further down that thread - is this a 'joke' or did she really post that?

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCamV0HWUAM1gwc.jpg

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @Anonymous

    99.99% sure it is fake.

  188. Santa Fe County DA Mary Carmack-Altwies: We will look into all facts and evidence of the case with great discretion and have further information at a later time.

    NM is as blue as adobe is brown. The lawyer-DA is a big supporter of public education. She and her wife Jo are proud parents of two. There’s little reason to believe that a left-wing lawyer, from the state whose favorite son once famously offered Kneepads a job at the UN, would resist DEM pressure. More likely, she’ll find something to pin on James Woods.

    @ #179: Maybe a slide.

  189. @Johann Ricke
    Anyone interested in a replica of the Colt Single Action Army revolver that might be at the center of this imbroglio should take a look at the Heritage Rough Rider line. It is to the original what a Mattel toy vehicle is to the real thing, except in one respect - unlike Mattel scale replicas, the Heritage Rough Rider is a functional gun that fires real bullets. While they're .22's more useful against squirrels than larger quarry, they did give Al Haig occasion to utter the infamous words: "I am in control here in the White House".

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling

    Ummm, no, as a single action pistol the Heritage Rough Rider would have been an even worse choice for Hinckley than the double action Röhm RG-14 in .22LR he used.

    For those not familiar with the terminology, while I’m not sure of the etymology, single action means pulling the trigger does exactly one thing, it drops the hammer. Such guns must be cocked by something else, for old handguns the hammer had to be manually pulled back. Ideally without accidentally letting go before the motion is finished, although there’s a “half-cock” notch to hopefully catch it if you do.

    Double action referrers to a long and heavy trigger pull that pulls back the hammer until it’s far enough and then it’s released. This is not good for accuracy, so double action revolvers generally can be fired in the two motion manner single action ones require.

    (There’s double action only (DAO) ones to simply things a lot, and semi-auto handguns come in all three of these modes as well, including the ergonomically bad first round double action, successive rounds single action, the cycling of the gun cocks the hammer. Lever actions need cocking for the first round, working the level recocks it for the next round.)

    This is supposed to take place in the 1880s, so the assumption it was a single action revolver is sound, meaning it would be even harder for Baldwin to make this negligent discharge, unless the gun was handed cocked to him and he and everyone else who could see were complete idiots to not notice. Or it’s of old design and he accidentally dropped the gun and it landed on its hammer. Some modern renditions of old single action revolvers add a feature to prevent this, I’ve read it was standard way back when to carry “six shooters” with five rounds in the cylinder, with an empty chamber under the hammer.

    Back to the incident, and note this is in the context of a general union strike action where one of the complaints is unsafe working conditions.

    Just lookup up the incident on Wikipedia and they’re of course dishing dirt out on the armorer:

    It was Gutierrez-Reed’s second film serving as lead armorer after The Old Way, where she had reportedly handed a weapon to child actress Ryan Kiera Armstrong without properly checking it. In September 2021, Reed said loading a prop gun with blank cartridges was “the scariest thing” to her.

    From further reading there are innocent explanations for the latter detail, like she learned how to do it from her father, spent plenty of time on sets while growing up. From the linked The Daily Beast article:

    “She was a bit careless with the guns, waving it around every now and again,” said a source, who worked alongside armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed on the upcoming Nicolas Cage film, The Old Way. “There were a couple times she was loading the blanks and doing it in a fashion that we thought was unsafe.”

    But such anonymous talk is cheap today. Although this is interesting for protocol:

    In a heartbreaking 911 call, script supervisor Mamie Mitchell also seemed to reference [assistant director] Halls as she urgently asked a dispatcher to send an ambulance to the set at Bonanza Creek Ranch, on the outskirts of Santa Fe.

    Mitchell can be overheard telling someone nearby, “this fucking AD that yelled at me at lunch asking about revisions, this motherfucker. Did you see him lean over my desk and yell at me? He’s supposed to check the guns. He’s responsible for what happened.”

    This could be very bad:

    The most troubling incident [in the filming of The Old Way] occurred when Gutierrez-Reed allegedly loaded a gun on the ground where the area was filled with pebbles, then without properly checking the weapon, handed it to child actress Ryan Kiera Armstrong, both sources told The Daily Beast.

    Concerned crew members intervened, demanding filming be stopped until Gutierrez-Reed had properly checked the firearm, the two sources said.

    “She was reloading the gun on the ground, where there were pebbles and stuff. We didn’t see her check it, we didn’t know if something got in the barrel or not,” one source said, explaining the crew waited until she double checked the gun for barrel obstruction.

    This is too specific, does not sound like it would have been made up just now to dirty her reputation. And if you’re experienced with guns as some of the other people on the set claimed to be, they’d know barrel obstructions are a big deal, “pebbles” would be bad in the context of a movie where one could make a blank round a lot more dangerous.

    Also some allegations and after the fact details about the previous negligent discharges. There are more details, contradictory with the about account as well as internally in this LA Times item where I got some of the above.

    Back to Wikipedia, it says the whole thing was going to be a gunfight in the church, whatever that clip of film was supposed to show. And “In the film industry, a live round refers to a gun loaded with any material, usually a blank.” which I believe, as we’ve mentioned blanks can be very deadly. Also:

    On October 24, it was reported that [assistant director] Halls had faced complaints about his behavior on two episodes of Into the Dark, in which he disregarded safety protocols, and ignored blocked exits and lanes.

    Also mentions a 1915 Cecil B. DeMille movie where an extra was accidentally shot and killed in addition to the other two more modern era accidents that have been discussed here.

    • Thanks: ic1000, Alden, Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Rouetheday
    @That Would Be Telling

    Today's Good Morning America show included that 911 call of Mamie Mitchell's. They included the bit where she was complaining to a colleague about the AD having yelled at her. They probably wish they could have a do-over on that as other news outlets that played that 911 call edited out that portion- presumably they realized it made it look like she had a personal grudge against the AD (because she does). It seems pretty obvious to me the MSM hopes to pin the blame primarily on the White male AD rather than the vaguely Hispanic woman or the left-wing activist actor.

  190. @Mr Mox
    @Buzz Mohawk

    There is no reason that shot cannot be made with a properly prepared movie gun — straight-on — with a long enough lens, from a sufficient distance to prevent the cinematographer from getting killed.

    Heck! They could do it in 1903.

    https://i.imgur.com/4iqsu9R.jpg

    Replies: @Paul Mendez

    Heck! They could do it in 1903

    .

    I seem to recall that in the early days of movie-making they used to shoot real bullets near actors to kick up dirt for misses.

  191. @Paul Mendez
    @Woodsie


    . It may sound ageist, but a 24-year old is unqualified to be the armorer.
     
    Uh, 24-year olds launch and retrieve multi-million dollar jets on aircraft carriers every day.

    Replies: @Jack D, @anon, @EdwardM

    That’s because the procedures on a flight deck are very strictly laid out and hierarchical – they’re all 24 years old (or sometimes less) but each 24 year old has one job to do and he has been drilled in that job and God help him if he deviates from his training or doesn’t follow orders. It’s all very choreographed and the people who did the choreography were all much older and wiser than 24 year olds. There are 24 year old NFL players but no 24 year old NFL head coaches. No improvisation allowed except in case of dire emergency. This is the only way that can work.

    In this case, not only did you have a 24 year old but she was apparently not fully trained and the discipline on the set was loose. There is supposed to be, especially when shooting (no pun intended) in Hollywood, a similar degree of training and discipline which has been worked out after many decades of unionization and government regulation and tradition. Remember the movie business is an old business now – they have been doing this for over a century. They have (supposedly) learned from past mistakes. There are dozens (sometimes hundreds) of people on a set and there aren’t just guns, there are high voltage cables and cranes swinging around and lights that are hot enough to set flammable scenery and costumes on fire and heavy enough to kill you if they fall from above and dangerous stunts and so on. Unless you have a high degree of hierarchy and structure and ritual and rules you are going to have anarchy and even death one way or another.

    On this set, they were doing what Feynman called cargo cult science. They were observing (some of) the forms and rituals of Hollywood movie making but without the substance. There was someone called an “armorer” but she didn’t maintain custody and control of the weapons. Someone called “cold gun” as tradition requires, but without actually checking to see if it was a cold gun. If you did this on an aircraft carrier, tragedy would likewise ensue in short order.

    • Replies: @Paul Mendez
    @Jack D

    You simply repeated my comment, but in a very verbose way.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    , @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Jack D


    they’re all 24 years old (or sometimes less) but each 24 year old has one job to do and he has been drilled in that job and God help him if he deviates from his training or doesn’t follow orders
     
    Not so much on the Bonhomme Richard

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/this-is-not-raymond-spruances-u-s-navy

    Replies: @Rob McX, @That Would Be Telling, @GeologyAnon Mk 3

  192. @El Dato
    @Rob


    For automatics (i think that is the right term — guns with clips)
     
    If this were 4chan, that would be cloud level trolling.

    "Magazines", man!

    https://i.postimg.cc/YCQ79SVX/clip-vs-mag.png

    Replies: @Right_On, @Expletive Deleted

    Andy, the gun dealer in Taxi Driver: “You interested in an automatic? It’s a Colt .25 Automatic. It’s a nice little gun. It’s a beautiful little gun. It holds six shots in the clip, one shot in the chamber, if you’re dumb enough to put a round in the chamber. Here, look at this. 380 Walther, holds eight shots in the clip. That’s a nice gun.”

    In the movies, they always say “clip” rather than “magazine”. Blame it on Hollywood.

    • Thanks: That Would Be Telling
    • Replies: @Nicholas Stix
    @Right_On

    Peter Boyle, God bless him.

  193. @Jack D
    @Paul Mendez

    That's because the procedures on a flight deck are very strictly laid out and hierarchical - they're all 24 years old (or sometimes less) but each 24 year old has one job to do and he has been drilled in that job and God help him if he deviates from his training or doesn't follow orders. It's all very choreographed and the people who did the choreography were all much older and wiser than 24 year olds. There are 24 year old NFL players but no 24 year old NFL head coaches. No improvisation allowed except in case of dire emergency. This is the only way that can work.

    In this case, not only did you have a 24 year old but she was apparently not fully trained and the discipline on the set was loose. There is supposed to be, especially when shooting (no pun intended) in Hollywood, a similar degree of training and discipline which has been worked out after many decades of unionization and government regulation and tradition. Remember the movie business is an old business now - they have been doing this for over a century. They have (supposedly) learned from past mistakes. There are dozens (sometimes hundreds) of people on a set and there aren't just guns, there are high voltage cables and cranes swinging around and lights that are hot enough to set flammable scenery and costumes on fire and heavy enough to kill you if they fall from above and dangerous stunts and so on. Unless you have a high degree of hierarchy and structure and ritual and rules you are going to have anarchy and even death one way or another.

    On this set, they were doing what Feynman called cargo cult science. They were observing (some of) the forms and rituals of Hollywood movie making but without the substance. There was someone called an "armorer" but she didn't maintain custody and control of the weapons. Someone called "cold gun" as tradition requires, but without actually checking to see if it was a cold gun. If you did this on an aircraft carrier, tragedy would likewise ensue in short order.

    Replies: @Paul Mendez, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    You simply repeated my comment, but in a very verbose way.

    • Disagree: ic1000
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Paul Mendez

    He added context that refuted the obvious connotation of your few very carefully chosen words.

  194. @HenryA
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Prior to the 1980s the words clip and magazine were interchangeable terms for the boxy device that feeds cartridges into a gun even among experts and many gun writers. It's only since the politicization of guns in the past forty years that language tyrants on the right will denounce any poor soul who says clip to describe a magazine.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling, @Achmed E. Newman

    Prior to the 1980s the words clip and magazine were interchangeable terms for the boxy device that feeds cartridges into a gun even among experts and many gun writers. It’s only since the politicization of guns in the past forty years that language tyrants on the right will denounce any poor soul who says clip to describe a magazine.

    Well, of course to the “language tyrants,” but that’s mostly because so many communications media are now two or N-way. My corner of US Gun Culture V1.0 in the 1960s-70s knew the difference, even if we didn’t at the time have a whole lot of guns with detachable magazines. We would not be impressed by any so-called expert who made such a mistake in a column or whatever.

  195. They didn’t need CGI when the gorgeous Peggy Cummins was firing on all cylinders . . .

  196. @El Dato
    @Rob


    For automatics (i think that is the right term — guns with clips)
     
    If this were 4chan, that would be cloud level trolling.

    "Magazines", man!

    https://i.postimg.cc/YCQ79SVX/clip-vs-mag.png

    Replies: @Right_On, @Expletive Deleted

    O c’mon fair play lads.

    Old bloke who’d spent all his best years knocking ’em through the same hole at Bisley. And then sticking it to the krauts.
    Couldn’t even remember what the damn’ clip thing was called. Fire & forget.
    ” A .. a .. little gadget”

    You does this wiv yer fum, then you do this wiv ..
    Put it through your left eye at a furlong, so he could

    Or your right eye, accordin’ to Orders. Ain’t no big fuss.

  197. @anon
    Was the armorer anywhere on the set? I'm betting no. The part that shocks me is that the guns were used for target practice!!!

    And more people are murdered with guns on television than in real life. So this has been done safely more or less forever, all the time. With only the handful of accidents that are constantly referenced. So it isn't that hard. And nepotism has its issues, but the girl is probably more than good enough.

    I pretty much blame Baldwin. But it looks like the AD is going take the blame. The girl would have if she could have.

    If prop guns were a real danger, there would be lots of dead actors. Always plenty of incompetence to go around.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling

    If prop guns were a real danger, there would be lots of dead actors. Always plenty of incompetence to go around.

    Indeed to the latter, but prop guns are a real danger as has been extensively discussed, but as has also been extensively discussed, this being a more than century old business, culture, protocols etc. have been established to use them safely. At their best, you show everyone who matters, the actor and the people he’s going to be pointing the gun at that it is empty as this one was supposed to be prior to actually filming the gunfight in the church. It’s not hard with a light, but takes a few minutes and this production was cutting corners left and right.

    As Jack D noted, the protocols were being cargo culted, for example the assistant director we believe (Jack D. is more careful) “called ‘cold gun’ as tradition requires, but without actually checking to see if it was a cold gun.” Baldwin who’s really eager to take our guns did not practice proper gun safety, the gun didn’t “go off” without him taking one or more specific actions including one you never do in such a circumstance or dropping it, which I hope I don’t have to note you try really hard to avoid, especially for non-modern designs that you’d expect on an movie set in the 1880s.

    • Agree: Rob, ic1000
  198. @Sick 'n Tired
    @Rob

    Reading what you wrote tells me you know absolutely nothing about guns.

    Replies: @TWS, @Rob

    I do know next to nothing about guns. But I do know that, when one is playing pretend, having a type of prop that requires very few people be able to access them, everyone handling them must check to make sure they aren’t in deadly mode, etc then those things one is playing pretend with are too dangerous, and need to be re-engineered.

    Take hypodermic needles and the concern over needle sticks after HIV became common. Did hospitals emphasize needle safety, put biohazard boxes in every room, etc. Sure they did but people are human. They make mistakes. If you just say “add another layer of people checking the dangerous thing” you are not being realistic. If one person is checking, he will make the occasional mistake. Two people check? More reliable. So ten people check? That might even be less reliable than two. Every checker will say “no way a mistake could have gotten past the x people before me, and be laxer. He will also think “any mistake I make will be caught by one of the people who check it after me” and be even laxer.

    [MORE]

    So, what happened to reduce needle sticks? Safer needles. Single-use needles, and could be irreversibly covered by a one-handed motion. To draw blood, they don’t stick you, draw blood, and then stick you again with a new syringe for the next vial. They stick you once and then draw blood into multiple tubes through that one needle.

    I think one thing gun people like about guns is that they are fairly dangerous to handle. They get a feeling of “I am being responsible with a dangerous thing. I am reliable and can be trusted with responsibility.” But people make mistakes.

    I have read that endless training of chemical workers that you don’t use hose A for chemical B did not work. There were always accidents. Only by re-engineering the connections, so that hose A did not fit the spigot on the barrel that chemical B was in eliminated accidents.

    While you may think that the fact that I could not come up with revolver means I don’t know enough about guns to know that props can be re-engineered, it is precisely because I don’t come from a “respect the great power and responsibility this deadly penis substitute gives me” that I realize dangerous tech should not be used when re-engineering the tech for safety is a possibility.

    Prop guns should not be loadable with real ammunition? If somehow they are loaded with real ammunition, they should not be able to fire it. How is that not an obvious takeaway? The Crow was a great movie when I was 13. Brandon Lee living could have meant a The Crow 2. So many girls and gay boys would have had happier teenage years.

    Look how endless harangues about driving more safely paled compared to mandated seat belt installation.

    Let’s say a company’s warehouse employees get into wrecks driving their forklifts at 40 mph. Is it a better idea to constantly be paying workers comp/wrongful death to people the forklift drivers hurt or is it a better idea to have the forklifts modified so that their maximum speed is lower?

    Making blank guns that cannot be loaded with live ammunition, cannot fire live ammunition, and can be visually distinguished from real guns in a way that can be reversed with special effects tech is really a no-brainer.

    I realize that in the grand scheme of things, very few people get hurt with misloaded prop guns on film sets. But the general principle that tech and systems should be redesigned rather than people being more personally responsibilityer shows up throughout American life. The unwillingness of the elite to re-engineer buildings and building operations to reduce colds and flu is a much bigger one.

    Some things can be best prevented by redesign rather than just ameliorated by paying wergeld to injured people or their next of kin.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @borfwink
    @Rob

    Starter pistols have a vertical rod in the barrel. Should any moron put a live round into it, the barrel will burst. Let the moron pay for his stupidity, not the cinematographer.

    , @anon
    @Rob

    Guns are designed to be lethal. Prop guns could be designed to be non lethal. 99.99% of the time, being careful was enough.

    Replies: @El Dato

    , @Fhjjjkjcdddbb
    @Rob

    The more people checking for safety, the more chances for a mistake.

    , @Muggles
    @Rob

    Safety engineering is a big field.

    "Human factors" tend to be the hardest to overcome.

    Nearly all computer hacks are the result of failed human decisions being made (or spoofed, faked, etc.) "I thought this was their VP of Finance calling..."

    I read a recent article about password construction. It concluded that "experts" now think that the multiple/many character long ones are not much better than ordinary ones. Why? Because at some point people won't use them. Too much trouble.

    Pilots are trained to use checklists (now often electronic) and I suspect others use them too (ship captains, military equipment operators, etc.).

    As your post suggests the best methods involve non interoperability. I.e. square plugs into round holes. Not always possible though. I suspect film set firearms safety protocols will be more diligent, at least for a while.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Rob

  199. @Woodsie
    Pumpkin has it right. It may sound ageist, but a 24-year old is unqualified to be the armorer. I don't care if his or her daddy is a top guy in the industry. Like the gaffer (head electrician), armorer is a job where if you do it wrong, people die. No kids, no tyros, no wannabes.

    Replies: @Paul Mendez, @Expletive Deleted

    Luke, I am your father

  200. @Paperback Writer
    @Etruscan Film Star

    Yes, do a search for the word "cart" - that's where the gun was, between the macarons and the cheesecake.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted

    I assume they had been given carte blanche?

  201. @Rob
    @Sick 'n Tired

    I do know next to nothing about guns. But I do know that, when one is playing pretend, having a type of prop that requires very few people be able to access them, everyone handling them must check to make sure they aren’t in deadly mode, etc then those things one is playing pretend with are too dangerous, and need to be re-engineered.

    Take hypodermic needles and the concern over needle sticks after HIV became common. Did hospitals emphasize needle safety, put biohazard boxes in every room, etc. Sure they did but people are human. They make mistakes. If you just say “add another layer of people checking the dangerous thing” you are not being realistic. If one person is checking, he will make the occasional mistake. Two people check? More reliable. So ten people check? That might even be less reliable than two. Every checker will say “no way a mistake could have gotten past the x people before me, and be laxer. He will also think “any mistake I make will be caught by one of the people who check it after me” and be even laxer.

    So, what happened to reduce needle sticks? Safer needles. Single-use needles, and could be irreversibly covered by a one-handed motion. To draw blood, they don’t stick you, draw blood, and then stick you again with a new syringe for the next vial. They stick you once and then draw blood into multiple tubes through that one needle.

    I think one thing gun people like about guns is that they are fairly dangerous to handle. They get a feeling of “I am being responsible with a dangerous thing. I am reliable and can be trusted with responsibility.” But people make mistakes.

    I have read that endless training of chemical workers that you don’t use hose A for chemical B did not work. There were always accidents. Only by re-engineering the connections, so that hose A did not fit the spigot on the barrel that chemical B was in eliminated accidents.

    While you may think that the fact that I could not come up with revolver means I don’t know enough about guns to know that props can be re-engineered, it is precisely because I don’t come from a “respect the great power and responsibility this deadly penis substitute gives me” that I realize dangerous tech should not be used when re-engineering the tech for safety is a possibility.

    Prop guns should not be loadable with real ammunition? If somehow they are loaded with real ammunition, they should not be able to fire it. How is that not an obvious takeaway? The Crow was a great movie when I was 13. Brandon Lee living could have meant a The Crow 2. So many girls and gay boys would have had happier teenage years.

    Look how endless harangues about driving more safely paled compared to mandated seat belt installation.

    Let’s say a company’s warehouse employees get into wrecks driving their forklifts at 40 mph. Is it a better idea to constantly be paying workers comp/wrongful death to people the forklift drivers hurt or is it a better idea to have the forklifts modified so that their maximum speed is lower?

    Making blank guns that cannot be loaded with live ammunition, cannot fire live ammunition, and can be visually distinguished from real guns in a way that can be reversed with special effects tech is really a no-brainer.

    I realize that in the grand scheme of things, very few people get hurt with misloaded prop guns on film sets. But the general principle that tech and systems should be redesigned rather than people being more personally responsibilityer shows up throughout American life. The unwillingness of the elite to re-engineer buildings and building operations to reduce colds and flu is a much bigger one.

    Some things can be best prevented by redesign rather than just ameliorated by paying wergeld to injured people or their next of kin.

    Replies: @borfwink, @anon, @Fhjjjkjcdddbb, @Muggles

    Starter pistols have a vertical rod in the barrel. Should any moron put a live round into it, the barrel will burst. Let the moron pay for his stupidity, not the cinematographer.

  202. @HenryA
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Prior to the 1980s the words clip and magazine were interchangeable terms for the boxy device that feeds cartridges into a gun even among experts and many gun writers. It's only since the politicization of guns in the past forty years that language tyrants on the right will denounce any poor soul who says clip to describe a magazine.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling, @Achmed E. Newman

    Henry, that most likely comes from the many years of increasing gun control (tailing off and even reversing in the 1990s), as politicians who didn’t know squat about guns kept using erroneous terms and making laws that were not only unConstitutional but vague due to that lack of knowledge.

  203. @Paul Mendez
    @Jack D

    You simply repeated my comment, but in a very verbose way.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    He added context that refuted the obvious connotation of your few very carefully chosen words.

  204. @Anon
    I think we need to wait until the facts are in. I've been reading widely on this, and the story keeps morphing. Media, including LAT snd NYT, doesn't bother to trace down original sources anymore (The police court documents that AP obtained are a breath of fresh air, but still speculative.)

    For instance...

    We are hearing that there was a walkout by staff on account of safety violations hours before the incident. Had you read the early reports of this you would know that some camera staff, but obviously not the DP, walked out because of a missed payroll, and nonpayment of their hotel rooms. This was the original report. And this happens a lot with indie films, juggling insufficient money.

    Next it morphed into the story that staff (not camera, but the vaguer "staff") walked out because the production was "in chaos" and there were safety violations. What safety violations? Well, there was an "official compliant" filed. What does that even mean in the context of a film? OSHA? Well, that was walked out. Someone claimed to have sent a text around complaining of safety. In this day and age everyone is sending bitchy complaints around all the time. In retrospect you could search the everybody's texts and prove anything.

    We heard the same gun had the same problems the day before. The original version of that was that somebody reported hearing a couple of loud reports coming from one inside one of the shacks. Maybe they were from a gun. This went through the Chinese telephone speculation FOAF mixmaster, turning into the "same gun went off" story.

    Beware anything coming from a union. They get stories out there, and then walk them back, and the walk back is never reported in the media. You need to keep a close eye on Deadline.com, the HR, and The Wrap. Also, disregard anything without a named source.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling

    Beware anything coming from a union in the middle of nasty contract negotiations.

    FITY, here’s a start from Wikipedia.

    TL;DR: Strikes overwhelmingly authorized in an October 1st-3rd vote, adverted on the 16th, but “On October 17, it was reported that many IATSE members would vote against the proposed agreement as it did not address their work conditions adequately.” Variety said “which many find to be inhumane and unsustainable.” And now of course the safety aspect is being stressed, but it’s implicit in what they are arguing over. Tired people make mistakes, and that’s where iron protocols as we’ve been discussing are all the more important.

    For example, from Massad Ayoob’s very good safety video, every time you clear your semi-auto gun, with the slide locked back, stick your pinky into the chamber to make sure it’s empty, and then into the magazine well to make sure that’s also empty. Ingrain this habit and you’ll do it properly when your tired, in an almost empty parking lot on a rainy night and your nerves and concentration are messed up because you just had to use the gun to defend yourself.

    (You do this if you think you’re now safe and before the police show up, nothing good will come from your gun being loaded when they do.)

  205. @Veteran Aryan
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Clips don’t go in guns at all.
     
    Here's a little Marine Corps meme for you: "Guns" are artillery pieces, i.e. 'The Guns Of Navarone'. During USMC boot camp I observed several different unfortunate fellows who made the mistake of using the term "gun." They were then required to stand on top of their footlocker, pull down their pants, and yell "This is my rifle, this is my gun; this is for fighting, this is for fun."

    Assume the position.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @El Dato, @Catdog

    I recall reading that in high school, in Norman Mailer’s The Naked and the Dead. It was assigned reading, and caused much hilarity among us 15 year olds.

  206. @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Almost Missouri

    That photo clarifies a lot. The key question now becomes how was this ditzy tart ever allowed on a movie set, let alone given a responsible position on that set.

    Replies: @The Real World, @Alden

    ….how was this ditzy tart ever allowed on a movie set,

    Seems clear that you’ve never seen film crews. This chick fits right in.

  207. @Catdog
    @Paperback Writer

    It seems obvious to me that a prop gun should NEVER be loaded with live rounds.

    Replies: @Boomthorkell

    It seems obvious to me that you’re just no fun.

    ; D

  208. @Anonymous
    I wonder if there’s an armorer equivalent of the epigraph from “Pushing Tin” (originally “One deal, and you never hear the end of it” which the movie changes to “One little mid-air”)

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Near-collisions are called “deals” in the movie dialog. A “mid-air” means contact.

    Here’s the source 1996 New York Times Magazine article:

    https://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/24/magazine/something-s-got-to-give.html

    [MORE]

    And every year as the traffic, the equipment and the hours get worse, so, too, does the threat of operational errors — the ultimate emblem of a controller’s lack of control — which the F.A.A. defines as a loss of the requisite separation between two planes, but is more terrifyingly known as a “near midair collision.” In 1994, operational errors at the Tracon jumped threefold, from 16 to 50, most of them in the Newark sector. Operational errors occur for many reasons — a pilot turning his plane too slowly or a radar screen going dark. All are stressful, but none more than the error judged to be a controller’s fault. That, in the local argot, is called a “deal.” Three deals within two and a half years means the controller is pulled off the scopes, sent back to the lab simulator for retraining and must get recertified, a process that can go on for months.

    At the Newark sector, there’s actually a deal a day — sometimes a deal an hour — but unless a pilot or supervisor files a complaint with the F.A.A. within 15 days, the incident escapes inquiry; controllers, spotting a deal on their scopes, just look around to see if they were caught. “We don’t get loud about it here,” says one controller. Jughead’s one deal — a loss of separation that, he insists, occurred because a pilot turned his plane too slowly — was caught only because the then-head of the New York Tracon happened to run into that same pilot. The pilot mentioned a close call he’d had, the Tracon manager promised to look into it and did so — on the 14th day. “Everybody was howling,” Jughead says, still peeved at his luck. “He looks into it on the 14th day, and I have to eat the deal! I don’t think that has ever happened in the history of the F.A.A.!”

    Eating a deal is not a tasty experience. If it’s caught immediately, the controller is pulled off the scopes and sent “downstairs,” where Tracon managers examine the radar and radio data to determine whether the pilot or the controller is at fault. “It’s always them against you — they’ll use any little mistake against you,” complains Graz. “That’s why I always tell my trainees, C.Y.A.” He smiles apologetically. “Cover Your . . . Rear End.”

    • Thanks: El Dato
  209. @Jack D
    @Paul Mendez

    That's because the procedures on a flight deck are very strictly laid out and hierarchical - they're all 24 years old (or sometimes less) but each 24 year old has one job to do and he has been drilled in that job and God help him if he deviates from his training or doesn't follow orders. It's all very choreographed and the people who did the choreography were all much older and wiser than 24 year olds. There are 24 year old NFL players but no 24 year old NFL head coaches. No improvisation allowed except in case of dire emergency. This is the only way that can work.

    In this case, not only did you have a 24 year old but she was apparently not fully trained and the discipline on the set was loose. There is supposed to be, especially when shooting (no pun intended) in Hollywood, a similar degree of training and discipline which has been worked out after many decades of unionization and government regulation and tradition. Remember the movie business is an old business now - they have been doing this for over a century. They have (supposedly) learned from past mistakes. There are dozens (sometimes hundreds) of people on a set and there aren't just guns, there are high voltage cables and cranes swinging around and lights that are hot enough to set flammable scenery and costumes on fire and heavy enough to kill you if they fall from above and dangerous stunts and so on. Unless you have a high degree of hierarchy and structure and ritual and rules you are going to have anarchy and even death one way or another.

    On this set, they were doing what Feynman called cargo cult science. They were observing (some of) the forms and rituals of Hollywood movie making but without the substance. There was someone called an "armorer" but she didn't maintain custody and control of the weapons. Someone called "cold gun" as tradition requires, but without actually checking to see if it was a cold gun. If you did this on an aircraft carrier, tragedy would likewise ensue in short order.

    Replies: @Paul Mendez, @Jenner Ickham Errican

    they’re all 24 years old (or sometimes less) but each 24 year old has one job to do and he has been drilled in that job and God help him if he deviates from his training or doesn’t follow orders

    Not so much on the Bonhomme Richard

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/this-is-not-raymond-spruances-u-s-navy

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    The Bonhomme Richard? The navy were just asking for trouble, giving a ship such an oppressively binarist name.

    , @That Would Be Telling
    @Jenner Ickham Errican



    they’re all 24 years old (or sometimes less) but each 24 year old [on a carrier deck] has one job to do and he has been drilled in that job and God help him if he deviates from his training or doesn’t follow orders
     
    Not so much on the Bonhomme Richard
     
    Damage control is a different beast because your response is situation specific, but all sailors, enlisted and officers, were at last count trained in it. That said, one female sailor noticed the smoke pretty early but said it didn't smell like smoke so she ignored it.

    The real key is that the ship was docked for maintenance meaning it didn't have its normal crew compliment, per Wikipedia and other reports the "on-board fire-suppression systems had been disabled", etc. etc., but after we lost the USS Miami attack sub to arson during maintenance in 2012 the recommendations to avoid such a fate for other ships were of course ignored.

    And diversity played another a role if what's been said about the sailor who's been charged with it is true, that it pertained to his relationship with a female sailor. See also the first major Pacific destroyer crash into a cargo ship, female in CIC wasn't talking to the female Officer of the Deck, although there was a lot more to that incident.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @By-tor

    , @GeologyAnon Mk 3
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Not necessarily. Damage control is only the GQ specialty for maybe 1/5th the crew. The others not assigned to repair lockers during GQ have only nominal damage control training. During in port watch stations you don't have the regular repair lockers roster also, you have whoever is DC qualified on the watchbill. And you don't have repair 5, or the flying squad, or the DCA, your elite fire fighting team.

    I was repair 3 leader for a while and had to fight an in-port engineering space fire. The sailors on the hose team were solid, but it was very dicey. You aren't familiar with the equipment layout in the responding locker, you never train to fight fires in that part of the ship, a lot of your hosemen and maybe the repair leader will be Topsiders who are unfamiliar with the engineering spaces and can easily get lost or not be able to find the eductors, critical valves etc, especially with heavy smoke and heat. And you're at the lowest level of compartmentalizition, with many compartments that can't be sealed without compromising shore power, fire main water, AFFF, or whatever else.

    We got the major fuel oil leak and major conflagration alert within maybe a minute from the duty engineer and if it would have taken him another minute to notice it, I'm not confident we could have contained it without extreme damage to the ship. And that was on a destroyer. I can easily easily see the same situation being drastically more severe on a much larger amphib. I don't think this shows necessarily a degradation of damage control skill or fighting spirit. Ironically a Moskit in the mess decks when you're at GQ is probably more manageable and less likely to destroy the ship than an smouldering fire in an unmapped compartment when you're in 5 section shipyard duty.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

  210. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Jack D


    they’re all 24 years old (or sometimes less) but each 24 year old has one job to do and he has been drilled in that job and God help him if he deviates from his training or doesn’t follow orders
     
    Not so much on the Bonhomme Richard

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/this-is-not-raymond-spruances-u-s-navy

    Replies: @Rob McX, @That Would Be Telling, @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    The Bonhomme Richard? The navy were just asking for trouble, giving a ship such an oppressively binarist name.

  211. Anonymous[234] • Disclaimer says:
    @peterike
    OT: Steve, are you going to cover BeagleGate? Granted, it's so horrifying that I can't even read any more about it, but it's the one thing that might make the normies finally realize that Fauci is a satanic monster, so we need it covered everywhere.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Anonymous

    Oh, come on! There is no “BeagleGate”. There is a sad reality of animal studies and the fact that many of them cannot be restricted to mice, flies and worms.

    Nothing is black and white – in real life, compromises are made. If you’re given a choice between keeping your son or an average beagle alive, the decision is obvious, right? Same with animal experiments: Many of them are cruel but on the other scale is that more people will die without them. E.g., the cancer-beating Rituximab antibody would not exist without animal studies.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Anonymous

    They removed the dogs' vocal chords because the scientists didn't like to hear their yelping. Really necessary to cure disease, yeah, right.

    , @Catdompanj
    @Anonymous

    Tell us how removing a dog's vocal chords saves human lives?

  212. @John Henry
    @NickG

    I never see this one: "Clear every firearm when you pick it up or it is handed to you. It doesn't matter if you just handed it to someone else, they did the same thing, and they gave it right back." What I've always done and taught my children to do.

    Replies: @ScarletNumber

    What I’ve always done and taught my children to do

    Unless you’ve been on a movie set, this advice is meaningless.

    • Replies: @John Henry
    @ScarletNumber

    So you never check the chamber when you first pick up a firearm. Please do not come shooting around me.

    Replies: @Old Prude

  213. @Jack D
    @J1234


    I wonder if any of Rust was filmed or scheduled to be filmed in Kansas (where a significant part of the story apparently takes place)
     
    There is a famous story about the making of Marathon Man. Dustin Hoffman is a "method" actor - when a scene called for him to be sleep deprived he would stay up for 48 hours and so on. One day when Laurence Olivier saw Hoffman on the set looking particular worn out, he said to him something like , "Have you considered acting, my dear boy?"

    The same thing is true of movie sets. Just because a movie is set in Kansas doesn't mean you have to actually BE in Kansas. Maybe the 5 people from that part of Kansas who see the movie will notice that the dirt is the wrong shade for Kansas (but 3 of them won't care) and everyone else won't know the difference.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Stebbing Heuer, @Anonymous Jew, @J1234

    There’s a long history of Hollywood making movies about Kansas or the Dakotas out in California with little regard for topographical accuracy, so you’d get things like cacti and giant rock formations in a scene that’s supposed to take place near of Abilene, KS. Believe it or not, that’s silly to an awful lot of people. That would be like someone from Iowa filming scenes about Detroit or Chicago in Des Moines and saying “what difference does it make?” That lack of sophistication was fine for the 1940’s, but now Hollywood sells itself to the world as reality, in one fashion or another. That “reality” is generally a big lie, of course, but they usually try to make it more believable than they did in the 1940’s.

    Other than a lack of trees, I’ve seen little on I-25 between Santa Fe and Albuquerque that bears much resemblance to Kansas, and most everything north of Santa Fe is Rocky Mountains, so that doesn’t work either. Maybe they found a little patch of KS in NM, or maybe cinematography flattens out topography or maybe part of the story takes place in NM, and that’s what they were filming. If not, they could’ve changed the story or the location pretty easily. I’m sure there were other considerations, though, and a production company that can’t even afford to keep its firearms safe probably isn’t going to pay a lot of attention to geographical accuracy either.

    • Replies: @Muggles
    @J1234


    Other than a lack of trees, I’ve seen little on I-25 between Santa Fe and Albuquerque that bears much resemblance to Kansas, and most everything north of Santa Fe is Rocky Mountains, so that doesn’t work either.
     
    Having just driven through that area two months ago, you are wrong.

    There are parts of NM north of I-40 on a highway connecting up to I 25 which are quite flat and treeless. Rolling hills in some places. Very dry but grassy. Many canyons up in the hills and of course mountains nearby if needed. This is within an hour of Santa Fe.

    Not exactly Kansas but close enough. Some flat-to-the- horizon views (mainly looking east).

    This "film ranch" is very popular and used a lot.

    Besides as you mention, most people are clueless about geography unless they are locals. I have yet to see those nearby mountains in Houston, though they appear in some films/TV. Maybe someday...
    , @Curle
    @J1234

    What’s the percent of Americans who’ve ever set foot in Kansas? Five percent, maybe? What’s the percent of worldwide market for Hollywood movies that have ever set foot in Kansas? 0.2%, maybe?

    Replies: @Alden

  214. @Rob
    @Sick 'n Tired

    I do know next to nothing about guns. But I do know that, when one is playing pretend, having a type of prop that requires very few people be able to access them, everyone handling them must check to make sure they aren’t in deadly mode, etc then those things one is playing pretend with are too dangerous, and need to be re-engineered.

    Take hypodermic needles and the concern over needle sticks after HIV became common. Did hospitals emphasize needle safety, put biohazard boxes in every room, etc. Sure they did but people are human. They make mistakes. If you just say “add another layer of people checking the dangerous thing” you are not being realistic. If one person is checking, he will make the occasional mistake. Two people check? More reliable. So ten people check? That might even be less reliable than two. Every checker will say “no way a mistake could have gotten past the x people before me, and be laxer. He will also think “any mistake I make will be caught by one of the people who check it after me” and be even laxer.

    So, what happened to reduce needle sticks? Safer needles. Single-use needles, and could be irreversibly covered by a one-handed motion. To draw blood, they don’t stick you, draw blood, and then stick you again with a new syringe for the next vial. They stick you once and then draw blood into multiple tubes through that one needle.

    I think one thing gun people like about guns is that they are fairly dangerous to handle. They get a feeling of “I am being responsible with a dangerous thing. I am reliable and can be trusted with responsibility.” But people make mistakes.

    I have read that endless training of chemical workers that you don’t use hose A for chemical B did not work. There were always accidents. Only by re-engineering the connections, so that hose A did not fit the spigot on the barrel that chemical B was in eliminated accidents.

    While you may think that the fact that I could not come up with revolver means I don’t know enough about guns to know that props can be re-engineered, it is precisely because I don’t come from a “respect the great power and responsibility this deadly penis substitute gives me” that I realize dangerous tech should not be used when re-engineering the tech for safety is a possibility.

    Prop guns should not be loadable with real ammunition? If somehow they are loaded with real ammunition, they should not be able to fire it. How is that not an obvious takeaway? The Crow was a great movie when I was 13. Brandon Lee living could have meant a The Crow 2. So many girls and gay boys would have had happier teenage years.

    Look how endless harangues about driving more safely paled compared to mandated seat belt installation.

    Let’s say a company’s warehouse employees get into wrecks driving their forklifts at 40 mph. Is it a better idea to constantly be paying workers comp/wrongful death to people the forklift drivers hurt or is it a better idea to have the forklifts modified so that their maximum speed is lower?

    Making blank guns that cannot be loaded with live ammunition, cannot fire live ammunition, and can be visually distinguished from real guns in a way that can be reversed with special effects tech is really a no-brainer.

    I realize that in the grand scheme of things, very few people get hurt with misloaded prop guns on film sets. But the general principle that tech and systems should be redesigned rather than people being more personally responsibilityer shows up throughout American life. The unwillingness of the elite to re-engineer buildings and building operations to reduce colds and flu is a much bigger one.

    Some things can be best prevented by redesign rather than just ameliorated by paying wergeld to injured people or their next of kin.

    Replies: @borfwink, @anon, @Fhjjjkjcdddbb, @Muggles

    Guns are designed to be lethal. Prop guns could be designed to be non lethal. 99.99% of the time, being careful was enough.

    • Agree: Hibernian
    • Replies: @El Dato
    @anon

    I remember that the guns in the original Westworld (1973) detected when you were trying to shoot at Real Humans and simply refused to fire (*click* ... improbable tech!). Going on holiday in Delos with crazy tourists around must still have been fraught with danger even before Yul Brynner went full Terminator.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPOjTGYm0-g

    Replies: @SunBakedSuburb

  215. @prosa123
    @Buzz Mohawk

    A clever filming technique in North by Northwest was in the scene where Cary Grant's character walks into the United Nations. Going through official channels wasn't possible because the UN flatly prohibited commercial filming. So Alfred Hitchcock and a cameraman hid in a parked van and surreptitiously filmed Grant as he strolled onto the UN grounds, hoping against hope that no one would recognize him (no one did).

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Rohirrimborn, @J1234

    … surreptitiously filmed Grant as he strolled onto the UN grounds, hoping against hope that no one would recognize him (no one did).

    That’s cool. An old man I knew told me about seeing Cary Grant in Manhattan. My friend happened to be walking behind as Grant made his way along the sidewalk down 5th Avenue or something, impeccably dressed in a perfectly-fitted suit just like in the movies. My friend could see that the actor was smiling, head held high as if to say, “I’m Cary Grant, and I’m having a great day being Cary Grant.” (One of my favorite actors of all time)

    • Replies: @Cortes
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Probably smiling at the cellophane flowers of yellow and green towering over his head (they grow so incredibly high).

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    , @Anonymous
    @Buzz Mohawk


    That’s cool. An old man I knew told me about seeing Cary Grant in Manhattan. My friend happened to be walking behind as Grant made his way along the sidewalk down 5th Avenue or something, impeccably dressed in a perfectly-fitted suit just like in the movies. My friend could see that the actor was smiling, head held high as if to say, “I’m Cary Grant, and I’m having a great day being Cary Grant.” (One of my favorite actors of all time)
     
    Here's a story you haven't heard, I got from the horse's mouth:

    So this girl, 20 years old, had gotten a job at a company in New York in the early fifties. The building she worked in had a few talent agencies stationed there. Her first week at work, she got on the elevator, and on the next floor, the elevator stopped and Cary Grant entered.

    Since he was her favorite actor, her heart started beating a mile a minute, and she obviously had strange look on her face as she continued to face forward in the elevator.

    Cary Grant says, "Uh... excuse me, miss. Are you all right?"

    She says, "Yes, I'm all right! You're Cary Grant! I've seen all your movies. I just love you! I mean your movies! I've seen them all! I just think you're wonderful! All your movies! You're just... wonderful!"

    Grant says, "What is your name?"

    She says, "Suzie! My name is Suzie!"

    Grant says, "Well, Suzie, I have to tell you I was having a pretty lousy day today, but meeting you has really turned it around for me. Thank you."

    Suzie says, "Oh, thank YOU! I love your movies! I've seen them all! Thank you!"

    He reached his floor, said goodbye and left.

    Cut to 11 years later. Suzie had moved to Los Angeles, and had another job as a secretary at a talent agency. She had been mortified by how she had behaved meeting her first celebrity, and had felt embarrassed that she had so thoroughly lost control of herself. Not very professional for a girl working in her profession.

    So... she parks her car in the underground garage, gets into the elevator of her building, and the next stop, Cary Grant enters... again.

    She thought he couldn't possibly remember something that happened 11 years ago, and she decided just to keep looking forward, not speak, to avoid making an ass of herself again. So it was dead quiet in the elevator.

    After a couple of floors, Grant looked at her and said, "What's the matter, Suzie? Don't you love me anymore?"

    Suzie lost it again, "Oh yes, Mr. Grant! I still do! I've still seen all your movies!"

    I recall Cary Grant was quoted as saying, "It's not easy being Cary Grant."
    I think Cary Grant was more Cary Grant than he gave himself credit for.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

  216. @Rob McX
    @Harry Baldwin

    Talking about TikTok sluttery, it's hard to beat this. That's her dad in his coffin behind her. Her hashtags are #dadless #veteran #ptsd #funeral #neverforgotten.

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/10/25/15/49613479-10128429-OOTD_An_American_woman_posed_for_photos_at_her_father_s_funeral_-a-5_1635171026079.jpg

    Replies: @Not Raul, @Buzz Mohawk, @TWS, @Emil Nikola Richard

    In her defense; maybe she came to the funeral straight from work.

    • Replies: @Catdompanj
    @Not Raul

    Is she a Rockette? Lol.

    Replies: @Not Raul

  217. @Buffalo Joe
    @Sean

    Sean, thank you for the reply and not to argue but a gut shot could penetrate one victim, exit and wound a second. Again thank you.

    Replies: @Sean

    That might happen with a full load of propellant but though full strength blanks look realer, they entailed massive blast and were always a rarity, some actors using them on Westerns in the 60’s were permanently deafened. With a revolver they sometimes have completely inert rounds loaded for filming where the chambers would otherwise be seen to be empty.

  218. @That Would Be Telling
    @Johann Ricke

    Ummm, no, as a single action pistol the Heritage Rough Rider would have been an even worse choice for Hinckley than the double action Röhm RG-14 in .22LR he used.

    For those not familiar with the terminology, while I'm not sure of the etymology, single action means pulling the trigger does exactly one thing, it drops the hammer. Such guns must be cocked by something else, for old handguns the hammer had to be manually pulled back. Ideally without accidentally letting go before the motion is finished, although there's a "half-cock" notch to hopefully catch it if you do.

    Double action referrers to a long and heavy trigger pull that pulls back the hammer until it's far enough and then it's released. This is not good for accuracy, so double action revolvers generally can be fired in the two motion manner single action ones require.

    (There's double action only (DAO) ones to simply things a lot, and semi-auto handguns come in all three of these modes as well, including the ergonomically bad first round double action, successive rounds single action, the cycling of the gun cocks the hammer. Lever actions need cocking for the first round, working the level recocks it for the next round.)

    This is supposed to take place in the 1880s, so the assumption it was a single action revolver is sound, meaning it would be even harder for Baldwin to make this negligent discharge, unless the gun was handed cocked to him and he and everyone else who could see were complete idiots to not notice. Or it's of old design and he accidentally dropped the gun and it landed on its hammer. Some modern renditions of old single action revolvers add a feature to prevent this, I've read it was standard way back when to carry "six shooters" with five rounds in the cylinder, with an empty chamber under the hammer.

    Back to the incident, and note this is in the context of a general union strike action where one of the complaints is unsafe working conditions.

    Just lookup up the incident on Wikipedia and they're of course dishing dirt out on the armorer:


    It was Gutierrez-Reed's second film serving as lead armorer after The Old Way, where she had reportedly handed a weapon to child actress Ryan Kiera Armstrong without properly checking it. In September 2021, Reed said loading a prop gun with blank cartridges was "the scariest thing" to her.
     
    From further reading there are innocent explanations for the latter detail, like she learned how to do it from her father, spent plenty of time on sets while growing up. From the linked The Daily Beast article:

    “She was a bit careless with the guns, waving it around every now and again,” said a source, who worked alongside armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed on the upcoming Nicolas Cage film, The Old Way. “There were a couple times she was loading the blanks and doing it in a fashion that we thought was unsafe.”
     
    But such anonymous talk is cheap today. Although this is interesting for protocol:

    In a heartbreaking 911 call, script supervisor Mamie Mitchell also seemed to reference [assistant director] Halls as she urgently asked a dispatcher to send an ambulance to the set at Bonanza Creek Ranch, on the outskirts of Santa Fe.

    Mitchell can be overheard telling someone nearby, “this fucking AD that yelled at me at lunch asking about revisions, this motherfucker. Did you see him lean over my desk and yell at me? He’s supposed to check the guns. He’s responsible for what happened.”
     
    This could be very bad:

    The most troubling incident [in the filming of The Old Way] occurred when Gutierrez-Reed allegedly loaded a gun on the ground where the area was filled with pebbles, then without properly checking the weapon, handed it to child actress Ryan Kiera Armstrong, both sources told The Daily Beast.

    Concerned crew members intervened, demanding filming be stopped until Gutierrez-Reed had properly checked the firearm, the two sources said.

    “She was reloading the gun on the ground, where there were pebbles and stuff. We didn’t see her check it, we didn’t know if something got in the barrel or not,” one source said, explaining the crew waited until she double checked the gun for barrel obstruction.
     
    This is too specific, does not sound like it would have been made up just now to dirty her reputation. And if you're experienced with guns as some of the other people on the set claimed to be, they'd know barrel obstructions are a big deal, "pebbles" would be bad in the context of a movie where one could make a blank round a lot more dangerous.

    Also some allegations and after the fact details about the previous negligent discharges. There are more details, contradictory with the about account as well as internally in this LA Times item where I got some of the above.

    Back to Wikipedia, it says the whole thing was going to be a gunfight in the church, whatever that clip of film was supposed to show. And "In the film industry, a live round refers to a gun loaded with any material, usually a blank." which I believe, as we've mentioned blanks can be very deadly. Also:

    On October 24, it was reported that [assistant director] Halls had faced complaints about his behavior on two episodes of Into the Dark, in which he disregarded safety protocols, and ignored blocked exits and lanes.
     
    Also mentions a 1915 Cecil B. DeMille movie where an extra was accidentally shot and killed in addition to the other two more modern era accidents that have been discussed here.

    Replies: @Rouetheday

    Today’s Good Morning America show included that 911 call of Mamie Mitchell’s. They included the bit where she was complaining to a colleague about the AD having yelled at her. They probably wish they could have a do-over on that as other news outlets that played that 911 call edited out that portion- presumably they realized it made it look like she had a personal grudge against the AD (because she does). It seems pretty obvious to me the MSM hopes to pin the blame primarily on the White male AD rather than the vaguely Hispanic woman or the left-wing activist actor.

  219. @Prester John
    REAL bullets? On a MOVIE set?

    Replies: @Charon

    It’s pretty funny when you consider that real cigarettes are never used, even in period pieces. Too dangerous!

  220. @Prof. Woland
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I feel bad for the woman that was killed. Alec Baldwin, no so much but it is harder to care when considering the fact that I could not work there due to my politics. You could swing a dead cat anywhere in the movie industry and not hit a 'conservative' or any based person for that matter.

    I had a bit of schadenfreude when old Harvey Weinstein and the others were rousted out of Hollywood. You knew that every single one of them hated people like me and mine.

    I am looking forward to Baldwin getting his just deserts. It could not have happened to a bigger prick.

    Replies: @PaceLaw

    Other than paying a hefty settlement in a civil suit, I don’t think much else will happen to Baldwin. Based upon what I heard, there really is no strong basis for a criminal charge. He was told the firearm that he had was “cold“ and safe to use. Some other negligent person was responsible for the live round that was in the firearm.

    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    @PaceLaw

    I am not a lawyer so I won't pretend that I know what will legally happen to Alec Baldwin but this much is true, his career is finished. That includes any attempt at humor or comedy. His narcissistic rage schtick and mockery of conservatives in general and President Trump specifically won't suit him well going forward. We will see in discovery but it remains to be seen how much influence this bully had regarding this movie set and simply pawning off responsibility on a 'sub-contractor' that he himself picked won't do his reputation any good either. He could fall on the sword but that does not seem to be the type of guy he is.

  221. @Buzz Mohawk
    @prosa123


    ... surreptitiously filmed Grant as he strolled onto the UN grounds, hoping against hope that no one would recognize him (no one did).
     
    That's cool. An old man I knew told me about seeing Cary Grant in Manhattan. My friend happened to be walking behind as Grant made his way along the sidewalk down 5th Avenue or something, impeccably dressed in a perfectly-fitted suit just like in the movies. My friend could see that the actor was smiling, head held high as if to say, "I'm Cary Grant, and I'm having a great day being Cary Grant." (One of my favorite actors of all time)

    Replies: @Cortes, @Anonymous

    Probably smiling at the cellophane flowers of yellow and green towering over his head (they grow so incredibly high).

    • LOL: Right_On
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Cortes

    Yes, he tried LSD -- when it was a brand new, experimental drug (endorsed by the doctors and Ph.D.s present at the time, mind you.) He was a cool guy all around, and maybe not what most people would expect. Again, for this and other reasons, one of my favorites.

    Replies: @Cortes

  222. @Paperback Writer
    @Paperback Writer

    This is getting weird.

    The armorer was there (p. 4, bottom) and removed the spent casing.

    Concealing evidence?

    In the presence of her bosses?

    Replies: @Polistra

    We are now entering the O.J. zone.

    • Agree: Paperback Writer
  223. @Johann Ricke
    Woke pronoun usage from the NY Post:

    A hiker lost on a mountain in Colorado ignored repeated calls from rescuers — later explaining that they had been unfamiliar with the phone number, authorities said.
     
    Of course, these days, it's hard to tell the difference between wokeness and illiteracy.

    Replies: @Polistra, @PiltdownMan

    I took that to mean that the hiker was female.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Polistra

    They (and I MEAN "they") do this for male or female, Polistra. For you, Mr. Ricke, and Piltdown Man: This is usually not the new wokeness. The use of "they" for singular person of unknown sex has been ruining the clarity of the English language since the feminists pushed this crap way back in the 1970s!

    What makes it stupider now is that they (and I MEAN "they") will sometimes use "they" as a 3rd-person pronoun for even known sex, now, EVEN for a female. "They were not in a good mood later that week due to their menstrual cycle." "Mr. Newman left town, saying that they they would not want to be around for any of this."

    What's worse is it is used in manuals for my work that are safety related! Often there are a couple of people or just one who may be involved. Who knows? It's PC over safety, every time.

    Replies: @Polistra

    , @res
    @Polistra

    I wondered about that. It was a man.
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/oct/26/hiker-lost-on-us-mountain-ignored-calls-from-rescuers-because-he-didnt-recognise-the-number

  224. Anonymous[950] • Disclaimer says:
    @Buzz Mohawk
    @prosa123


    ... surreptitiously filmed Grant as he strolled onto the UN grounds, hoping against hope that no one would recognize him (no one did).
     
    That's cool. An old man I knew told me about seeing Cary Grant in Manhattan. My friend happened to be walking behind as Grant made his way along the sidewalk down 5th Avenue or something, impeccably dressed in a perfectly-fitted suit just like in the movies. My friend could see that the actor was smiling, head held high as if to say, "I'm Cary Grant, and I'm having a great day being Cary Grant." (One of my favorite actors of all time)

    Replies: @Cortes, @Anonymous

    That’s cool. An old man I knew told me about seeing Cary Grant in Manhattan. My friend happened to be walking behind as Grant made his way along the sidewalk down 5th Avenue or something, impeccably dressed in a perfectly-fitted suit just like in the movies. My friend could see that the actor was smiling, head held high as if to say, “I’m Cary Grant, and I’m having a great day being Cary Grant.” (One of my favorite actors of all time)

    Here’s a story you haven’t heard, I got from the horse’s mouth:

    So this girl, 20 years old, had gotten a job at a company in New York in the early fifties. The building she worked in had a few talent agencies stationed there. Her first week at work, she got on the elevator, and on the next floor, the elevator stopped and Cary Grant entered.

    Since he was her favorite actor, her heart started beating a mile a minute, and she obviously had strange look on her face as she continued to face forward in the elevator.

    Cary Grant says, “Uh… excuse me, miss. Are you all right?”

    She says, “Yes, I’m all right! You’re Cary Grant! I’ve seen all your movies. I just love you! I mean your movies! I’ve seen them all! I just think you’re wonderful! All your movies! You’re just… wonderful!”

    Grant says, “What is your name?”

    She says, “Suzie! My name is Suzie!”

    Grant says, “Well, Suzie, I have to tell you I was having a pretty lousy day today, but meeting you has really turned it around for me. Thank you.”

    Suzie says, “Oh, thank YOU! I love your movies! I’ve seen them all! Thank you!”

    He reached his floor, said goodbye and left.

    Cut to 11 years later. Suzie had moved to Los Angeles, and had another job as a secretary at a talent agency. She had been mortified by how she had behaved meeting her first celebrity, and had felt embarrassed that she had so thoroughly lost control of herself. Not very professional for a girl working in her profession.

    So… she parks her car in the underground garage, gets into the elevator of her building, and the next stop, Cary Grant enters… again.

    She thought he couldn’t possibly remember something that happened 11 years ago, and she decided just to keep looking forward, not speak, to avoid making an ass of herself again. So it was dead quiet in the elevator.

    After a couple of floors, Grant looked at her and said, “What’s the matter, Suzie? Don’t you love me anymore?”

    Suzie lost it again, “Oh yes, Mr. Grant! I still do! I’ve still seen all your movies!”

    I recall Cary Grant was quoted as saying, “It’s not easy being Cary Grant.”
    I think Cary Grant was more Cary Grant than he gave himself credit for.

    • Troll: HammerJack
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Anonymous

    That is wonderful. He must have had an amazing memory, which must have helped with scripts and lines. That part of acting is no small feat, BTW.

  225. @Altai
    And yet how do you know it wasn't just such a man, clad in his MAGA hat, who set Baldwin up to shoot an immigrant woman?

    https://twitter.com/Villavelius/status/1451499563903242242

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted, @Almost Missouri, @Joe S.Walker, @Jack Armstrong, @Charlotte, @Wade Hampton, @Reg Cæsar, @Buffalo Joe, @EdwardM

    The set supposedly had a lot of complaints and they were using, or recruiting, scab camera crews. Could this have been a sabotage labor action? Far more likely than some triple bank-shot pro-Trump frame-up.

  226. Evidently the weapon was a colt dragoon 3
    A black powder pistol.Takes a bit of effort to load it.

    Before anyone makes anymore silly comments about bullets etc might be worth watching the video.

    • Replies: @anon
    @mcohen


    Before anyone makes anymore silly comments about bullets etc might be worth watching the video.
     
    Eh, that won't stop israeli lover 'Jack D' or vaccine enthusiast 'That would would be shilling' from bloviating, writing 2000 word posts about how it all happened.

    Replies: @El Dato

    , @El Dato
    @mcohen

    17:00 Making the device hot with a cocked hammer like that seems dangerous. Is the hammer locked in place somehow?

    Doing all that demands some balls.

    , @Emil Nikola Richard
    @mcohen

    Thank you mchohen. The you tube might get more views with the authentic armorer scantily clothed doing the re-load segment with nipple and ramrod. Since she maybe could use a new career perhaps she is paying attention.

    , @Jack D
    @mcohen

    Source?

    Replies: @Johann Ricke

    , @J1234
    @mcohen

    You might be conflating eras, which is easy to do when you're talking about the late 19th century, when firearms technology was rapidly evolving. The gun that Hickok45 is demonstrating is called a cap and ball revolver - typical of the 1860's - which is different than what was typically found by the 1880's, even in remote parts of the western US. I only watched a few seconds of this video, so I don't know if he mentioned this or showed other variants of the gun.

    Early cap and ball revolvers were still in use during the late 1800's, but most of them had probably been converted to fire cartridge rounds, just like the famous Colt Single Action Army of 1873 which was designed for cartridges. This involved replacing or modifying the cylinder and maybe making a few other mods. Wild Bill Hickok frequently used converted cap and ball revolvers, but .36 cal., I think.

    The converted guns were more difficult to load cartridges into than the SAA, but for budget conscious frontiersmen it was cheaper than buying a new gun and was still much easier than loading powder, primer and projectile for every chamber in the cylinder. (I've read that during the Civil War the common procedure was to fire six rounds from your cap and ball, then put it back in your holster and forget it because it would be too involved to try to reload during a battle. )

    If Baldwin was firing a Dragoon as you say, it could've been in cap and ball form, but it's much more likely it was a cartridge conversion since the story takes place in the 1880's. Regardless, the use of this type of gun might be critical in explaining why this accident happened. In either cap and ball or cartridge form, it's very difficult to tell at a glance whether the gun is loaded or not (other than looking at the gun from the front, which generally isn't cool.) If it was cap and ball, though, one could remove the primer caps and pretty much ensure it wasn't going to fire.

    And speaking of looking at revolvers from the front, I've noticed that revolvers in movies have projectiles (bullets) visible in the cylinder when filmed from the front...for authenticity, I guess. I assume they use dummy rounds to create that look. Maybe another factor? Who knows. BTW, speaking of conflating eras of firearms, the Winchester model 92 was the most frequently used lever action rifle used in westerns back when I was a kid, but was produced too late (1892) to have been available when most of those western stories were supposed to have taken place.

    Replies: @mcohen

  227. @Anonymous
    @peterike

    Oh, come on! There is no "BeagleGate". There is a sad reality of animal studies and the fact that many of them cannot be restricted to mice, flies and worms.

    Nothing is black and white - in real life, compromises are made. If you're given a choice between keeping your son or an average beagle alive, the decision is obvious, right? Same with animal experiments: Many of them are cruel but on the other scale is that more people will die without them. E.g., the cancer-beating Rituximab antibody would not exist without animal studies.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Catdompanj

    They removed the dogs’ vocal chords because the scientists didn’t like to hear their yelping. Really necessary to cure disease, yeah, right.

    • Thanks: HammerJack
  228. @That Would Be Telling
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Look more closely at the gun's barrel, you can see the underside of it but not the top side. I think that guy or whomever coached him just before the photo knows enough gun safety to have it angled up so it's unlikely to hit the photographer. I'm not certain because the photo does not have him using the sights, that would likely cover too much of his face for the desired photo.

    We can't know about the handling of the gun before or after, but from what we can tell this is not a gross violation of Rule 2 of gun safety although that's by a hair, and I wouldn't do it myself without personally emptying the gun, double checking that, abd keeping my trigger finger in the trigger guard but touching the forward part of it, not the trigger. But see below, we can assume most of the people on the set weren't taught gun safety starting when they were three (by example, that's when my father would start taking me and my siblings out hunting with him).

    The discussion so far here is excellent, I give particular thanks to ic1000 for bringing us up to date on the facts as they are believed to be known, they allow us to figure out ways this could have happened as Jack D has done (except for the gun being visibly dirty after plinking, smokeless power is pretty clean stuff). However Altai's point, and our general points about people downstream of the armorer double checking the latter's work are iffy because the difference between a regular and blank round is only apparent at the forward end of it.

    So depending on the action type, checking safety for a semi-auto would require removing the magazine and then the round in the chamber, for revolvers based on lighting and such maybe looking at the front of the cylinder, spinning it if single action, or removing all the rounds. And then, not being a specialist armorer, restoring the gun and its blank ammo back to the condition it was in so the film shooting will go right, you don't want to ruin a take because the gun doesn't fire. And all this keeping the barrel pointed in a safe direction, all blanks are deadly at contact range, those with wadding somewhat further, and I assume wadding plus light springs are used make semi-autos cycle new rounds into the chamber.

    So it would make sense for the guns to be completely under the control of the armorer, directly in his physical possession, or locked away with a key only he has, and everyone downstream assuming the armorer is doing his job properly. Which obviously wasn't happening if as said the armorer is allowing the guns to used for plinking, mixing of blank and real ammo should never be allowed except for the rare situations where you want to film that that. In which case the armorer would directly hand the gun to the actor, who he'd previously vetted for being sufficiently experienced and responsible in using guns for real.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Ben Kurtz, @Polistra, @dimples

    This is America so every male individual is completely obsessed with the finer points of the gern accident involving the famous Hollywood film star. If it were 911, then nukes and no-planes will work just fine thanks. Who’d a thunk it?

    • Agree: El Dato
  229. @Johann Ricke
    Woke pronoun usage from the NY Post:

    A hiker lost on a mountain in Colorado ignored repeated calls from rescuers — later explaining that they had been unfamiliar with the phone number, authorities said.
     
    Of course, these days, it's hard to tell the difference between wokeness and illiteracy.

    Replies: @Polistra, @PiltdownMan

    I was helping PiltdownChild2 fill out a form for college, and the pronoun “they” is all over the parents section, referring to her mother and father both individually and collectively, and is ambiguous in places. The form also allows her to enter more than two parents, and, of course, allows parents to be the same sex, or, “other.”

    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    @PiltdownMan

    Thee/ye/thy/thine are good. Mine preferred salutations, and don't 'ee dare neglect they.
    Or plain "yez" for everything, in the case of non-fee-paying establishments

  230. @Veteran Aryan
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Clips don’t go in guns at all.
     
    Here's a little Marine Corps meme for you: "Guns" are artillery pieces, i.e. 'The Guns Of Navarone'. During USMC boot camp I observed several different unfortunate fellows who made the mistake of using the term "gun." They were then required to stand on top of their footlocker, pull down their pants, and yell "This is my rifle, this is my gun; this is for fighting, this is for fun."

    Assume the position.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @El Dato, @Catdog

    Now, referring to submarines as “ships” instead of “boats” would be unnatural, but this is pointlessly taking it too far. Artillery is “cannon”.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @El Dato

    You can refer to a sub as a ship or a boat. Boat is sort of the cute familiar term, but obviously they are ships of the fleet. If you had a collection of 3 submarines and 3 skimmers, I mean 3 surface ships, you'd probably say 6 ships, not 3 boats and 3 ships.

    I've heard the rationale for calling subs boats is they don't have any boats on them (not counting life rafts). Don't have a whale boat, don't have a captain's gig.

    -served on two 637 class out of Sand Dog and Mare Island.

    Replies: @El Dato, @Right_On

    , @Veteran Aryan
    @El Dato


    Now, referring to submarines as “ships” instead of “boats” would be unnatural, but this is pointlessly taking it too far. Artillery is “cannon”.
     
    Not pointless. Enforced conformity of nomenclature is a group bonding mechanism - one that anyone familiar with Wokemon culture should recognize.

    The singular for artillery is "piece." The plural is "battery." (but this is also true of "batteries." The singular is "cell." It takes multiple cells to make a battery)
  231. @Stebbing Heuer
    @Jack D

    Less than halfway into the first episode of the first season of The Man in the High Castle I completely lost interest in the whole thing.

    I was so looking forward to the series. Having Juliana be an aikidoka was the cherry on top. Then it came out and I saw it.

    The aikido was completely wrong - the poorly-tied hakama, the stance, the mind-set, the execution, the way the receiving student takes the falls hard (aikidoka LOVE getting thrown around, rolling out of a fall, and being smashed into the mat - learning how fall safely with a smile on your face is part of the training), the students sitting in a circle where they were guaranteed to get crushed by a flying student, the 'aikido philosophy' espoused by the sensei, dammit even the paper coverings on the doors, which would last maybe three minutes before a flying student breached them with an arm or leg, to universal acclaim.

    https://youtu.be/tWrxpI0LZdI?t=13

    It told me the producers and director didn't care about getting the little details right. The show's failure was presaged in the first twenty minutes of the first episode.

    Aikido isn't about the techniques, they are just the path. That's why it takes years to learn and can't be faked. They should have stuck with judo, as in PKD's novel. Judo is a superb art that teaches everything in that sensei's 'philosophy' and is much more practical, and so is much more relevant to the storyline.

    Just appalling. I can't even!

    I'll shut up now. My friends know not to start me talking about aikido.

    Replies: @anon

    the book was silly as well.

    • Disagree: El Dato
  232. @Paul Mendez
    @Woodsie


    . It may sound ageist, but a 24-year old is unqualified to be the armorer.
     
    Uh, 24-year olds launch and retrieve multi-million dollar jets on aircraft carriers every day.

    Replies: @Jack D, @anon, @EdwardM

    uh, 24 year olds with red hair and a belly ring?

  233. @Paul Mendez
    @Woodsie


    . It may sound ageist, but a 24-year old is unqualified to be the armorer.
     
    Uh, 24-year olds launch and retrieve multi-million dollar jets on aircraft carriers every day.

    Replies: @Jack D, @anon, @EdwardM

    Agree, let’s not get carried away here and say that the job of armorer is rocket science. It entails a very narrow scope for which a few simple protocols should suffice. A 24-year-old nurse, cop, or truck driver could also easily create death and destruction in more complex jobs.

    This girl may have been an idiot unsuited for the job but it’s a bit much no say that the average 24-year-old couldn’t possibly be trusted.

    • Replies: @we
    @EdwardM

    Actually EdwardM the job of armourer is quite literally rocket science(engineering) - aerodynamics, propellant chemistry, thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, and metallurgy. As the comments in this thread make quite clear, a lot can go wrong if you dont have a working (not theroretical) knowledge of how these principles apply to specific firearms, of which there are many. I know that your using the term "rocket science" to imply that the job doesn't require someone with a PHD level of theoretical knowledge about these principles. However, the position of armourer does require someone with a large empirical (learned through observation/experimentation) knowledge about the wide variety of firerams that appear on a set and all of the danger that the use of those firearms entails. It would be the rare 24 year old, especially one working on only their second film, that would have that breadth of knowledge. In defense of Baldwin, one might reasonably think that such a rare 24 year old could be the child of legendary Hollywood armourer but in this case, by her own admission, she was not. Baldwin is going to pay dearly for this, as he should.

    , @Alden
    @EdwardM

    In Britain, Ireland and a few other countries medical school starts at 17 or 18. It’s a 5 year program. Grads take the licensing exam and if they pass they are full fledged physicians at 23 or 24.

    Chisum of the famous Chisum trail was only 14 when he made the original trip. His father thought him capable. So sent him off at age 14.
    Plenty of other examples of very capable young people. I

    guess the old codgers MEN OF UNZ don’t just hate women. They hate anyone under. 70 too. That’s thread displays the worst of UNZ. Hatred of women and hundreds of asinine comments by ignoramuses who know nothing. Except for Robert Weissberg who spoke with his son a movie director about guns use in movies.

  234. @anon
    @Rob

    Guns are designed to be lethal. Prop guns could be designed to be non lethal. 99.99% of the time, being careful was enough.

    Replies: @El Dato

    I remember that the guns in the original Westworld (1973) detected when you were trying to shoot at Real Humans and simply refused to fire (*click* … improbable tech!). Going on holiday in Delos with crazy tourists around must still have been fraught with danger even before Yul Brynner went full Terminator.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    @El Dato

    "Yul Brynner went full Terminator"

    Yul's Gunfighter is way spookier than Arnold's Terminator. Michael Crichton was an idea machine.

    Replies: @SunBakedSuburb

  235. @mcohen
    Evidently the weapon was a colt dragoon 3
    A black powder pistol.Takes a bit of effort to load it.


    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y5v68GMgTb8

    Before anyone makes anymore silly comments about bullets etc might be worth watching the video.

    Replies: @anon, @El Dato, @Emil Nikola Richard, @Jack D, @J1234

    Before anyone makes anymore silly comments about bullets etc might be worth watching the video.

    Eh, that won’t stop israeli lover ‘Jack D’ or vaccine enthusiast ‘That would would be shilling’ from bloviating, writing 2000 word posts about how it all happened.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    @anon

    anon[sixgorillion] please

  236. @Jack D
    @Altai

    1. Apparently the guns were left outside on a cart in order to minimize the number of people going into the location as a result of Covid protocols.

    2. The shooting happened immediately after lunch.

    3. Members of the crew had picked up a habit of using the prop guns for target shooting in the dessert when they were not in use on the set. Movie sets can be incredibly boring places when nothing is happening for you. This is the kind of fun thing that Spider Girl might allow. Her dad - NFW are you going to do that on my set. If you touch my guns I'll punch you out and then have you fired.

    This is my guess:

    1. Before lunch, Spider Girl checks the guns, tells AD they are cold, leaves them on cart. Retires to her trailer to text on her phone/do other fun activities. Her job is done. She'll come by at the end of the day to retrieve the guns. She is not allowed inside the building - the great star Baldwin might catch Covid if such icky people were allowed near him. The shoot is set up to minimize the # of icky people that interact with Baldwin "due to Covid" but it suits him just fine. Nor is she going to stand in the open desert and watch those guns while they sit on a cart for hours. You could get heatstroke/ go nuts.

    2. During lunch, someone picks up gun, loads it with live ammo, does a bit of target shooting and returns it to the cart, but they leave 1 cartridge in the cylinder. They have done this before (not the leaving the cartridge part but the plinking) and it was fine. The gun wasn't being used for filming during lunchtime, so what's the harm? Spider Girl might or might not have been aware that it was going on. Strange that the weapons were dirtier than they should have been, but maybe she wasn't really into cleaning weapons anyway.

    3. AD returns from lunch with Baldwin, picks up gun from cart and announces that it is cold.

    4. Tragedy ensues.

    The weapons were supposed to be in the armorer's custody and control. That's what her job description is - to have custody of the weapons at all times when they are not being used on the set. She didn't do her job. She is the main person at fault.

    Secondarily, Covid foolishness - Covid is so dangerous that leaving guns lying around in the open is the safer alternative. At least no one caught Covid from Spider Girl.

    Thirdly the asshole that borrowed the gun and returned it loaded. This person deserves jailtime for sure.

    Replies: @fish, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer, @Anonymous, @Stonewall Jackson, @Paperback Writer, @Etruscan Film Star, @foxotcw, @anonymouseperson

    In support of your hypothesis, the Colt single-action revolver involved is trickier to load and unload than most modern handguns. You have to pull the hammer to half-cock, open the loading gate, and eject each cartridge one-at-a-time. There is no way you can just “check the chamber.” Each chamber has to be rotated into view and checked individually. You better be counting that you checked every one of them, too.
    It would be easy for a careless shooter to load six rounds, shoot five, eject five, and forget the live round in the last chamber.

    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    @foxotcw

    http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/tumblr_llxd9e3KAP1qhw7c0o1_500.gif

  237. A crime was committed, a warning gone terribly wrong, or maybe out and out murder, deploying Alec the Horribilis, as the perfect patsy. Like the ‘suicide’ of Kate Spade and too many other celebs dying for ‘talking’.

    • Replies: @Coemgen
    @Cking


    A crime was committed, a warning gone terribly wrong, or maybe out and out murder, deploying Alec the Horribilis
     
    I saw some comments on Quora referring to Alec Baldwin's killing of a woman as an "incident with the woman."

    Like Donald Trump said, about 15 years ago, "When you're a star, ... you can do anything."
  238. @mcohen
    Evidently the weapon was a colt dragoon 3
    A black powder pistol.Takes a bit of effort to load it.


    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y5v68GMgTb8

    Before anyone makes anymore silly comments about bullets etc might be worth watching the video.

    Replies: @anon, @El Dato, @Emil Nikola Richard, @Jack D, @J1234

    17:00 Making the device hot with a cocked hammer like that seems dangerous. Is the hammer locked in place somehow?

    Doing all that demands some balls.

  239. @anon
    @mcohen


    Before anyone makes anymore silly comments about bullets etc might be worth watching the video.
     
    Eh, that won't stop israeli lover 'Jack D' or vaccine enthusiast 'That would would be shilling' from bloviating, writing 2000 word posts about how it all happened.

    Replies: @El Dato

    anon[sixgorillion] please

  240. Speaking of funny movies, “El Dragon” on Netflix is very good. Season two is better than season one. It has good action, decent body count, lots of betrayals, full of Mexican, Russian, Spanish thugs and white collar criminals, one car bomb set off so far. It has its soapish opera moments, I fast forward through this boring fem-splaining. The suds bring in the female views, meaning more money and a season three. The main evil narcotraficante, the man you love to hate, is Epigmenio Moncada, done by a very good actor.
    El Dragon is a production from Spain, I believe.

    Production locations
    Tokyo, Japan
    Madrid, Spain
    Miami, United States
    Mexico City, Mexico
    Veracruz, Mexico
    Huatulco, Mexico
    Mazatlan, Mexico
    Cuernavaca, Mexico

  241. @Polistra
    @Johann Ricke

    I took that to mean that the hiker was female.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @res

    They (and I MEAN “they”) do this for male or female, Polistra. For you, Mr. Ricke, and Piltdown Man: This is usually not the new wokeness. The use of “they” for singular person of unknown sex has been ruining the clarity of the English language since the feminists pushed this crap way back in the 1970s!

    What makes it stupider now is that they (and I MEAN “they”) will sometimes use “they” as a 3rd-person pronoun for even known sex, now, EVEN for a female. “They were not in a good mood later that week due to their menstrual cycle.” “Mr. Newman left town, saying that they they would not want to be around for any of this.”

    What’s worse is it is used in manuals for my work that are safety related! Often there are a couple of people or just one who may be involved. Who knows? It’s PC over safety, every time.

    • Replies: @Polistra
    @Achmed E. Newman

    All of that granted, but I still see the same news outlets reverting to male pronouns whenever something really bad has been perpetrated.

  242. If you get your news from NBC, here’s how this story was handled this morning on Today (cf. yesterday, see comment #28).

    * While teased at the opening, the story didn’t air until the second half-hour. So it’s ‘clickbait,’ but not very important.
    * Still, featherweight reporter Miguel Almaguer was given a (very lengthy) 3 1/2 minutes for his at-the-ranch report.
    * Lede: Informed voices are urgently calling for better gun safety on movie sets.
    * The Asst. Director is the one who handed the gun to Alec Baldwin. A still of handsome, cocky, masculine, and white Dave Halls is on screen during the voiceover. In 2019, Halls was fired from another set for a misfire [sic]. No compliments but nothing damning on Armorer Hanna Gutierrez-Reed.
    * Prior safety concerns on the set of Rust.
    * Alec Baldwin’s wife posted her condolences to the slain cinematographer on Twitter!
    * A good interview with an Armorer and another with a Prop Master. ‘I always demonstrate to the actors that a revolver is cleared, it’s easy and fast.’ ‘No AD would touch a prop gun on my set.’
    * The producers (somehow) contributed to the working conditions on the set. (No mention of their names.)

    So Dave Halls is the bad guy. Gutierrez-Reed — not great. Baldwin — victim of Tragedy.

    • Thanks: That Would Be Telling
    • Replies: @Wilkey
    @ic1000


    So Dave Halls is the bad guy. Gutierrez-Reed — not great. Baldwin — victim of Tragedy.
     
    Alec Baldwin may have had no direct personal responsibility for ensuring the safety of the gun that killed Hutchins but, as the writer, producer, and star of the movie, as well as the last person with a chance to check the gun for safety, and the person who fired the gun, he bore a shitload of moral and probably legal responsibility.

    He appears to have been the sole star in a low budget movie featuring a lot of unknown actors. He was in every sense the "adult" on the set - or he was supposed to be, anyway. He should have been insisting that everyone was doing his or her job. If shit was going on that shouldn't have been - like using prop guns for target shooting - he should have put a stop to that. He should have been making sure that a young, novice armorer knew what was expected of her and was doing her job. Better yet, he probably shouldn't have allowed her to be hired in the first place.

    One of the magic moments of becoming an adult is when you develop the ability to tell people "no," regardless of what people may think of you, regardless of how much you like them or want them to like you. The problem with Gutierrez-Reed is that she is not old enough to have necessarily reached that transition stage. Her forays into TikTok and Instagram suggest that she was more interested in having people like her than respect her.

    Maybe I'm just giving Gutierrez-Reed some young woman privilege, but I feel bad for her. She's going to have to live with this for the rest of her life - a mistake made doing a job the adults in the room shouldn't have hired her to do. She was too young and inexperienced to be doing this job and probably didn't know she wasn't really qualified to do it. She didn't know what she didn't know. It was the job of the adults around her to make sure that she did.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @That Would Be Telling, @ic1000, @Jack D

  243. @Cortes
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Probably smiling at the cellophane flowers of yellow and green towering over his head (they grow so incredibly high).

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Yes, he tried LSD — when it was a brand new, experimental drug (endorsed by the doctors and Ph.D.s present at the time, mind you.) He was a cool guy all around, and maybe not what most people would expect. Again, for this and other reasons, one of my favorites.

    • Replies: @Cortes
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Agreed. It’s difficult to imagine a remake of something like “Bringing Up Baby” being produced successfully (though I fear some dolt may attempt it).

  244. @mcohen
    Evidently the weapon was a colt dragoon 3
    A black powder pistol.Takes a bit of effort to load it.


    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y5v68GMgTb8

    Before anyone makes anymore silly comments about bullets etc might be worth watching the video.

    Replies: @anon, @El Dato, @Emil Nikola Richard, @Jack D, @J1234

    Thank you mchohen. The you tube might get more views with the authentic armorer scantily clothed doing the re-load segment with nipple and ramrod. Since she maybe could use a new career perhaps she is paying attention.

  245. @Anonymous
    @Buzz Mohawk


    That’s cool. An old man I knew told me about seeing Cary Grant in Manhattan. My friend happened to be walking behind as Grant made his way along the sidewalk down 5th Avenue or something, impeccably dressed in a perfectly-fitted suit just like in the movies. My friend could see that the actor was smiling, head held high as if to say, “I’m Cary Grant, and I’m having a great day being Cary Grant.” (One of my favorite actors of all time)
     
    Here's a story you haven't heard, I got from the horse's mouth:

    So this girl, 20 years old, had gotten a job at a company in New York in the early fifties. The building she worked in had a few talent agencies stationed there. Her first week at work, she got on the elevator, and on the next floor, the elevator stopped and Cary Grant entered.

    Since he was her favorite actor, her heart started beating a mile a minute, and she obviously had strange look on her face as she continued to face forward in the elevator.

    Cary Grant says, "Uh... excuse me, miss. Are you all right?"

    She says, "Yes, I'm all right! You're Cary Grant! I've seen all your movies. I just love you! I mean your movies! I've seen them all! I just think you're wonderful! All your movies! You're just... wonderful!"

    Grant says, "What is your name?"

    She says, "Suzie! My name is Suzie!"

    Grant says, "Well, Suzie, I have to tell you I was having a pretty lousy day today, but meeting you has really turned it around for me. Thank you."

    Suzie says, "Oh, thank YOU! I love your movies! I've seen them all! Thank you!"

    He reached his floor, said goodbye and left.

    Cut to 11 years later. Suzie had moved to Los Angeles, and had another job as a secretary at a talent agency. She had been mortified by how she had behaved meeting her first celebrity, and had felt embarrassed that she had so thoroughly lost control of herself. Not very professional for a girl working in her profession.

    So... she parks her car in the underground garage, gets into the elevator of her building, and the next stop, Cary Grant enters... again.

    She thought he couldn't possibly remember something that happened 11 years ago, and she decided just to keep looking forward, not speak, to avoid making an ass of herself again. So it was dead quiet in the elevator.

    After a couple of floors, Grant looked at her and said, "What's the matter, Suzie? Don't you love me anymore?"

    Suzie lost it again, "Oh yes, Mr. Grant! I still do! I've still seen all your movies!"

    I recall Cary Grant was quoted as saying, "It's not easy being Cary Grant."
    I think Cary Grant was more Cary Grant than he gave himself credit for.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    That is wonderful. He must have had an amazing memory, which must have helped with scripts and lines. That part of acting is no small feat, BTW.

  246. Not if you want a fall guy for killing someone.

  247. @PiltdownMan
    @Johann Ricke

    I was helping PiltdownChild2 fill out a form for college, and the pronoun "they" is all over the parents section, referring to her mother and father both individually and collectively, and is ambiguous in places. The form also allows her to enter more than two parents, and, of course, allows parents to be the same sex, or, "other."

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted

    Thee/ye/thy/thine are good. Mine preferred salutations, and don’t ‘ee dare neglect they.
    Or plain “yez” for everything, in the case of non-fee-paying establishments

  248. @YetAnotherAnon
    @Harry Baldwin

    Further down that thread - is this a 'joke' or did she really post that?

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCamV0HWUAM1gwc.jpg

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @Anonymous

    Obvious fake. Still funny.

  249. @foxotcw
    @Jack D

    In support of your hypothesis, the Colt single-action revolver involved is trickier to load and unload than most modern handguns. You have to pull the hammer to half-cock, open the loading gate, and eject each cartridge one-at-a-time. There is no way you can just "check the chamber." Each chamber has to be rotated into view and checked individually. You better be counting that you checked every one of them, too.
    It would be easy for a careless shooter to load six rounds, shoot five, eject five, and forget the live round in the last chamber.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted

  250. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Jack D


    they’re all 24 years old (or sometimes less) but each 24 year old has one job to do and he has been drilled in that job and God help him if he deviates from his training or doesn’t follow orders
     
    Not so much on the Bonhomme Richard

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/this-is-not-raymond-spruances-u-s-navy

    Replies: @Rob McX, @That Would Be Telling, @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    they’re all 24 years old (or sometimes less) but each 24 year old [on a carrier deck] has one job to do and he has been drilled in that job and God help him if he deviates from his training or doesn’t follow orders

    Not so much on the Bonhomme Richard

    Damage control is a different beast because your response is situation specific, but all sailors, enlisted and officers, were at last count trained in it. That said, one female sailor noticed the smoke pretty early but said it didn’t smell like smoke so she ignored it.

    The real key is that the ship was docked for maintenance meaning it didn’t have its normal crew compliment, per Wikipedia and other reports the “on-board fire-suppression systems had been disabled”, etc. etc., but after we lost the USS Miami attack sub to arson during maintenance in 2012 the recommendations to avoid such a fate for other ships were of course ignored.

    And diversity played another a role if what’s been said about the sailor who’s been charged with it is true, that it pertained to his relationship with a female sailor. See also the first major Pacific destroyer crash into a cargo ship, female in CIC wasn’t talking to the female Officer of the Deck, although there was a lot more to that incident.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @That Would Be Telling


    That Would Be Telling says:
     

    Damage control is a different beast …
    That said …
    The real key is that …
    And diversity played …
    See also …
    although there was a lot more to that …
     
    Vincenzo Coccotti sez:

    “Now, what we got here is a little game of show and tell. You don't wanna show me nothin’, but you're tellin’ me everything.”

    https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5cac90a4e5f7d1409ead718b/1554905113856-FDKFND8AKTMBOUBDRXY5/True+Romance+1.jpg
    , @By-tor
    @That Would Be Telling

    Remember this incident in 2018 involving the Norwegian Navy at the conclusion of NATO rehearsals for 'confronting Russian aggression'?

    https://freewestmedia.com/2018/11/28/we-have-hit-an-unknown-object-radio-and-radar-comms-from-hnm-helge-ingstad/

    The HNM Helge Ingstad has repeatedly been praised for its gender equality by the Navy and feminists, as four out of five navigators on board are female.

    https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/11/12/safety-report-slams-the-norwegian-navy-for-training-safety-shortfalls-in-the-runup-to-frigate-sinking/

    https://insurancemarinenews.com/insurance-marine-news/us-navy-officer-could-face-questions-in-norwegian-frigate-collision/

    https://www.theweek.in/news/world/2018/11/20/norwegian-warship-accident-raises-questions-on-women-in-armed-fo.html

    The American bridge officer present that night was also female.

  251. @prosa123
    @Buzz Mohawk

    A clever filming technique in North by Northwest was in the scene where Cary Grant's character walks into the United Nations. Going through official channels wasn't possible because the UN flatly prohibited commercial filming. So Alfred Hitchcock and a cameraman hid in a parked van and surreptitiously filmed Grant as he strolled onto the UN grounds, hoping against hope that no one would recognize him (no one did).

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Rohirrimborn, @J1234

    Here’s an amusing clip in which Michael Caine describes Cary Grant going unrecognized in public:

  252. @Veteran Aryan
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Clips don’t go in guns at all.
     
    Here's a little Marine Corps meme for you: "Guns" are artillery pieces, i.e. 'The Guns Of Navarone'. During USMC boot camp I observed several different unfortunate fellows who made the mistake of using the term "gun." They were then required to stand on top of their footlocker, pull down their pants, and yell "This is my rifle, this is my gun; this is for fighting, this is for fun."

    Assume the position.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @El Dato, @Catdog

    I don’t care what the marines say. In English we have called them “handgonnes” among other names since the 15th century.

  253. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Cortes

    Yes, he tried LSD -- when it was a brand new, experimental drug (endorsed by the doctors and Ph.D.s present at the time, mind you.) He was a cool guy all around, and maybe not what most people would expect. Again, for this and other reasons, one of my favorites.

    Replies: @Cortes

    Agreed. It’s difficult to imagine a remake of something like “Bringing Up Baby” being produced successfully (though I fear some dolt may attempt it).

  254. @mcohen
    Evidently the weapon was a colt dragoon 3
    A black powder pistol.Takes a bit of effort to load it.


    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y5v68GMgTb8

    Before anyone makes anymore silly comments about bullets etc might be worth watching the video.

    Replies: @anon, @El Dato, @Emil Nikola Richard, @Jack D, @J1234

    Source?

    • Replies: @Johann Ricke
    @Jack D

    It appears that her dad was an experienced gun handler, and taught her everything he knew, from an early age:

    https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2021-10-23/hannah-gutierrez-reed-rust-shooting-armorer

    She expressed nervousness about being an armorer. My guess is that she was worried about the non-customary nature of this particular use of firearms - preparing weapons for use on a movie set where success involved the gun *not* wounding or killing the person at which it was aimed.

    It's more than likely that the amoral Hollywood pros working alongside her are engaged in a little pre-emptive backstabbing via carefully calculated lies leaked to the media so as to pin all the blame on her. They might have been the major impediments to her doing her job properly by pulling rank, thereby cowing someone new to this particular job into submission, and reducing her to the role of rubber stamp for their unsafe work practices.

    Replies: @Jack D

  255. It would be easy to find out via YouTube and IMDb exactly how many movies Baldwin has worked on in which a gun was fired, and thus establish that he should have been well versed in the protocols. (I’m guessing it’s a lot more than the number the armourer has been on.) Plus if prosecutors or the family’s lawyers decide the whole production was unsafe and criminally liable he’s in the dock as one of the producers and head of El Dorado Pictures.

  256. @prosa123
    @Redmen

    The only question is if this rises to the level of recklessness. If so, I would expect there to be criminal charges of manslaughter as well as massive civil liability. In terms of civil liability, Baldwin is a very deep pocket. Could become one of the largest civil payouts by an individual for a tort.

    Dunno ... it happened at a work site, and workers' compensation provisions might prevent civil lawsuits. For example, that woman who got her face eaten by a chimpanzee in Connecticut could not bring a lawsuit against the chimp's very wealthy owner because she worked for her and the comp laws applied.

    Replies: @FPD72, @Redmen

    it happened at a work site, and workers’ compensation provisions might prevent civil lawsuits.

    There are a number of factors that may penetrate the supposed exclusive remedy of workers’ compensation. Was the cinematographer an employee of the same production company as Baldwin? Was she an employee or contractor? Was she hired in New Mexico or California? Do Baldwin’s actions constitute foreseeable consequences to the degree that the 2002 Delgado NM Supreme Court decision could be invoked (If Delgado is still applicable; I haven’t worked in NM for over ten years)?

    I don’t know the answer to any of these questions but I’m sure that the cinematographer’s estate attorney is looking into them. On multiple employer sites such as movie sets there are many work arounds to the sole remedy status of WC, especially third party over claims against higher tier entities.

  257. @Rob
    @Sick 'n Tired

    I do know next to nothing about guns. But I do know that, when one is playing pretend, having a type of prop that requires very few people be able to access them, everyone handling them must check to make sure they aren’t in deadly mode, etc then those things one is playing pretend with are too dangerous, and need to be re-engineered.

    Take hypodermic needles and the concern over needle sticks after HIV became common. Did hospitals emphasize needle safety, put biohazard boxes in every room, etc. Sure they did but people are human. They make mistakes. If you just say “add another layer of people checking the dangerous thing” you are not being realistic. If one person is checking, he will make the occasional mistake. Two people check? More reliable. So ten people check? That might even be less reliable than two. Every checker will say “no way a mistake could have gotten past the x people before me, and be laxer. He will also think “any mistake I make will be caught by one of the people who check it after me” and be even laxer.

    So, what happened to reduce needle sticks? Safer needles. Single-use needles, and could be irreversibly covered by a one-handed motion. To draw blood, they don’t stick you, draw blood, and then stick you again with a new syringe for the next vial. They stick you once and then draw blood into multiple tubes through that one needle.

    I think one thing gun people like about guns is that they are fairly dangerous to handle. They get a feeling of “I am being responsible with a dangerous thing. I am reliable and can be trusted with responsibility.” But people make mistakes.

    I have read that endless training of chemical workers that you don’t use hose A for chemical B did not work. There were always accidents. Only by re-engineering the connections, so that hose A did not fit the spigot on the barrel that chemical B was in eliminated accidents.

    While you may think that the fact that I could not come up with revolver means I don’t know enough about guns to know that props can be re-engineered, it is precisely because I don’t come from a “respect the great power and responsibility this deadly penis substitute gives me” that I realize dangerous tech should not be used when re-engineering the tech for safety is a possibility.

    Prop guns should not be loadable with real ammunition? If somehow they are loaded with real ammunition, they should not be able to fire it. How is that not an obvious takeaway? The Crow was a great movie when I was 13. Brandon Lee living could have meant a The Crow 2. So many girls and gay boys would have had happier teenage years.

    Look how endless harangues about driving more safely paled compared to mandated seat belt installation.

    Let’s say a company’s warehouse employees get into wrecks driving their forklifts at 40 mph. Is it a better idea to constantly be paying workers comp/wrongful death to people the forklift drivers hurt or is it a better idea to have the forklifts modified so that their maximum speed is lower?

    Making blank guns that cannot be loaded with live ammunition, cannot fire live ammunition, and can be visually distinguished from real guns in a way that can be reversed with special effects tech is really a no-brainer.

    I realize that in the grand scheme of things, very few people get hurt with misloaded prop guns on film sets. But the general principle that tech and systems should be redesigned rather than people being more personally responsibilityer shows up throughout American life. The unwillingness of the elite to re-engineer buildings and building operations to reduce colds and flu is a much bigger one.

    Some things can be best prevented by redesign rather than just ameliorated by paying wergeld to injured people or their next of kin.

    Replies: @borfwink, @anon, @Fhjjjkjcdddbb, @Muggles

    The more people checking for safety, the more chances for a mistake.

  258. @War for Blair Mountain
    I have great doubts that Alec Baldwin could hammer a nail straight…..But there have been persistent rumors over the years about Alec’s exemplary technical skills in servicing Jewish Hollywood Producers…especially in getting his foot in the door in that Industry in the early part of his career….

    Replies: @Ralph L, @War for Blair Mountain

    True story…

    Alec was shooting a remake and updated version of THE DEVIL AND DANIEL WEBSTER downtown Huntington on Wall Street….short walking distance to John Derbyshire’s home…

    A section of Wall St was closed off..You could see all the trailers….right across from Starbucks……It was a very bad snow storm for the week of shooting…..Alec’s co-stars were Anthony Hopkins and big tits Jennifer Love Hewitt……….Alec was shooting a scene in the very expensive Men’s Clothing Store across the street from StarBucks……….On Saturday morning, Alec walks across the street goes into StarBucks…orders a couple of large Starbucks placed in the cardboard tray…out he goes…….I was so disappointed that BIG TITS JENNIFER didn’t make an appearance at Starbucks that Saturday Morning….perhaps the walk across the street would have frozen Jennifer’s nipples…..

    The rest of the movie was filmed at the old Gruman Corp…the ol LEM building to be precise….the surrounding area now colonized by the Punjab State of India…..But how did all those White Men place 12 Alpha White Males on the Moon without the Hindu LEGAL IMMIGRANTS?…back when America was 90 percent Huwhite….This is one of the great mysteries of American History…..

    Alec Baldwin does know a thing or two about selling his soul to the Devil…now doesn’t he….

  259. @Rob McX
    @Harry Baldwin

    Talking about TikTok sluttery, it's hard to beat this. That's her dad in his coffin behind her. Her hashtags are #dadless #veteran #ptsd #funeral #neverforgotten.

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/10/25/15/49613479-10128429-OOTD_An_American_woman_posed_for_photos_at_her_father_s_funeral_-a-5_1635171026079.jpg

    Replies: @Not Raul, @Buzz Mohawk, @TWS, @Emil Nikola Richard

    That is just weird. Maybe she and her dad had an understanding. I hope so.

    Perhaps the saddest thing is that she thinks she is so hot; whereas, there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of young women in America who are equally hot or hotter. This is a very typical look. She is average, but she thinks she is special.

    It’s all in the tight, little dress, the pantyhose, and the heels. She is not especially hot at all, any more than any other healthy young woman is. (Nothing wrong with that, mind you.)

    There will come a day when she will be a middle-aged woman of average looks, and then things won’t be so hot anymore. We can only hope that she will respect the memory of her father — and that this photograph will make some sense for both of them, whatever it is.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @Buzz Mohawk

    It's standard practice at iSteve that whenever someone posts a picture of a reasonably attractive woman, someone feels compelled to comment that "she's not really that hot." And if someone responds to this comment, it will be to insist that, "C'mon, man, she's really not that hot."

    , @duncsbaby
    @Buzz Mohawk

    She's pretty hot. She's also a hot mess, but she is pretty damn hot nonetheless.

    , @Nicholas Stix
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Of course, she's hot. She's slim, voluptuous, and has a glorious derriere. She paid thousands of dollars for the T&A, and I won't begrudge her for them. In a few years, she'll have to get them fixed again, but that's her problem. As for me, I'm not into rubber.

  260. @ScarletNumber
    @John Henry


    What I’ve always done and taught my children to do
     
    Unless you've been on a movie set, this advice is meaningless.

    Replies: @John Henry

    So you never check the chamber when you first pick up a firearm. Please do not come shooting around me.

    • Troll: ScarletNumber
    • Replies: @Old Prude
    @John Henry

    I don't need to check the chamber in my firearms: They are all loaded. Makes it real easy to remember.

  261. @SaneClownPosse
    @NickG

    Basically, the movie company is running a "Producers" scam, making a money losing production for the backers, meanwhile pocketing untaxed cash.

    Blanks can kill, e.g. Brandon Lee on "The Crow" set.

    Is anyone sure this happened as they say it happened? Or is this yet just another hoax event involving firearms?

    Displaying the use of firearms on screen to be banned? Similar to the on screen smoking ban.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Muggles

    Brandon Lee was not killed by a blank. Like you, I had mixed up the Brandon Lee story with an earlier one, that of Jon-Erik Hexum, who shot himself in the head with a .44-caliber blank while clowning around playing Russian roulette on the set of Cover Up in 1984.

    Brandon Lee was tragically killed through no fault of his own. There is a detailed account on his Wikipedia page. The entry contains an explanation of the difference between blank rounds and dummy rounds, which are used to give the impression of a loaded revolver when it is seen from the front.

    [MORE]
    On March 31, 1993, Lee was filming a scene in The Crow where his character is shot and killed by thugs. In the scene, Lee’s character walks into his apartment and discovers his fiancée being beaten and raped, and a thug played by actor Michael Massee fires a Smith & Wesson Model 629 .44 Magnum revolver at Lee’s character as he walks into the room.

    In the film shoot preceding the fatal scene, the prop gun (which was a real revolver) was loaded with improperly-made dummy rounds, improvised from live cartridges that had the powder charges removed by the special effects crew, so in close-ups the revolver would show normal-looking ammunition. However, the crew neglected to remove the primers from the cartridges, and at some point before the fatal event, one of the rounds had been fired. Although there was no powder charges, the energy from the ignited primer was enough to separate the bullet from the casing and push it part-way into the gun barrel, where it got stuck — a dangerous condition known as a squib load. During the fatal scene, which called for the revolver to be fired at Lee from a distance of 3.6–4.5 meters (12–15 ft), the dummy cartridges were replaced with blank rounds, which contained a powder charge and the primer, but no solid bullet, allowing the gun to be fired with sound and flash effects without the risk of an actual projectile. However, the gun was not properly checked and cleared before the blank was fired, and the dummy bullet previously lodged in the barrel was then propelled forward by the blank’s propellant and shot out the muzzle with almost the same force as if the round were live, striking Lee in the abdomen.

    After Massee pulled the trigger and shot Lee, Lee fell backwards instead of forwards as he was supposed to. When the director said “cut”, Lee did not stand up and the crew thought he was either still acting or kidding around. Jeff Imada, who immediately checked Lee, noticed something wrong when he came close and noted Lee was unconscious and breathing heavily. Medic Clyde Baisey went over and shook Lee to see if he was dazed by hitting his head during the fall, but did not think Lee had been shot since there was no visible bleeding. Baisey took Lee’s pulse, which was regular, but within two to three minutes it slowed down dramatically, and stopped.

    Lee was rushed to the New Hanover Regional Medical Center in Wilmington, North Carolina. Attempts to save him were unsuccessful and after six hours of emergency surgery, Lee was pronounced dead at 1:03 pm on March 31, 1993.
    >>>

    • Replies: @Tex
    @Harry Baldwin

    Lee's death was preventable at a number of stages.

    1) Use of a squib round (caused by a failure to construct an inert dummy round) caused a slug to be pushed into the barrel of the weapon.

    2) The gun was apparently unloaded after the squib round fired (in order to insert blanks) but the expended shell of the squib went unnoticed.

    This is crucial, it's very, very easy to tell if a cartridge has been fired. This should have been a massive red flag as dummy rounds don't change appearance after you click the trigger. The bullet stays in place, that's the defining characteristic of a dummy. The sight of an empty cartridge should have triggered a "Hey, what happened" moment.

    3) The barrel of the weapon was not checked for obstructions.

    Perhaps not the most obvious, but the slug in the barrel was a vital ingredient in a negligent death.

    4) The scene called for an actor to fire a blank directly at Lee.

    I've been in mock battles where hundreds of guys fired blanks at each other, including from cannons. At worst some of us were deafer than when we started. But we had more than a few precautions along the way.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling

  262. @Jack D
    @mcohen

    Source?

    Replies: @Johann Ricke

    It appears that her dad was an experienced gun handler, and taught her everything he knew, from an early age:

    https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2021-10-23/hannah-gutierrez-reed-rust-shooting-armorer

    She expressed nervousness about being an armorer. My guess is that she was worried about the non-customary nature of this particular use of firearms – preparing weapons for use on a movie set where success involved the gun *not* wounding or killing the person at which it was aimed.

    It’s more than likely that the amoral Hollywood pros working alongside her are engaged in a little pre-emptive backstabbing via carefully calculated lies leaked to the media so as to pin all the blame on her. They might have been the major impediments to her doing her job properly by pulling rank, thereby cowing someone new to this particular job into submission, and reducing her to the role of rubber stamp for their unsafe work practices.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Johann Ricke

    No, I meant the source for the idea that it was a cap and ball gun. This makes no sense in the context of what appears to have happened. They have now found numerous live cartridges on the set - apparently the staff was bringing in live ammo that they could use for "plinking" beer cans and such, using the production's guns.

    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/investigators-still-seeking-key-answers-alec-baldwin-shooting-case-2021-10-25/

    As I said before, my wager is that the gun was used for plinking at lunch and a cartridge was left behind in the chamber. Cap and ball loading is such a pain that it wouldn't have happened with a cap and ball gun.

    If in fact it was a Dragoon (doubtful) it was probably converted to cartridge loading.

  263. Anonymous[320] • Disclaimer says:
    @El Dato
    @Veteran Aryan

    Now, referring to submarines as "ships" instead of "boats" would be unnatural, but this is pointlessly taking it too far. Artillery is "cannon".

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Veteran Aryan

    You can refer to a sub as a ship or a boat. Boat is sort of the cute familiar term, but obviously they are ships of the fleet. If you had a collection of 3 submarines and 3 skimmers, I mean 3 surface ships, you’d probably say 6 ships, not 3 boats and 3 ships.

    I’ve heard the rationale for calling subs boats is they don’t have any boats on them (not counting life rafts). Don’t have a whale boat, don’t have a captain’s gig.

    -served on two 637 class out of Sand Dog and Mare Island.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    @Anonymous

    Isn't it just because the originals were "Unterseeboote", and they remained "Boote" even when they became large-ish like "Seekuh" submarine tenders.

    637 class: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon-class_submarine

    Pretty cool.

    I still can't really understand how these things can be successfully designed, built and then actually run. It is a mystery of hierarchical design!

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @Right_On
    @Anonymous

    served on two 637 class out of Sand Dog and Mare Island

    Respect. My uncle served on Royal Navy subs - the last of the diesel-electric kind. (So with a big carbon footprint compared to your environmentally friendly nuclear ones!)

    What about that hoary claim that, while we laymen say sub-marin-er, actual crew members prefer submarine-er?

    Replies: @Anonymous

  264. @prosa123
    @Redmen

    The only question is if this rises to the level of recklessness. If so, I would expect there to be criminal charges of manslaughter as well as massive civil liability. In terms of civil liability, Baldwin is a very deep pocket. Could become one of the largest civil payouts by an individual for a tort.

    Dunno ... it happened at a work site, and workers' compensation provisions might prevent civil lawsuits. For example, that woman who got her face eaten by a chimpanzee in Connecticut could not bring a lawsuit against the chimp's very wealthy owner because she worked for her and the comp laws applied.

    Replies: @FPD72, @Redmen

    Possibly. I don’t know about NM, but in NY there’s an exemption for wrongful death cases under the workers comp statute.

  265. @That Would Be Telling
    @Jenner Ickham Errican



    they’re all 24 years old (or sometimes less) but each 24 year old [on a carrier deck] has one job to do and he has been drilled in that job and God help him if he deviates from his training or doesn’t follow orders
     
    Not so much on the Bonhomme Richard
     
    Damage control is a different beast because your response is situation specific, but all sailors, enlisted and officers, were at last count trained in it. That said, one female sailor noticed the smoke pretty early but said it didn't smell like smoke so she ignored it.

    The real key is that the ship was docked for maintenance meaning it didn't have its normal crew compliment, per Wikipedia and other reports the "on-board fire-suppression systems had been disabled", etc. etc., but after we lost the USS Miami attack sub to arson during maintenance in 2012 the recommendations to avoid such a fate for other ships were of course ignored.

    And diversity played another a role if what's been said about the sailor who's been charged with it is true, that it pertained to his relationship with a female sailor. See also the first major Pacific destroyer crash into a cargo ship, female in CIC wasn't talking to the female Officer of the Deck, although there was a lot more to that incident.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican, @By-tor

    That Would Be Telling says:

    Damage control is a different beast …
    That said …
    The real key is that …
    And diversity played …
    See also …
    although there was a lot more to that …

    Vincenzo Coccotti sez:

    “Now, what we got here is a little game of show and tell. You don’t wanna show me nothin’, but you’re tellin’ me everything.”

  266. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Rob McX

    That is just weird. Maybe she and her dad had an understanding. I hope so.

    Perhaps the saddest thing is that she thinks she is so hot; whereas, there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of young women in America who are equally hot or hotter. This is a very typical look. She is average, but she thinks she is special.

    It's all in the tight, little dress, the pantyhose, and the heels. She is not especially hot at all, any more than any other healthy young woman is. (Nothing wrong with that, mind you.)

    There will come a day when she will be a middle-aged woman of average looks, and then things won't be so hot anymore. We can only hope that she will respect the memory of her father -- and that this photograph will make some sense for both of them, whatever it is.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @duncsbaby, @Nicholas Stix

    It’s standard practice at iSteve that whenever someone posts a picture of a reasonably attractive woman, someone feels compelled to comment that “she’s not really that hot.” And if someone responds to this comment, it will be to insist that, “C’mon, man, she’s really not that hot.”

    • LOL: Buzz Mohawk, El Dato
  267. @El Dato
    @Veteran Aryan

    Now, referring to submarines as "ships" instead of "boats" would be unnatural, but this is pointlessly taking it too far. Artillery is "cannon".

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Veteran Aryan

    Now, referring to submarines as “ships” instead of “boats” would be unnatural, but this is pointlessly taking it too far. Artillery is “cannon”.

    Not pointless. Enforced conformity of nomenclature is a group bonding mechanism – one that anyone familiar with Wokemon culture should recognize.

    The singular for artillery is “piece.” The plural is “battery.” (but this is also true of “batteries.” The singular is “cell.” It takes multiple cells to make a battery)

  268. @ic1000
    If you get your news from NBC, here's how this story was handled this morning on Today (cf. yesterday, see comment #28).

    * While teased at the opening, the story didn't air until the second half-hour. So it's 'clickbait,' but not very important.
    * Still, featherweight reporter Miguel Almaguer was given a (very lengthy) 3 1/2 minutes for his at-the-ranch report.
    * Lede: Informed voices are urgently calling for better gun safety on movie sets.
    * The Asst. Director is the one who handed the gun to Alec Baldwin. A still of handsome, cocky, masculine, and white Dave Halls is on screen during the voiceover. In 2019, Halls was fired from another set for a misfire [sic]. No compliments but nothing damning on Armorer Hanna Gutierrez-Reed.
    * Prior safety concerns on the set of Rust.
    * Alec Baldwin's wife posted her condolences to the slain cinematographer on Twitter!
    * A good interview with an Armorer and another with a Prop Master. 'I always demonstrate to the actors that a revolver is cleared, it's easy and fast.' 'No AD would touch a prop gun on my set.'
    * The producers (somehow) contributed to the working conditions on the set. (No mention of their names.)

    So Dave Halls is the bad guy. Gutierrez-Reed -- not great. Baldwin -- victim of Tragedy.

    Replies: @Wilkey

    So Dave Halls is the bad guy. Gutierrez-Reed — not great. Baldwin — victim of Tragedy.

    Alec Baldwin may have had no direct personal responsibility for ensuring the safety of the gun that killed Hutchins but, as the writer, producer, and star of the movie, as well as the last person with a chance to check the gun for safety, and the person who fired the gun, he bore a shitload of moral and probably legal responsibility.

    He appears to have been the sole star in a low budget movie featuring a lot of unknown actors. He was in every sense the “adult” on the set – or he was supposed to be, anyway. He should have been insisting that everyone was doing his or her job. If shit was going on that shouldn’t have been – like using prop guns for target shooting – he should have put a stop to that. He should have been making sure that a young, novice armorer knew what was expected of her and was doing her job. Better yet, he probably shouldn’t have allowed her to be hired in the first place.

    One of the magic moments of becoming an adult is when you develop the ability to tell people “no,” regardless of what people may think of you, regardless of how much you like them or want them to like you. The problem with Gutierrez-Reed is that she is not old enough to have necessarily reached that transition stage. Her forays into TikTok and Instagram suggest that she was more interested in having people like her than respect her.

    Maybe I’m just giving Gutierrez-Reed some young woman privilege, but I feel bad for her. She’s going to have to live with this for the rest of her life – a mistake made doing a job the adults in the room shouldn’t have hired her to do. She was too young and inexperienced to be doing this job and probably didn’t know she wasn’t really qualified to do it. She didn’t know what she didn’t know. It was the job of the adults around her to make sure that she did.

    • Agree: S Johnson
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @Wilkey

    He should have been making sure that a young, novice armorer knew what was expected of her and was doing her job.

    In Douglas Sutherland's The English Gentleman, he writes, "Of all a gentleman's servants the ones who are allowed the greatest latitude in familiarity and whom he holds in the greatest respect are his [game]keeper or ghillie. Keepers in particular have an unusual license to abuse his guests if their performance does not come up to his exacting standards or to insist on conducting a game drive the way he wants to, even if his master disagrees."

    Hierarchy and deference have to take a back seat to the life-and-death matter of firearms safety.

    Replies: @S Johnson

    , @That Would Be Telling
    @Wilkey

    About that legal responsibility for Baldwin.... Andrew Branca, a lawyer and gun type who's published a great deal of stuff on "Know[ing] the law so you’re hard to convict." and is currently the most up to date author WRT to the individual states' laws has a New Mexico statutory, case law and jury instructions analysis in Legal Insurrection that's not good for Baldwin.

    Published yesterday, based on some reasonable assumptions Baldwin has committed involuntary manslaughter. The only assumptions Branca makes that I question is the ease of checking really old revolvers, he assumes cartridges, and my wondering if Baldwin dropped the gun. But even then he's culpable, there's not too difficult ways to check old guns, and/or for not making sure a posited unsafe old design was loaded with a round under the hammer, was all the way to "cold" as the assistant director cargo culted. Some interesting bits:


    BALANCING INHERENT DANGER WITH SOCIAL UTILITY: STRICT LIABILITY

    So, society wants to realize the value of these various inherently dangerous instruments [such as guns, explosives, dangerous drugs and chemicals]—but also wants to balance that value against the considerable risk of harm these inherently dangerous instruments might cause.

    That balance is achieved by imposing the following rule—anyone making use of an inherently dangerous instrument is strictly liable for any unnecessary harm that they cause, no excuses, period. The burden is placed on the person using the inherently dangerous instrument to ensure that they take whatever steps are required in order to not cause unnecessary harm—and if they do cause unnecessary harm, they bear absolute responsibility for that harm, no excuses.
     
    An aside on gun safety which emphasizes as I and others have how comprehensive the failures were, which also helps explain why these incidents are so rare in over a century of Hollywood's existence:

    One interesting facet of [his Cooper derived first three] gun safety rules is that they are redundant, in the technical sense of meaning that violating any single one of them will not necessarily have a bad outcome. Indeed, a bad outcome in the sense of death or serious bodily injury can really only happen not if one of those three safety rules are violated, or even two of them, but instead requires that the gun handler manage to violate all three of those gun handling safety rules.
     
    He then goes into details on that. He also wrote an illuminating bit on the place in the law of jury instructions:

    While jury instructions are not, technically speaking, authoritative sources of law themselves (those are statutes and court decisions, or case law), jury instructions are a useful amalgamation of the statutory language and how the courts want that language applied to real people in real cases. Because they are instructions intended for a jury of laypeople, and not legal experts, they also tend to be written in plain English.

    Indeed, they are often written in a “fill-in-the-blanks” kind of format to make them easy to use consistently from trial to trial, and that’s precisely how New Mexico structures its uniform jury instructions.
     
    He then fills in the blanks for Baldwin. I bring this up because while they are not equal to case law, they are controlling on lower courts and are another method higher level judges use to nullify what's often white line statutory law that should protect citizen gun owners.

    Even in the Reddest of states, or conservative leaning ones Purple ones. See the now too old to be entirely useful Self Defense Laws of All 50 States by Mitch and Evan Vilos for details. This goes so far in Massachusetts as to require all but the owner or people who's names are on the lease to retreat from a house invader, even if this means abandoning a sleeping child (really).

    He then goes into an example of controlling New Mexico case law where it didn't matter who loaded the gun. And here's a good closing remark:

    The death of Ms. Hutchins is not a “Hollywood problem.” Hollywood has a pretty darned good safety record in gun handling. It’s an “Alec Baldwin problem.
     
    Prior to this, three deaths in 106 years, one of an idiot actor violating all four gun safety laws, is damned good given how very often guns are used on sets. If the technicians know their business (the initial failure in the Brandon Lee incident) and everyone follows the protocols no one will die.
    , @ic1000
    @Wilkey

    Thanks.


    So Dave Halls is the bad guy. Gutierrez-Reed — not great. Baldwin — victim of Tragedy.
     
    That was my summary of how NBC presented the Rust set events to its viewers, this morning.

    Today (and, this evening, NBC Nightly News With Lester Holt) is an exercise in storytelling. The point of curated facts and the accompanying analysis is to lead viewers towards a preferred narrative. That won't sit too well with many of the skeptical, worldly, and intelligent people who are following this case. Still, more Americans keep up with current events via network news, or worse, than via iSteve comment threads.

    Will Baldwin get the book thrown at him (Harvey Weinstein) or skate (Jussie Smollett)? Or, since somebody died as a result of his actions, will Baldwin be treated more like Derek Chavin (Minneapolis) or David Bailey (Capitol Police)?

    In his earlier Reply to your comment, TWBT linked a legal analysis by Andrew Branca. Taking that at face value, the Santa Fe DA can make a strong case that Baldwin is guilty of felony involuntary manslaughter.

    It's unclear whether the media will go all-in to save one of their own. While drifting in that direction, they can be fickle. I suspect Baldwin's crisis management team will be earning their pay.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @That Would Be Telling

    , @Jack D
    @Wilkey

    We have all at times been unusually impressed by some person who, although young in years, evinces an unusual maturity and competence often not found in people who are twice or thrice their age. A distant relative of mine was a savant regarding collectible coins and when he was but a boy of 14, he authored published monographs and full grown men who were respected coin dealers would approach him for advice on numismatic matters.


    Gutierrez-Reed was not such a person.

  269. @Rob McX
    @Harry Baldwin

    Talking about TikTok sluttery, it's hard to beat this. That's her dad in his coffin behind her. Her hashtags are #dadless #veteran #ptsd #funeral #neverforgotten.

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/10/25/15/49613479-10128429-OOTD_An_American_woman_posed_for_photos_at_her_father_s_funeral_-a-5_1635171026079.jpg

    Replies: @Not Raul, @Buzz Mohawk, @TWS, @Emil Nikola Richard

    There needs to be a, “what the hell is wrong with you?” Button

  270. @AceDeuce
    He's so ronrey....

    Replies: @SunBakedSuburb

    “He’s so ronrey …”

    Bad for glass. #2

  271. @El Dato
    @anon

    I remember that the guns in the original Westworld (1973) detected when you were trying to shoot at Real Humans and simply refused to fire (*click* ... improbable tech!). Going on holiday in Delos with crazy tourists around must still have been fraught with danger even before Yul Brynner went full Terminator.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPOjTGYm0-g

    Replies: @SunBakedSuburb

    “Yul Brynner went full Terminator”

    Yul’s Gunfighter is way spookier than Arnold’s Terminator. Michael Crichton was an idea machine.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    @SunBakedSuburb

    Michael Crichton is dead and Damon Lindelof is alive.

  272. @SunBakedSuburb
    @El Dato

    "Yul Brynner went full Terminator"

    Yul's Gunfighter is way spookier than Arnold's Terminator. Michael Crichton was an idea machine.

    Replies: @SunBakedSuburb

    Michael Crichton is dead and Damon Lindelof is alive.

  273. @Wilkey
    @ic1000


    So Dave Halls is the bad guy. Gutierrez-Reed — not great. Baldwin — victim of Tragedy.
     
    Alec Baldwin may have had no direct personal responsibility for ensuring the safety of the gun that killed Hutchins but, as the writer, producer, and star of the movie, as well as the last person with a chance to check the gun for safety, and the person who fired the gun, he bore a shitload of moral and probably legal responsibility.

    He appears to have been the sole star in a low budget movie featuring a lot of unknown actors. He was in every sense the "adult" on the set - or he was supposed to be, anyway. He should have been insisting that everyone was doing his or her job. If shit was going on that shouldn't have been - like using prop guns for target shooting - he should have put a stop to that. He should have been making sure that a young, novice armorer knew what was expected of her and was doing her job. Better yet, he probably shouldn't have allowed her to be hired in the first place.

    One of the magic moments of becoming an adult is when you develop the ability to tell people "no," regardless of what people may think of you, regardless of how much you like them or want them to like you. The problem with Gutierrez-Reed is that she is not old enough to have necessarily reached that transition stage. Her forays into TikTok and Instagram suggest that she was more interested in having people like her than respect her.

    Maybe I'm just giving Gutierrez-Reed some young woman privilege, but I feel bad for her. She's going to have to live with this for the rest of her life - a mistake made doing a job the adults in the room shouldn't have hired her to do. She was too young and inexperienced to be doing this job and probably didn't know she wasn't really qualified to do it. She didn't know what she didn't know. It was the job of the adults around her to make sure that she did.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @That Would Be Telling, @ic1000, @Jack D

    He should have been making sure that a young, novice armorer knew what was expected of her and was doing her job.

    In Douglas Sutherland’s The English Gentleman, he writes, “Of all a gentleman’s servants the ones who are allowed the greatest latitude in familiarity and whom he holds in the greatest respect are his [game]keeper or ghillie. Keepers in particular have an unusual license to abuse his guests if their performance does not come up to his exacting standards or to insist on conducting a game drive the way he wants to, even if his master disagrees.”

    Hierarchy and deference have to take a back seat to the life-and-death matter of firearms safety.

    • Thanks: HammerJack
    • Replies: @S Johnson
    @Harry Baldwin

    British game shoots are indeed led by the gamekeeper or estate manager. The second time he sees someone aiming low at a bird they’re out for the rest of the day (in order to avoid Dick Cheney-like accidents). There are also cash penalties for other reckless conduct.

    Waugh’s “Handful of Dust” gives a portrait of how the gentleman defers to his estate manager, a former farm worker, when it comes to hunting, with tragic results.

    Replies: @HammerJack

  274. https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-22/alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-set

    Baldwin removed the gun from its holster once without incident, but the second time he did so, ammunition flew toward the trio around the monitor.

    Dontcha just hate it when that happens?

  275. @Wilkey
    @ic1000


    So Dave Halls is the bad guy. Gutierrez-Reed — not great. Baldwin — victim of Tragedy.
     
    Alec Baldwin may have had no direct personal responsibility for ensuring the safety of the gun that killed Hutchins but, as the writer, producer, and star of the movie, as well as the last person with a chance to check the gun for safety, and the person who fired the gun, he bore a shitload of moral and probably legal responsibility.

    He appears to have been the sole star in a low budget movie featuring a lot of unknown actors. He was in every sense the "adult" on the set - or he was supposed to be, anyway. He should have been insisting that everyone was doing his or her job. If shit was going on that shouldn't have been - like using prop guns for target shooting - he should have put a stop to that. He should have been making sure that a young, novice armorer knew what was expected of her and was doing her job. Better yet, he probably shouldn't have allowed her to be hired in the first place.

    One of the magic moments of becoming an adult is when you develop the ability to tell people "no," regardless of what people may think of you, regardless of how much you like them or want them to like you. The problem with Gutierrez-Reed is that she is not old enough to have necessarily reached that transition stage. Her forays into TikTok and Instagram suggest that she was more interested in having people like her than respect her.

    Maybe I'm just giving Gutierrez-Reed some young woman privilege, but I feel bad for her. She's going to have to live with this for the rest of her life - a mistake made doing a job the adults in the room shouldn't have hired her to do. She was too young and inexperienced to be doing this job and probably didn't know she wasn't really qualified to do it. She didn't know what she didn't know. It was the job of the adults around her to make sure that she did.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @That Would Be Telling, @ic1000, @Jack D

    About that legal responsibility for Baldwin…. Andrew Branca, a lawyer and gun type who’s published a great deal of stuff on “Know[ing] the law so you’re hard to convict.” and is currently the most up to date author WRT to the individual states’ laws has a New Mexico statutory, case law and jury instructions analysis in Legal Insurrection that’s not good for Baldwin.

    Published yesterday, based on some reasonable assumptions Baldwin has committed involuntary manslaughter. The only assumptions Branca makes that I question is the ease of checking really old revolvers, he assumes cartridges, and my wondering if Baldwin dropped the gun. But even then he’s culpable, there’s not too difficult ways to check old guns, and/or for not making sure a posited unsafe old design was loaded with a round under the hammer, was all the way to “cold” as the assistant director cargo culted. Some interesting bits:

    BALANCING INHERENT DANGER WITH SOCIAL UTILITY: STRICT LIABILITY

    So, society wants to realize the value of these various inherently dangerous instruments [such as guns, explosives, dangerous drugs and chemicals]—but also wants to balance that value against the considerable risk of harm these inherently dangerous instruments might cause.

    That balance is achieved by imposing the following rule—anyone making use of an inherently dangerous instrument is strictly liable for any unnecessary harm that they cause, no excuses, period. The burden is placed on the person using the inherently dangerous instrument to ensure that they take whatever steps are required in order to not cause unnecessary harm—and if they do cause unnecessary harm, they bear absolute responsibility for that harm, no excuses.

    An aside on gun safety which emphasizes as I and others have how comprehensive the failures were, which also helps explain why these incidents are so rare in over a century of Hollywood’s existence:

    One interesting facet of [his Cooper derived first three] gun safety rules is that they are redundant, in the technical sense of meaning that violating any single one of them will not necessarily have a bad outcome. Indeed, a bad outcome in the sense of death or serious bodily injury can really only happen not if one of those three safety rules are violated, or even two of them, but instead requires that the gun handler manage to violate all three of those gun handling safety rules.

    He then goes into details on that. He also wrote an illuminating bit on the place in the law of jury instructions:

    While jury instructions are not, technically speaking, authoritative sources of law themselves (those are statutes and court decisions, or case law), jury instructions are a useful amalgamation of the statutory language and how the courts want that language applied to real people in real cases. Because they are instructions intended for a jury of laypeople, and not legal experts, they also tend to be written in plain English.

    Indeed, they are often written in a “fill-in-the-blanks” kind of format to make them easy to use consistently from trial to trial, and that’s precisely how New Mexico structures its uniform jury instructions.

    He then fills in the blanks for Baldwin. I bring this up because while they are not equal to case law, they are controlling on lower courts and are another method higher level judges use to nullify what’s often white line statutory law that should protect citizen gun owners.

    Even in the Reddest of states, or conservative leaning ones Purple ones. See the now too old to be entirely useful Self Defense Laws of All 50 States by Mitch and Evan Vilos for details. This goes so far in Massachusetts as to require all but the owner or people who’s names are on the lease to retreat from a house invader, even if this means abandoning a sleeping child (really).

    He then goes into an example of controlling New Mexico case law where it didn’t matter who loaded the gun. And here’s a good closing remark:

    The death of Ms. Hutchins is not a “Hollywood problem.” Hollywood has a pretty darned good safety record in gun handling. It’s an “Alec Baldwin problem.

    Prior to this, three deaths in 106 years, one of an idiot actor violating all four gun safety laws, is damned good given how very often guns are used on sets. If the technicians know their business (the initial failure in the Brandon Lee incident) and everyone follows the protocols no one will die.

    • Thanks: Wilkey
  276. @Harry Baldwin
    @SaneClownPosse

    Brandon Lee was not killed by a blank. Like you, I had mixed up the Brandon Lee story with an earlier one, that of Jon-Erik Hexum, who shot himself in the head with a .44-caliber blank while clowning around playing Russian roulette on the set of Cover Up in 1984.

    Brandon Lee was tragically killed through no fault of his own. There is a detailed account on his Wikipedia page. The entry contains an explanation of the difference between blank rounds and dummy rounds, which are used to give the impression of a loaded revolver when it is seen from the front.

    On March 31, 1993, Lee was filming a scene in The Crow where his character is shot and killed by thugs. In the scene, Lee's character walks into his apartment and discovers his fiancée being beaten and raped, and a thug played by actor Michael Massee fires a Smith & Wesson Model 629 .44 Magnum revolver at Lee's character as he walks into the room.

    In the film shoot preceding the fatal scene, the prop gun (which was a real revolver) was loaded with improperly-made dummy rounds, improvised from live cartridges that had the powder charges removed by the special effects crew, so in close-ups the revolver would show normal-looking ammunition. However, the crew neglected to remove the primers from the cartridges, and at some point before the fatal event, one of the rounds had been fired. Although there was no powder charges, the energy from the ignited primer was enough to separate the bullet from the casing and push it part-way into the gun barrel, where it got stuck — a dangerous condition known as a squib load. During the fatal scene, which called for the revolver to be fired at Lee from a distance of 3.6–4.5 meters (12–15 ft), the dummy cartridges were replaced with blank rounds, which contained a powder charge and the primer, but no solid bullet, allowing the gun to be fired with sound and flash effects without the risk of an actual projectile. However, the gun was not properly checked and cleared before the blank was fired, and the dummy bullet previously lodged in the barrel was then propelled forward by the blank's propellant and shot out the muzzle with almost the same force as if the round were live, striking Lee in the abdomen.

    After Massee pulled the trigger and shot Lee, Lee fell backwards instead of forwards as he was supposed to. When the director said "cut", Lee did not stand up and the crew thought he was either still acting or kidding around. Jeff Imada, who immediately checked Lee, noticed something wrong when he came close and noted Lee was unconscious and breathing heavily. Medic Clyde Baisey went over and shook Lee to see if he was dazed by hitting his head during the fall, but did not think Lee had been shot since there was no visible bleeding. Baisey took Lee's pulse, which was regular, but within two to three minutes it slowed down dramatically, and stopped.

    Lee was rushed to the New Hanover Regional Medical Center in Wilmington, North Carolina. Attempts to save him were unsuccessful and after six hours of emergency surgery, Lee was pronounced dead at 1:03 pm on March 31, 1993.
    >>>

    Replies: @Tex

    Lee’s death was preventable at a number of stages.

    1) Use of a squib round (caused by a failure to construct an inert dummy round) caused a slug to be pushed into the barrel of the weapon.

    2) The gun was apparently unloaded after the squib round fired (in order to insert blanks) but the expended shell of the squib went unnoticed.

    This is crucial, it’s very, very easy to tell if a cartridge has been fired. This should have been a massive red flag as dummy rounds don’t change appearance after you click the trigger. The bullet stays in place, that’s the defining characteristic of a dummy. The sight of an empty cartridge should have triggered a “Hey, what happened” moment.

    3) The barrel of the weapon was not checked for obstructions.

    Perhaps not the most obvious, but the slug in the barrel was a vital ingredient in a negligent death.

    4) The scene called for an actor to fire a blank directly at Lee.

    I’ve been in mock battles where hundreds of guys fired blanks at each other, including from cannons. At worst some of us were deafer than when we started. But we had more than a few precautions along the way.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    @Tex

    Your point 2 on "the expended shell of the squib went unnoticed" is excellent. I add that in addition to the obvious visual difference, a normal weight bullet is by far the most heavy thing in a dummy round made with non-small handgun rounds, so that might have provided a clue as well.

    Unfortunately we're talking about a six round .44 Magnum revolver, so 5/6ths of the weight of heavy bullets wasn't noticed assuming it was dumped into or later picked up into whomever's hand. I assume the empty brass was underneath the other dummy rounds, plus in that straight to hand scenario the guy also didn't pick up on the sharp-ish edge of the empty cartridge. And no one ever really noticed the dummy rounds had primers, a big no-no as described, but I suppose anyone who did was running on auto-pilot and didn't think it through.

    Bleah, this was so preventable, a typical chain of multiple mistakes, although the construction of bad dummy rounds is the most unforgivable one. I've got ones for all my centerfire rifles and handguns, all with empty primer pockets, that's just assumed. Which also was probably was part of it.

  277. @EdwardM
    @Paul Mendez

    Agree, let's not get carried away here and say that the job of armorer is rocket science. It entails a very narrow scope for which a few simple protocols should suffice. A 24-year-old nurse, cop, or truck driver could also easily create death and destruction in more complex jobs.

    This girl may have been an idiot unsuited for the job but it's a bit much no say that the average 24-year-old couldn't possibly be trusted.

    Replies: @we, @Alden

    Actually EdwardM the job of armourer is quite literally rocket science(engineering) – aerodynamics, propellant chemistry, thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, and metallurgy. As the comments in this thread make quite clear, a lot can go wrong if you dont have a working (not theroretical) knowledge of how these principles apply to specific firearms, of which there are many. I know that your using the term “rocket science” to imply that the job doesn’t require someone with a PHD level of theoretical knowledge about these principles. However, the position of armourer does require someone with a large empirical (learned through observation/experimentation) knowledge about the wide variety of firerams that appear on a set and all of the danger that the use of those firearms entails. It would be the rare 24 year old, especially one working on only their second film, that would have that breadth of knowledge. In defense of Baldwin, one might reasonably think that such a rare 24 year old could be the child of legendary Hollywood armourer but in this case, by her own admission, she was not. Baldwin is going to pay dearly for this, as he should.

  278. @Rob McX
    @Harry Baldwin

    Talking about TikTok sluttery, it's hard to beat this. That's her dad in his coffin behind her. Her hashtags are #dadless #veteran #ptsd #funeral #neverforgotten.

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/10/25/15/49613479-10128429-OOTD_An_American_woman_posed_for_photos_at_her_father_s_funeral_-a-5_1635171026079.jpg

    Replies: @Not Raul, @Buzz Mohawk, @TWS, @Emil Nikola Richard

    Those shoes do not look comfortable. The coffin looks expensive.

    • Replies: @additionalMike
    @Emil Nikola Richard

    What coffin?

  279. @PaceLaw
    @Prof. Woland

    Other than paying a hefty settlement in a civil suit, I don’t think much else will happen to Baldwin. Based upon what I heard, there really is no strong basis for a criminal charge. He was told the firearm that he had was “cold“ and safe to use. Some other negligent person was responsible for the live round that was in the firearm.

    Replies: @Prof. Woland

    I am not a lawyer so I won’t pretend that I know what will legally happen to Alec Baldwin but this much is true, his career is finished. That includes any attempt at humor or comedy. His narcissistic rage schtick and mockery of conservatives in general and President Trump specifically won’t suit him well going forward. We will see in discovery but it remains to be seen how much influence this bully had regarding this movie set and simply pawning off responsibility on a ‘sub-contractor’ that he himself picked won’t do his reputation any good either. He could fall on the sword but that does not seem to be the type of guy he is.

  280. @JackOH
    Gun discipline/gun etiquette is easy, but needs to be learned by drill/repetition so it's second nature. I'd guess set armorers/gun wranglers ought to be hired for having gun etiquette drilled into them. Ex-military, ex-police, experienced gun enthusiasts.

    A radio interview yesterday with a onetime movie guy had it there's no cinematic reason for live rounds on a set.

    (Truth in commenting notice: I'm a onetime gun owner and 2A supporter.)

    Replies: @Hibernian, @JimB

    I’d guess set armorers/gun wranglers ought to be hired for having gun etiquette drilled into them. Ex-military, ex-police, experienced gun enthusiasts.

    You think loudmouth lefty Alec Baldwin wants someone like that on the set? He probably felt highly virtuous hiring a purpled haired 24-year old Tik Tok thot.

    • Agree: HammerJack, Old Prude
  281. “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,” said Donald Trump. But Baldwin has gone the distance and proven that some people really do have that kind of support.

  282. As with the Weinstein incident. We Americans have a golden opportunity to ask why Hollywood has so much power and what should we do about it.

    The “ you’ll never eat lunch in this town again” aura needs to go. This attitude is born of young actors and actresses willing to do anything to get a role. The spreading of legs or keeping mouths shut when witnessing morality and safety issues are a direct result of the movie industry being all powerful. This allows their hateful propaganda to continue.

    I’m not optimistic that we will make good use of this golden opportunity.

  283. @prosa123
    @Buzz Mohawk

    A clever filming technique in North by Northwest was in the scene where Cary Grant's character walks into the United Nations. Going through official channels wasn't possible because the UN flatly prohibited commercial filming. So Alfred Hitchcock and a cameraman hid in a parked van and surreptitiously filmed Grant as he strolled onto the UN grounds, hoping against hope that no one would recognize him (no one did).

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Rohirrimborn, @J1234

    So Alfred Hitchcock and a cameraman hid in a parked van and surreptitiously filmed Grant as he strolled onto the UN grounds

    Showing that Hitchcock did care about location authenticity. The biplane-over-the-fields chase scene was plausible because that location happened to look like the Midwest. Cactus plants and distant mountains don’t look like Kansas.

  284. @bomag
    @Rob

    Excellent ideas.

    But there's a certain frisson from handling real guns, and Hollywood is weird about guns and other things.

    Replies: @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    You need realistic looking guns (especially in a western) where realistic looking replica shells are important in scenes where people are reloading or doing other things like that. So you will always need them and have some of them in the arsenal for an idiot to get mixed up. Also they don’t have internal restrictors since they don’t need the blowback function to cycle the next round. Without that there isn’t a physical stop to the bullet, and if the actor drops the gun or it’s got a fouled barrel in any other way you still can get an erstatz projectile even while firing blanks, that’s basically what killed Brandon Lee. It might turn out to be the exact same situation- a replica dummy round dropped it’s bullet into the barrel the gun was unloaded and replaced with blanks, the blank fires and the bullet goes out at near normal velocity

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    @GeologyAnon Mk 3


    You need realistic looking guns (especially in a western) where realistic looking replica shells are important in scenes where people are reloading or doing other things like that.
     
    A very good point. If you want to heighten tension in an old time Western in a drawn out gun battle, verisimilitude can be your friend. The guys were probably carrying five rounds in their revolvers to start with and have to use the loading gate and ejector rod to remove spend brass and replace each round one at a time.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @GeologyAnon Mk 3


    You need realistic looking guns (especially in a western) where realistic looking replica shells are important in scenes where people are reloading or doing other things like that.
     
    Yes, if you don't have realistic-looking guns, the global audience will not believe that nineteenth-century gunmen could shoot the gun out of someone's hand at thirty paces or hit them in the upper lobe of the left lung accurately enough for them to utter a few last words and then cough once on the blood dribbling from their mouth before they die.

    Realism is so important.

    Replies: @GeologyAnon Mk 3

  285. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Polistra

    They (and I MEAN "they") do this for male or female, Polistra. For you, Mr. Ricke, and Piltdown Man: This is usually not the new wokeness. The use of "they" for singular person of unknown sex has been ruining the clarity of the English language since the feminists pushed this crap way back in the 1970s!

    What makes it stupider now is that they (and I MEAN "they") will sometimes use "they" as a 3rd-person pronoun for even known sex, now, EVEN for a female. "They were not in a good mood later that week due to their menstrual cycle." "Mr. Newman left town, saying that they they would not want to be around for any of this."

    What's worse is it is used in manuals for my work that are safety related! Often there are a couple of people or just one who may be involved. Who knows? It's PC over safety, every time.

    Replies: @Polistra

    All of that granted, but I still see the same news outlets reverting to male pronouns whenever something really bad has been perpetrated.

  286. @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @That Would Be Telling


    That negligent discharges are reported to have happened twice before the third occurrence resulted in two people being shot is on every executive involved starting with Baldwin as a producer. I suspect this has been realized by Baldwin or those advising him, based on the careful wording of the statement that he made.
     
    This is probably another way that Baldwin's anti-gun politics became his undoing.

    The way that leftists write and talk about firearms, you'd believe that they believe that firearms regularly just kind of "go off" while being handled. If firearms regularly "go off," then a few negligent discharges on set are just de rigueur because that's what guns do.

    But to people with experience in firearms a single breach of safety protocols (like, say, actors horsing around on set with "cold" guns and muzzle sweeping people - let alone a single negligent discharge) would be ample grounds to shut everything down, figure out exactly what happened, and re-impose the safety protocols top to bottom and perhaps introduce additional safety redundancies. It's considered the minimum of firearms etiquette to chamber check a firearm immediately before handing it to another person, and that person is supposed to do their own chamber check upon receipt, and so forth when the firearm is handed back to the first person. What this trains into people is: 1) individual responsibility to maintain a safe, unloaded firearm while handling and not to take anyone's word that the firearm is safe; and, 2) safety redundancy - even though I just saw that the firearm is unloaded 90 seconds ago, I'm going to do my own redundant check.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    Go to any gun range and there will be a range master there watching what is going on. He will throw you out if he sees you acting unsafely.

    I know lots of gun owners and they all follow two simple rules:
    1) Any gun is presumed loaded until you check it yourself.
    2) Never point a gun at someone unless you intend to kill them.

  287. @Wilkey
    @ic1000


    So Dave Halls is the bad guy. Gutierrez-Reed — not great. Baldwin — victim of Tragedy.
     
    Alec Baldwin may have had no direct personal responsibility for ensuring the safety of the gun that killed Hutchins but, as the writer, producer, and star of the movie, as well as the last person with a chance to check the gun for safety, and the person who fired the gun, he bore a shitload of moral and probably legal responsibility.

    He appears to have been the sole star in a low budget movie featuring a lot of unknown actors. He was in every sense the "adult" on the set - or he was supposed to be, anyway. He should have been insisting that everyone was doing his or her job. If shit was going on that shouldn't have been - like using prop guns for target shooting - he should have put a stop to that. He should have been making sure that a young, novice armorer knew what was expected of her and was doing her job. Better yet, he probably shouldn't have allowed her to be hired in the first place.

    One of the magic moments of becoming an adult is when you develop the ability to tell people "no," regardless of what people may think of you, regardless of how much you like them or want them to like you. The problem with Gutierrez-Reed is that she is not old enough to have necessarily reached that transition stage. Her forays into TikTok and Instagram suggest that she was more interested in having people like her than respect her.

    Maybe I'm just giving Gutierrez-Reed some young woman privilege, but I feel bad for her. She's going to have to live with this for the rest of her life - a mistake made doing a job the adults in the room shouldn't have hired her to do. She was too young and inexperienced to be doing this job and probably didn't know she wasn't really qualified to do it. She didn't know what she didn't know. It was the job of the adults around her to make sure that she did.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @That Would Be Telling, @ic1000, @Jack D

    Thanks.

    So Dave Halls is the bad guy. Gutierrez-Reed — not great. Baldwin — victim of Tragedy.

    That was my summary of how NBC presented the Rust set events to its viewers, this morning.

    Today (and, this evening, NBC Nightly News With Lester Holt) is an exercise in storytelling. The point of curated facts and the accompanying analysis is to lead viewers towards a preferred narrative. That won’t sit too well with many of the skeptical, worldly, and intelligent people who are following this case. Still, more Americans keep up with current events via network news, or worse, than via iSteve comment threads.

    Will Baldwin get the book thrown at him (Harvey Weinstein) or skate (Jussie Smollett)? Or, since somebody died as a result of his actions, will Baldwin be treated more like Derek Chavin (Minneapolis) or David Bailey (Capitol Police)?

    In his earlier Reply to your comment, TWBT linked a legal analysis by Andrew Branca. Taking that at face value, the Santa Fe DA can make a strong case that Baldwin is guilty of felony involuntary manslaughter.

    It’s unclear whether the media will go all-in to save one of their own. While drifting in that direction, they can be fickle. I suspect Baldwin’s crisis management team will be earning their pay.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    @ic1000

    My guess is that Baldwin will skate. Either the local DA won't press charges, or Baldwin's legal team will be enough to get him off the hook with a plea bargain, no time served.

    Baldwin already appears to be laying the groundwork to throw AD Dave Halls under the bus. If you go to his Twitter page, the only post since Hutchins was killed is a link to an article casting the blame on Dave Halls.

    That also follows the usual Woke rules for placing blame. Gutierrez-Reed is a young (check) semi-Hispanic (check) woman (check) of power. We don't want the media allowing anyone to imply that young Hispanic women might sometimes be incompetent at their jobs.

    Baldwin is a famous liberal. So we can't blame him.

    Dave Halls is an attractive and apparently masculine male of no widely-known political persuasion. If he were cast in a political thriller they'd cast him as a privileged asshole Republican. He looks like he could be best friends with Mitt Romney.

    Why Halls would deserve the greatest blame is beyond me. He wasn't the armorer. He probably wasn't any better able to inspect the gun than Baldwin was. The firearms safety rules for the Actors' Equity Association explicitly state:


    "Check the firearm every time you take possession of it. Before each use, make sure the gun has been test-fired off stage and then ask to test fire it yourself. Watch the prop master check the cylinders and barrel to be sure no foreign object or dummy bullet has become lodged inside."
     
    This is not some paragraph buried deep inside some official, thousand page manual. It is one of only 20 rules - and the longest one - to appear on a safety sheet that is short enough to fit on a single page. It's the kind of thing actors are probably even expected to read and sign before working on a project involving firearms. And Baldwin would have had to read it and sign it a fair number of times in his career. If Dave Halls can inspect the weapon, then so can Alec Baldwin.

    P.S. And remember that NBC has a bias here beyond the usual media bias. Alec Baldwin has appeared on Saturday Night Live about 8,000 times, has hosted it 17 times, and apparently has - or had, before last week - a standing offer to host the show whenever he wants. He starred in "30 Rock" on NBC, and briefly had his own talk show on MSNBC. Ethically, NBC literally has an obligation to reveal a conflict of interest every time they report on this incident.

    Replies: @Jack D, @ic1000, @Hibernian, @ic1000

    , @That Would Be Telling
    @ic1000


    Will Baldwin get the book thrown at him (Harvey Weinstein) or skate (Jussie Smollett)? Or, since somebody died as a result of his actions, will Baldwin be treated more like Derek Chavin (Minneapolis) or David Bailey (Capitol Police)?
     
    Weinstein is unlike the others in being a chronic abuser of women, so much so he and his firm had to wage multiple massive as well as small scale actions to keep a lid on it. From that viewpoint that the operations would eventually fail should not be too surprising, especially since they were in multiple jurisdictions.

    Smollett committed crimes against the law itself, which upsets some US authorities especially when not done by women, against the narrative, and possibly led to an important black TV series cancellation. He only initially skated, then the city of Chicago filed a lawsuit seeking $135K for what they claimed he cost them (the city, like the state in general is in dire financial straits), and he countersued. And a special prosecutor was appointed by I don't know whom, bypassing the Crook County Soros black woman who let him off. Indicted again almost a year later, jury selection is scheduled to start in a month.

    Derek Chavin was simply a victim of our Minority Occupation Government, another piece of meat to throw at the mob when they were needed to remove the BAD ORANGE MAN from the Oval Office.

    If the Congress, Democrats and GOPe together could give Bailey a Medal of Honor they would.

    These are good extremes to contrast with Baldwin, and for Smollett an example that it doesn't have to come down to what the local DA wants.

  288. @Robert Weissberg
    My son is currently directing a movie in Hollywood with lots of gun action (mainly AK-47's). He told me that it is far easier to add the shot electronically after the scene is completed. Not only is this 100% safe, but the loud noise from the blank shot is distracting to the actors. All of his many guns have solid barrels. He also told me that Baldwin is push his crew far too hard to save some money. Stupidity all the way around.

    Replies: @Anonymous Jew, @Danindc, @Reg Cæsar, @That Would Be Telling

    One defender of Baldwin (because he mocked Trump on SNL; really) said he’s not liable because he was only the “executive” producer, and his duties were merely financial. But if saving money was the cause of the whole 💩 🎪, then he would be the most liable of the producers, not the least.

  289. anon[104] • Disclaimer says:

    Baldwin got out front early with the remorse angle. The civil suit….my guess is \$20 million with contributions from the Movie liability policy, buttressed by Baldwin’s umbrella coverage. But it will just involve haggling among insurers. But there is a single dead body…no multiple plaintiffs, no catastrophic injuries.

    And let’s face it, Baldwin is no OJ. Deserve has nothing to do with it.

    And there will be some fines, but they round to zero in the big picture. Anything harsh/harsher will be directed towards the AD.

    The underlying logic. work backwards following the money.

  290. @mcohen
    Evidently the weapon was a colt dragoon 3
    A black powder pistol.Takes a bit of effort to load it.


    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y5v68GMgTb8

    Before anyone makes anymore silly comments about bullets etc might be worth watching the video.

    Replies: @anon, @El Dato, @Emil Nikola Richard, @Jack D, @J1234

    You might be conflating eras, which is easy to do when you’re talking about the late 19th century, when firearms technology was rapidly evolving. The gun that Hickok45 is demonstrating is called a cap and ball revolver – typical of the 1860’s – which is different than what was typically found by the 1880’s, even in remote parts of the western US. I only watched a few seconds of this video, so I don’t know if he mentioned this or showed other variants of the gun.

    Early cap and ball revolvers were still in use during the late 1800’s, but most of them had probably been converted to fire cartridge rounds, just like the famous Colt Single Action Army of 1873 which was designed for cartridges. This involved replacing or modifying the cylinder and maybe making a few other mods. Wild Bill Hickok frequently used converted cap and ball revolvers, but .36 cal., I think.

    The converted guns were more difficult to load cartridges into than the SAA, but for budget conscious frontiersmen it was cheaper than buying a new gun and was still much easier than loading powder, primer and projectile for every chamber in the cylinder. (I’ve read that during the Civil War the common procedure was to fire six rounds from your cap and ball, then put it back in your holster and forget it because it would be too involved to try to reload during a battle. )

    If Baldwin was firing a Dragoon as you say, it could’ve been in cap and ball form, but it’s much more likely it was a cartridge conversion since the story takes place in the 1880’s. Regardless, the use of this type of gun might be critical in explaining why this accident happened. In either cap and ball or cartridge form, it’s very difficult to tell at a glance whether the gun is loaded or not (other than looking at the gun from the front, which generally isn’t cool.) If it was cap and ball, though, one could remove the primer caps and pretty much ensure it wasn’t going to fire.

    And speaking of looking at revolvers from the front, I’ve noticed that revolvers in movies have projectiles (bullets) visible in the cylinder when filmed from the front…for authenticity, I guess. I assume they use dummy rounds to create that look. Maybe another factor? Who knows. BTW, speaking of conflating eras of firearms, the Winchester model 92 was the most frequently used lever action rifle used in westerns back when I was a kid, but was produced too late (1892) to have been available when most of those western stories were supposed to have taken place.

    • Replies: @mcohen
    @J1234

    I read it was a colt dragoon but you might be right about it being cartridge ammo.The search warrant revealed all sorts of ammo on site so it will be interesting to see what comes of that.
    By way have you been following the Diana smay and Jonathan toebbe spying case.They were trying to sell american nuclear submarine data to a foreign entity for cryptocurrency
    They all live in a yellow submarine

  291. The thought arises that you just need to replace a few substantives and verbs and you are in the software industry.

    Only it happens every day, not just 3 times in 106 years.

    Management breathing fire on a team of people at the limit of their skillset and mostly junior because these are cheap. Procedures absent. Then they pull the “go to market” trigger.

    “How many people have we killed? Many! Many!” (Robert Martin)

  292. @Polistra
    @Johann Ricke

    I took that to mean that the hiker was female.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @res

    • Thanks: Polistra
  293. @ic1000
    @Wilkey

    Thanks.


    So Dave Halls is the bad guy. Gutierrez-Reed — not great. Baldwin — victim of Tragedy.
     
    That was my summary of how NBC presented the Rust set events to its viewers, this morning.

    Today (and, this evening, NBC Nightly News With Lester Holt) is an exercise in storytelling. The point of curated facts and the accompanying analysis is to lead viewers towards a preferred narrative. That won't sit too well with many of the skeptical, worldly, and intelligent people who are following this case. Still, more Americans keep up with current events via network news, or worse, than via iSteve comment threads.

    Will Baldwin get the book thrown at him (Harvey Weinstein) or skate (Jussie Smollett)? Or, since somebody died as a result of his actions, will Baldwin be treated more like Derek Chavin (Minneapolis) or David Bailey (Capitol Police)?

    In his earlier Reply to your comment, TWBT linked a legal analysis by Andrew Branca. Taking that at face value, the Santa Fe DA can make a strong case that Baldwin is guilty of felony involuntary manslaughter.

    It's unclear whether the media will go all-in to save one of their own. While drifting in that direction, they can be fickle. I suspect Baldwin's crisis management team will be earning their pay.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @That Would Be Telling

    My guess is that Baldwin will skate. Either the local DA won’t press charges, or Baldwin’s legal team will be enough to get him off the hook with a plea bargain, no time served.

    Baldwin already appears to be laying the groundwork to throw AD Dave Halls under the bus. If you go to his Twitter page, the only post since Hutchins was killed is a link to an article casting the blame on Dave Halls.

    That also follows the usual Woke rules for placing blame. Gutierrez-Reed is a young (check) semi-Hispanic (check) woman (check) of power. We don’t want the media allowing anyone to imply that young Hispanic women might sometimes be incompetent at their jobs.

    Baldwin is a famous liberal. So we can’t blame him.

    Dave Halls is an attractive and apparently masculine male of no widely-known political persuasion. If he were cast in a political thriller they’d cast him as a privileged asshole Republican. He looks like he could be best friends with Mitt Romney.

    Why Halls would deserve the greatest blame is beyond me. He wasn’t the armorer. He probably wasn’t any better able to inspect the gun than Baldwin was. The firearms safety rules for the Actors’ Equity Association explicitly state:

    “Check the firearm every time you take possession of it. Before each use, make sure the gun has been test-fired off stage and then ask to test fire it yourself. Watch the prop master check the cylinders and barrel to be sure no foreign object or dummy bullet has become lodged inside.”

    This is not some paragraph buried deep inside some official, thousand page manual. It is one of only 20 rules – and the longest one – to appear on a safety sheet that is short enough to fit on a single page. It’s the kind of thing actors are probably even expected to read and sign before working on a project involving firearms. And Baldwin would have had to read it and sign it a fair number of times in his career. If Dave Halls can inspect the weapon, then so can Alec Baldwin.

    P.S. And remember that NBC has a bias here beyond the usual media bias. Alec Baldwin has appeared on Saturday Night Live about 8,000 times, has hosted it 17 times, and apparently has – or had, before last week – a standing offer to host the show whenever he wants. He starred in “30 Rock” on NBC, and briefly had his own talk show on MSNBC. Ethically, NBC literally has an obligation to reveal a conflict of interest every time they report on this incident.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Wilkey


    Watch the prop master check the cylinders and barrel
     
    First of all, this shows that the author doesn't know what he (or she) is talking about. There is only one cylinder in a revolver and not all guns are revolvers. I think they mean chambers. A revolver has one cylinder but multiple chambers.

    2nd, they are talking about stage work. Movies are somewhat different, though the same general idea applies.

    3rd, in this case, supposedly due to "Covid Protocols" they were not allowing the "prop master" (armorer) to enter the set so the AD was acting as the surrogate prop master. Baldwin should have asked the AD to show him that the gun was not loaded and not just taken his word for it. But I can't say whether neglecting to ask rises to the level of a crime.
    , @ic1000
    @Wilkey

    > Ethically, NBC literally has an obligation to reveal a conflict of interest every time they report on this incident.

    Using "ethically" and "NBC" together -- that's pretty cool. I'll be sure to note such a declaration, if I see it or hear of it.

    , @Hibernian
    @Wilkey


    Ethically, NBC literally has an obligation to reveal a conflict of interest every time they report on this incident.
     
    That'll be the day.
    , @ic1000
    @Wilkey

    A third summary of Today's coverage of this story. Comment #28 described Miguel Almaguer's report of Monday, Oct. 25. #245 was about Tuesday, Oct. 26. Here is what he told viewers this morning (Wednesday, Oct. 27) in the 3 minutes, 20 seconds allotted.

    * As yesterday, a mention of Almaguer's segment opened the show at 7:00 am, but it didn't get on air until after the 7:30 news recap.
    * Lede (breathlessly): NBC News has seen haunting videos taken just before the Tragedy.
    * The Santa Fe D.A. is having a news conference today. She might file charges.
    * Again with the passive voice: "Baldwin was handed a gun," then "Hutchins was shot in the chest."
    * There is a video (haunting?) of Gutierrez-Reed handing revolvers to Baldwin, days before the mishap.
    * A very short interview with Bill Davis, an "armourer expert," who is pro-safety.
    * Almaguer again recounts that Asst. Director Dave Halls handed the revolver to Baldwin while calling "cold gun." The same still of handsome, cocky, masculine, and white Halls is on screen as Almaguer warns that he and Guierrez-Reed could face criminal charges.
    * Again with the Real Problem: informed voices are urgently calling for better gun safety on movie sets.
    * The penultimate sentence, spoken portentiously: "Should someone face charges for what happened?"
    * Almaguer ends on a positive note: Some safety protocols were being followed on the set -- people were wearing masks.

    Many dogs didn't bark. Among them:

    * Commenter Wilkey had proposed that NBC should disclose its conflict of interest in covering the woes of its darlin', Alec Baldwin (#296). Apparently, Almaguer isn't reading this thread.
    * Any notion that Baldwin could face exposure for felony involuntary manslaughter under New Mexico law. (hat tip TWBT #278).
    * TheWrap story from Oct. 25 that crew members used the revolver for plinking with live ammo, then returned it to the set (hat tip Peter Johnson #339).
    * Any notion that a movie's producers might have any responsibility for what goes on at the set. (Was Baldwin a producer? I forget.)

    So, in the run-up to the D.A.'s presser, NBC has doubled down. Throw Dave Halls under the bus, maybe Gutierrez-Reed too, if need be. Baldwin — still the real victim of Tragedy.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  294. OT: Midday update of the Newspeak Vocabulary

    Loundon County genderfluid transgender bathroom oral+anal rape case was just “dating violence”.

    Surprised [as if] people aren’t talking about the verdict in this Loudoun County case, and how the testimony undercuts the right wing’s narrative about what went down [more like up]. (Turns out it was a dating violence story, not a trans bathroom story, as portrayed.)

    Amazingly Free article at WaPo. Bless Bezos!

    On Monday, the teenage victim of the Stone Bridge assault testified that she and her attacker had agreed to meet up in a school bathroom around 12:15 p.m. on the date of the assault. She testified they had not explicitly discussed having sex beforehand.

    The teen testified she arrived first and chose to go in the girls’ bathroom because the two had always met in the girls’ bathrooms in the past. When the boy arrived, the teen testified, he came into the handicapped stall she was in and locked the door.

    The two talked, before the girl testified the boy began grabbing her neck and other parts of her body in a sexual manner. She testified she told her attacker she was not in the mood for sex, but he forced himself on her.

    “He flipped me over,” the girl testified. “I was on the ground and couldn’t move and he sexually assaulted me.”

    The attack only stopped when someone came in the bathroom and startled the defendant, the victim testified. The girl testified that a second sexual assault occurred a little later. The judge found there was sufficient evidence to find the defendant had forced the girl into two sex acts.

    You can now put your Pussy Hats back into the “unused bullshit items” box in the attic.

  295. @ic1000
    @Wilkey

    Thanks.


    So Dave Halls is the bad guy. Gutierrez-Reed — not great. Baldwin — victim of Tragedy.
     
    That was my summary of how NBC presented the Rust set events to its viewers, this morning.

    Today (and, this evening, NBC Nightly News With Lester Holt) is an exercise in storytelling. The point of curated facts and the accompanying analysis is to lead viewers towards a preferred narrative. That won't sit too well with many of the skeptical, worldly, and intelligent people who are following this case. Still, more Americans keep up with current events via network news, or worse, than via iSteve comment threads.

    Will Baldwin get the book thrown at him (Harvey Weinstein) or skate (Jussie Smollett)? Or, since somebody died as a result of his actions, will Baldwin be treated more like Derek Chavin (Minneapolis) or David Bailey (Capitol Police)?

    In his earlier Reply to your comment, TWBT linked a legal analysis by Andrew Branca. Taking that at face value, the Santa Fe DA can make a strong case that Baldwin is guilty of felony involuntary manslaughter.

    It's unclear whether the media will go all-in to save one of their own. While drifting in that direction, they can be fickle. I suspect Baldwin's crisis management team will be earning their pay.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @That Would Be Telling

    Will Baldwin get the book thrown at him (Harvey Weinstein) or skate (Jussie Smollett)? Or, since somebody died as a result of his actions, will Baldwin be treated more like Derek Chavin (Minneapolis) or David Bailey (Capitol Police)?

    Weinstein is unlike the others in being a chronic abuser of women, so much so he and his firm had to wage multiple massive as well as small scale actions to keep a lid on it. From that viewpoint that the operations would eventually fail should not be too surprising, especially since they were in multiple jurisdictions.

    Smollett committed crimes against the law itself, which upsets some US authorities especially when not done by women, against the narrative, and possibly led to an important black TV series cancellation. He only initially skated, then the city of Chicago filed a lawsuit seeking \$135K for what they claimed he cost them (the city, like the state in general is in dire financial straits), and he countersued. And a special prosecutor was appointed by I don’t know whom, bypassing the Crook County Soros black woman who let him off. Indicted again almost a year later, jury selection is scheduled to start in a month.

    Derek Chavin was simply a victim of our Minority Occupation Government, another piece of meat to throw at the mob when they were needed to remove the BAD ORANGE MAN from the Oval Office.

    If the Congress, Democrats and GOPe together could give Bailey a Medal of Honor they would.

    These are good extremes to contrast with Baldwin, and for Smollett an example that it doesn’t have to come down to what the local DA wants.

    • Thanks: Polistra
  296. @Wilkey
    @ic1000


    So Dave Halls is the bad guy. Gutierrez-Reed — not great. Baldwin — victim of Tragedy.
     
    Alec Baldwin may have had no direct personal responsibility for ensuring the safety of the gun that killed Hutchins but, as the writer, producer, and star of the movie, as well as the last person with a chance to check the gun for safety, and the person who fired the gun, he bore a shitload of moral and probably legal responsibility.

    He appears to have been the sole star in a low budget movie featuring a lot of unknown actors. He was in every sense the "adult" on the set - or he was supposed to be, anyway. He should have been insisting that everyone was doing his or her job. If shit was going on that shouldn't have been - like using prop guns for target shooting - he should have put a stop to that. He should have been making sure that a young, novice armorer knew what was expected of her and was doing her job. Better yet, he probably shouldn't have allowed her to be hired in the first place.

    One of the magic moments of becoming an adult is when you develop the ability to tell people "no," regardless of what people may think of you, regardless of how much you like them or want them to like you. The problem with Gutierrez-Reed is that she is not old enough to have necessarily reached that transition stage. Her forays into TikTok and Instagram suggest that she was more interested in having people like her than respect her.

    Maybe I'm just giving Gutierrez-Reed some young woman privilege, but I feel bad for her. She's going to have to live with this for the rest of her life - a mistake made doing a job the adults in the room shouldn't have hired her to do. She was too young and inexperienced to be doing this job and probably didn't know she wasn't really qualified to do it. She didn't know what she didn't know. It was the job of the adults around her to make sure that she did.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @That Would Be Telling, @ic1000, @Jack D

    We have all at times been unusually impressed by some person who, although young in years, evinces an unusual maturity and competence often not found in people who are twice or thrice their age. A distant relative of mine was a savant regarding collectible coins and when he was but a boy of 14, he authored published monographs and full grown men who were respected coin dealers would approach him for advice on numismatic matters.

    Gutierrez-Reed was not such a person.

  297. @Wilkey
    @ic1000

    My guess is that Baldwin will skate. Either the local DA won't press charges, or Baldwin's legal team will be enough to get him off the hook with a plea bargain, no time served.

    Baldwin already appears to be laying the groundwork to throw AD Dave Halls under the bus. If you go to his Twitter page, the only post since Hutchins was killed is a link to an article casting the blame on Dave Halls.

    That also follows the usual Woke rules for placing blame. Gutierrez-Reed is a young (check) semi-Hispanic (check) woman (check) of power. We don't want the media allowing anyone to imply that young Hispanic women might sometimes be incompetent at their jobs.

    Baldwin is a famous liberal. So we can't blame him.

    Dave Halls is an attractive and apparently masculine male of no widely-known political persuasion. If he were cast in a political thriller they'd cast him as a privileged asshole Republican. He looks like he could be best friends with Mitt Romney.

    Why Halls would deserve the greatest blame is beyond me. He wasn't the armorer. He probably wasn't any better able to inspect the gun than Baldwin was. The firearms safety rules for the Actors' Equity Association explicitly state:


    "Check the firearm every time you take possession of it. Before each use, make sure the gun has been test-fired off stage and then ask to test fire it yourself. Watch the prop master check the cylinders and barrel to be sure no foreign object or dummy bullet has become lodged inside."
     
    This is not some paragraph buried deep inside some official, thousand page manual. It is one of only 20 rules - and the longest one - to appear on a safety sheet that is short enough to fit on a single page. It's the kind of thing actors are probably even expected to read and sign before working on a project involving firearms. And Baldwin would have had to read it and sign it a fair number of times in his career. If Dave Halls can inspect the weapon, then so can Alec Baldwin.

    P.S. And remember that NBC has a bias here beyond the usual media bias. Alec Baldwin has appeared on Saturday Night Live about 8,000 times, has hosted it 17 times, and apparently has - or had, before last week - a standing offer to host the show whenever he wants. He starred in "30 Rock" on NBC, and briefly had his own talk show on MSNBC. Ethically, NBC literally has an obligation to reveal a conflict of interest every time they report on this incident.

    Replies: @Jack D, @ic1000, @Hibernian, @ic1000

    Watch the prop master check the cylinders and barrel

    First of all, this shows that the author doesn’t know what he (or she) is talking about. There is only one cylinder in a revolver and not all guns are revolvers. I think they mean chambers. A revolver has one cylinder but multiple chambers.

    2nd, they are talking about stage work. Movies are somewhat different, though the same general idea applies.

    3rd, in this case, supposedly due to “Covid Protocols” they were not allowing the “prop master” (armorer) to enter the set so the AD was acting as the surrogate prop master. Baldwin should have asked the AD to show him that the gun was not loaded and not just taken his word for it. But I can’t say whether neglecting to ask rises to the level of a crime.

  298. @Hapalong Cassidy
    One thing I can take away from this: “Armorer” is a pretty awesome job title. I didn’t even know they still existed, now that there are no more Knights in need of tending to.

    Replies: @HA

    “One thing I can take away from this: “Armorer” is a pretty awesome job title. I didn’t even know they still existed, now that there are no more Knights in need of tending to.”

    It’s interesting that two of the most male-dominated roles in film making, that of cinematographer and armorer (note that according to that link, ONLY 83.8% of armorers are men), were both assigned to women in this film.

    Given that Alec Baldwin is involved, I suspect that is not a coincidence. Was this just an effort to look good to the Twitterati who make a career of denouncing sexism in Hollywood, or did some of the backers or tax break officials require more aggressive affirmative action? From her headshot, I’m guessing the spider-tattoo lady with the excellent Photoshop skills was trying to break into other roles in the business, and that might have made her more congenial and friendly than, say, an armorer who was drill instructor with two tours in Afghanistan on his resume.

    But I rather doubt anyone trying to hold on to a job in mainstream journalism is going to ask that question, so we might never know.

  299. The armoress:

    • LOL: J1234
    • Replies: @Polistra
    @Reg Cæsar

    WTAF. She's an unusual mix of Train Wreck and Freak Show.

    Replies: @HammerJack

  300. @Robert Weissberg
    My son is currently directing a movie in Hollywood with lots of gun action (mainly AK-47's). He told me that it is far easier to add the shot electronically after the scene is completed. Not only is this 100% safe, but the loud noise from the blank shot is distracting to the actors. All of his many guns have solid barrels. He also told me that Baldwin is push his crew far too hard to save some money. Stupidity all the way around.

    Replies: @Anonymous Jew, @Danindc, @Reg Cæsar, @That Would Be Telling

    My son is currently directing a movie in Hollywood with lots of gun action (mainly AK-47’s). He told me that it is far easier to add the shot electronically after the scene is completed. Not only is this 100% safe, but the loud noise from the blank shot is distracting to the actors. All of his many guns have solid barrels.

    Thanks, that’s a good point about the detrimental noise of blanks, and indoors especially they could also cost you some hearing.

    Assault rifles like the AK-47 and AR-15 families are special cases compared to handguns and battle or more powerful rifles. They use an “intermediate” power cartridge and tend to have relatively straight line recoil, that is the butt of the stock does not drop far below the barrel like previous gun designs. So they don’t produce much felt or visible recoil, no one is envisioning using them for mass fire at greater than 1,000 yards etc. So faking everything, including what’s a much more deafening noise makes sense, and the time savings on the set could pay for at least part of the special effects needed later, and lessening the mental wear and tear on everyone is also all around good (although you should always pull back the bolt a bit to check for sure).

    Handguns should more noticably jump, and should have more of an effect on the shooter, not that a lot of productions really care about such verisimilitude.

  301. @Wilkey
    @ic1000

    My guess is that Baldwin will skate. Either the local DA won't press charges, or Baldwin's legal team will be enough to get him off the hook with a plea bargain, no time served.

    Baldwin already appears to be laying the groundwork to throw AD Dave Halls under the bus. If you go to his Twitter page, the only post since Hutchins was killed is a link to an article casting the blame on Dave Halls.

    That also follows the usual Woke rules for placing blame. Gutierrez-Reed is a young (check) semi-Hispanic (check) woman (check) of power. We don't want the media allowing anyone to imply that young Hispanic women might sometimes be incompetent at their jobs.

    Baldwin is a famous liberal. So we can't blame him.

    Dave Halls is an attractive and apparently masculine male of no widely-known political persuasion. If he were cast in a political thriller they'd cast him as a privileged asshole Republican. He looks like he could be best friends with Mitt Romney.

    Why Halls would deserve the greatest blame is beyond me. He wasn't the armorer. He probably wasn't any better able to inspect the gun than Baldwin was. The firearms safety rules for the Actors' Equity Association explicitly state:


    "Check the firearm every time you take possession of it. Before each use, make sure the gun has been test-fired off stage and then ask to test fire it yourself. Watch the prop master check the cylinders and barrel to be sure no foreign object or dummy bullet has become lodged inside."
     
    This is not some paragraph buried deep inside some official, thousand page manual. It is one of only 20 rules - and the longest one - to appear on a safety sheet that is short enough to fit on a single page. It's the kind of thing actors are probably even expected to read and sign before working on a project involving firearms. And Baldwin would have had to read it and sign it a fair number of times in his career. If Dave Halls can inspect the weapon, then so can Alec Baldwin.

    P.S. And remember that NBC has a bias here beyond the usual media bias. Alec Baldwin has appeared on Saturday Night Live about 8,000 times, has hosted it 17 times, and apparently has - or had, before last week - a standing offer to host the show whenever he wants. He starred in "30 Rock" on NBC, and briefly had his own talk show on MSNBC. Ethically, NBC literally has an obligation to reveal a conflict of interest every time they report on this incident.

    Replies: @Jack D, @ic1000, @Hibernian, @ic1000

    > Ethically, NBC literally has an obligation to reveal a conflict of interest every time they report on this incident.

    Using “ethically” and “NBC” together — that’s pretty cool. I’ll be sure to note such a declaration, if I see it or hear of it.

  302. @SaneClownPosse
    @NickG

    Basically, the movie company is running a "Producers" scam, making a money losing production for the backers, meanwhile pocketing untaxed cash.

    Blanks can kill, e.g. Brandon Lee on "The Crow" set.

    Is anyone sure this happened as they say it happened? Or is this yet just another hoax event involving firearms?

    Displaying the use of firearms on screen to be banned? Similar to the on screen smoking ban.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Muggles

    Basically, the movie company is running a “Producers” scam, making a money losing production for the backers, meanwhile pocketing untaxed cash.

    You appear to be making several accusations but fail to cite any actual evidence. I haven’t seen or heard of any financial details of this film.

    Normally there are outside investors and/or lenders who are very careful about financial details and accountability. Lots of lawsuits in this area.

    Hollywood accounting is opaque and notorious but none of it is legally going to allow “pocketing of untaxed cash” as you say. If the accounting is honest.

    I suspect modern real time cash flow info is provided to major backers and/or studios. Online QuickBooks or similar is available.

    Only when criminals lie, steal, cheat, commit fraud, etc. is “untaxed cash” part of that. Of course there can be loan or investment repayments which are not normally taxable.

    This film project and it’s financial results are likely to be merely tax loss write-offs.

  303. @Harry Baldwin
    @Wilkey

    He should have been making sure that a young, novice armorer knew what was expected of her and was doing her job.

    In Douglas Sutherland's The English Gentleman, he writes, "Of all a gentleman's servants the ones who are allowed the greatest latitude in familiarity and whom he holds in the greatest respect are his [game]keeper or ghillie. Keepers in particular have an unusual license to abuse his guests if their performance does not come up to his exacting standards or to insist on conducting a game drive the way he wants to, even if his master disagrees."

    Hierarchy and deference have to take a back seat to the life-and-death matter of firearms safety.

    Replies: @S Johnson

    British game shoots are indeed led by the gamekeeper or estate manager. The second time he sees someone aiming low at a bird they’re out for the rest of the day (in order to avoid Dick Cheney-like accidents). There are also cash penalties for other reckless conduct.

    Waugh’s “Handful of Dust” gives a portrait of how the gentleman defers to his estate manager, a former farm worker, when it comes to hunting, with tragic results.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    @S Johnson


    in order to avoid Dick Cheney-like accidents
     
    https://disntr.com/2021/10/22/alec-baldwins-name-removed-from-article-calling-dick-cheney-terrorist-for-shooting-accident-after-baldwin-shoots-kills-woman-on-set/

    The internet is permanent, sort of.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @That Would Be Telling

  304. @Rob
    @Sick 'n Tired

    I do know next to nothing about guns. But I do know that, when one is playing pretend, having a type of prop that requires very few people be able to access them, everyone handling them must check to make sure they aren’t in deadly mode, etc then those things one is playing pretend with are too dangerous, and need to be re-engineered.

    Take hypodermic needles and the concern over needle sticks after HIV became common. Did hospitals emphasize needle safety, put biohazard boxes in every room, etc. Sure they did but people are human. They make mistakes. If you just say “add another layer of people checking the dangerous thing” you are not being realistic. If one person is checking, he will make the occasional mistake. Two people check? More reliable. So ten people check? That might even be less reliable than two. Every checker will say “no way a mistake could have gotten past the x people before me, and be laxer. He will also think “any mistake I make will be caught by one of the people who check it after me” and be even laxer.

    So, what happened to reduce needle sticks? Safer needles. Single-use needles, and could be irreversibly covered by a one-handed motion. To draw blood, they don’t stick you, draw blood, and then stick you again with a new syringe for the next vial. They stick you once and then draw blood into multiple tubes through that one needle.

    I think one thing gun people like about guns is that they are fairly dangerous to handle. They get a feeling of “I am being responsible with a dangerous thing. I am reliable and can be trusted with responsibility.” But people make mistakes.

    I have read that endless training of chemical workers that you don’t use hose A for chemical B did not work. There were always accidents. Only by re-engineering the connections, so that hose A did not fit the spigot on the barrel that chemical B was in eliminated accidents.

    While you may think that the fact that I could not come up with revolver means I don’t know enough about guns to know that props can be re-engineered, it is precisely because I don’t come from a “respect the great power and responsibility this deadly penis substitute gives me” that I realize dangerous tech should not be used when re-engineering the tech for safety is a possibility.

    Prop guns should not be loadable with real ammunition? If somehow they are loaded with real ammunition, they should not be able to fire it. How is that not an obvious takeaway? The Crow was a great movie when I was 13. Brandon Lee living could have meant a The Crow 2. So many girls and gay boys would have had happier teenage years.

    Look how endless harangues about driving more safely paled compared to mandated seat belt installation.

    Let’s say a company’s warehouse employees get into wrecks driving their forklifts at 40 mph. Is it a better idea to constantly be paying workers comp/wrongful death to people the forklift drivers hurt or is it a better idea to have the forklifts modified so that their maximum speed is lower?

    Making blank guns that cannot be loaded with live ammunition, cannot fire live ammunition, and can be visually distinguished from real guns in a way that can be reversed with special effects tech is really a no-brainer.

    I realize that in the grand scheme of things, very few people get hurt with misloaded prop guns on film sets. But the general principle that tech and systems should be redesigned rather than people being more personally responsibilityer shows up throughout American life. The unwillingness of the elite to re-engineer buildings and building operations to reduce colds and flu is a much bigger one.

    Some things can be best prevented by redesign rather than just ameliorated by paying wergeld to injured people or their next of kin.

    Replies: @borfwink, @anon, @Fhjjjkjcdddbb, @Muggles

    Safety engineering is a big field.

    “Human factors” tend to be the hardest to overcome.

    Nearly all computer hacks are the result of failed human decisions being made (or spoofed, faked, etc.) “I thought this was their VP of Finance calling…”

    I read a recent article about password construction. It concluded that “experts” now think that the multiple/many character long ones are not much better than ordinary ones. Why? Because at some point people won’t use them. Too much trouble.

    Pilots are trained to use checklists (now often electronic) and I suspect others use them too (ship captains, military equipment operators, etc.).

    As your post suggests the best methods involve non interoperability. I.e. square plugs into round holes. Not always possible though. I suspect film set firearms safety protocols will be more diligent, at least for a while.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Muggles


    Nearly all computer hacks are the result of failed human decisions being made (or spoofed, faked, etc.) “I thought this was their VP of Finance calling…”
     
    I think the majority, maybe an overwhelming one, are inside jobs. "Falling for a phishing scheme" is a cover story for the insiders who provide the information. Like the planned give ups of trucks to hijackers by mobbed up, or mob compromised, drivers.
    , @Rob
    @Muggles

    Good point about overly-onerous protocols for anything. Especially safety, as 99% of the time, you’ll get away with skipping a safety step. As things get more hectic, especially when budgets are cut, onerous safety protocols are an early thing that gets cut.

    Another commenter said starter pistols have an internal rod to prevent them from effectively discharging a bullet. This is a not-quite-perfect alternative for prop guns, as a prop gun that explodes in the actor’s hand is still a bad thing. That’s why I think that reducing the “interoperability” of prop guns and real guns is the way to go.

    Perhaps all prop guns should be of a single, non-standard caliber? Coupling that, a non-standard caliber that won’t accept a bulleted cartridge, with a feature that would be a “duh, that’s dumb” way for a normal firearm to work might be ideal. For a way for prop guns to work, some guns are centerfire and others are rimfire. No one’s going to introduce a double-fire fire shell, that requires two (or more) primer charges to ignite simultaneously, so that would be a possible way to do prop ammunition. But electric ignition seems like it would be even more reasonable.

    A single caliber would mean that films would only have to keep up with one type of blank, maybe one each for pistol, shotgun, and rifle, and blanks could be designed so they looked as little like real rounds as possible. Like, make the cartridges green screen color, and then make ejecting cartridges look metal. Or just have a green or purple dot on the back, so one could tell a revolver is loaded with blanks at a glance. Maybe the wax “bullet-replacement piece could be green screen color or purple, so someone can at least tell that the chambered round in an automatic is a blank

    I must admit, I am somewhat flummoxed that “have someone engineer prop guns to be safe” is not the first response to this. Kinda surprised it was not the response when Brandon Lee died way back when. I think it must be because someone’s salary largely depends on “I am paid to be responsible and reliable with dangerous things.” Master armorer is a thing, and no “master armorer” is going to disparage his abilities by saying, “boss, we need our production’s prop guns to be safer” when other master armorers are saying “I am paid to manage danger responsibly.”.

    I get why, say, the victims’ families are not saying that. They deserve compensation, but what happened to the “can-do” American attitude to improving things? Actors have a lot of pull in movie-making, no? Surely they realize they have an interest in not getting shot?

  305. Though not involving a gun, I’m a little surprised no one has mentioned silent movie star Harold Lloyd’s studio accident. A real bomb was mistaken for a prop bomb and blew off a portion of his right hand. He continued acting afterward for many years with a prosthetic glove, and its almost impossible to tell its not his real complete hand.

    Interestingly, his family’s Bevery Hills estate, Greenacres, is where a part of Westworld was filmed.

    On Sunday, August 24, 1919, while posing for some promotional still photographs in the Los Angeles Witzel Photography Studio, he picked up what he thought was a prop bomb and lit it with a cigarette. It exploded and mangled his right hand, causing him to lose a thumb and forefinger. The blast was severe enough that the cameraman and prop director nearby were also seriously injured. Lloyd was in the act of lighting a cigarette from the fuse of the bomb when it exploded, also badly burning his face and chest and injuring his eye.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Lloyd

  306. @J1234
    @Jack D

    There's a long history of Hollywood making movies about Kansas or the Dakotas out in California with little regard for topographical accuracy, so you'd get things like cacti and giant rock formations in a scene that's supposed to take place near of Abilene, KS. Believe it or not, that's silly to an awful lot of people. That would be like someone from Iowa filming scenes about Detroit or Chicago in Des Moines and saying "what difference does it make?" That lack of sophistication was fine for the 1940's, but now Hollywood sells itself to the world as reality, in one fashion or another. That "reality" is generally a big lie, of course, but they usually try to make it more believable than they did in the 1940's.

    Other than a lack of trees, I've seen little on I-25 between Santa Fe and Albuquerque that bears much resemblance to Kansas, and most everything north of Santa Fe is Rocky Mountains, so that doesn't work either. Maybe they found a little patch of KS in NM, or maybe cinematography flattens out topography or maybe part of the story takes place in NM, and that's what they were filming. If not, they could've changed the story or the location pretty easily. I'm sure there were other considerations, though, and a production company that can't even afford to keep its firearms safe probably isn't going to pay a lot of attention to geographical accuracy either.

    Replies: @Muggles, @Curle

    Other than a lack of trees, I’ve seen little on I-25 between Santa Fe and Albuquerque that bears much resemblance to Kansas, and most everything north of Santa Fe is Rocky Mountains, so that doesn’t work either.

    Having just driven through that area two months ago, you are wrong.

    There are parts of NM north of I-40 on a highway connecting up to I 25 which are quite flat and treeless. Rolling hills in some places. Very dry but grassy. Many canyons up in the hills and of course mountains nearby if needed. This is within an hour of Santa Fe.

    Not exactly Kansas but close enough. Some flat-to-the- horizon views (mainly looking east).

    This “film ranch” is very popular and used a lot.

    Besides as you mention, most people are clueless about geography unless they are locals. I have yet to see those nearby mountains in Houston, though they appear in some films/TV. Maybe someday…

  307. @Tex
    @Harry Baldwin

    Lee's death was preventable at a number of stages.

    1) Use of a squib round (caused by a failure to construct an inert dummy round) caused a slug to be pushed into the barrel of the weapon.

    2) The gun was apparently unloaded after the squib round fired (in order to insert blanks) but the expended shell of the squib went unnoticed.

    This is crucial, it's very, very easy to tell if a cartridge has been fired. This should have been a massive red flag as dummy rounds don't change appearance after you click the trigger. The bullet stays in place, that's the defining characteristic of a dummy. The sight of an empty cartridge should have triggered a "Hey, what happened" moment.

    3) The barrel of the weapon was not checked for obstructions.

    Perhaps not the most obvious, but the slug in the barrel was a vital ingredient in a negligent death.

    4) The scene called for an actor to fire a blank directly at Lee.

    I've been in mock battles where hundreds of guys fired blanks at each other, including from cannons. At worst some of us were deafer than when we started. But we had more than a few precautions along the way.

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling

    Your point 2 on “the expended shell of the squib went unnoticed” is excellent. I add that in addition to the obvious visual difference, a normal weight bullet is by far the most heavy thing in a dummy round made with non-small handgun rounds, so that might have provided a clue as well.

    Unfortunately we’re talking about a six round .44 Magnum revolver, so 5/6ths of the weight of heavy bullets wasn’t noticed assuming it was dumped into or later picked up into whomever’s hand. I assume the empty brass was underneath the other dummy rounds, plus in that straight to hand scenario the guy also didn’t pick up on the sharp-ish edge of the empty cartridge. And no one ever really noticed the dummy rounds had primers, a big no-no as described, but I suppose anyone who did was running on auto-pilot and didn’t think it through.

    Bleah, this was so preventable, a typical chain of multiple mistakes, although the construction of bad dummy rounds is the most unforgivable one. I’ve got ones for all my centerfire rifles and handguns, all with empty primer pockets, that’s just assumed. Which also was probably was part of it.

  308. @GeologyAnon Mk 3
    @bomag

    You need realistic looking guns (especially in a western) where realistic looking replica shells are important in scenes where people are reloading or doing other things like that. So you will always need them and have some of them in the arsenal for an idiot to get mixed up. Also they don't have internal restrictors since they don't need the blowback function to cycle the next round. Without that there isn't a physical stop to the bullet, and if the actor drops the gun or it's got a fouled barrel in any other way you still can get an erstatz projectile even while firing blanks, that's basically what killed Brandon Lee. It might turn out to be the exact same situation- a replica dummy round dropped it's bullet into the barrel the gun was unloaded and replaced with blanks, the blank fires and the bullet goes out at near normal velocity

    Replies: @That Would Be Telling, @Jonathan Mason

    You need realistic looking guns (especially in a western) where realistic looking replica shells are important in scenes where people are reloading or doing other things like that.

    A very good point. If you want to heighten tension in an old time Western in a drawn out gun battle, verisimilitude can be your friend. The guys were probably carrying five rounds in their revolvers to start with and have to use the loading gate and ejector rod to remove spend brass and replace each round one at a time.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @That Would Be Telling

    Perhaps this has already been covered in this very long thread, but in the Baldwin situation, this was a rehearsal.

    In a rehearsal, a prop gun - meaning, a real prop gun, not a real gun being used as a prop, is used. They were working out a change of the lighting situation, apparently.

    When that's worked out, the real gun is produced, which should have been checked with all the redundancies that have been noted here, and which was not.

    So there's that final insult.

    And again, SAG rules (see my comment above, somewhere or other) say never to point a gun at a person. Or, I suppose, a camera behind which a person is standing at close range.

    Replies: @Veteran Aryan

  309. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Jack D


    they’re all 24 years old (or sometimes less) but each 24 year old has one job to do and he has been drilled in that job and God help him if he deviates from his training or doesn’t follow orders
     
    Not so much on the Bonhomme Richard

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/this-is-not-raymond-spruances-u-s-navy

    Replies: @Rob McX, @That Would Be Telling, @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    Not necessarily. Damage control is only the GQ specialty for maybe 1/5th the crew. The others not assigned to repair lockers during GQ have only nominal damage control training. During in port watch stations you don’t have the regular repair lockers roster also, you have whoever is DC qualified on the watchbill. And you don’t have repair 5, or the flying squad, or the DCA, your elite fire fighting team.

    I was repair 3 leader for a while and had to fight an in-port engineering space fire. The sailors on the hose team were solid, but it was very dicey. You aren’t familiar with the equipment layout in the responding locker, you never train to fight fires in that part of the ship, a lot of your hosemen and maybe the repair leader will be Topsiders who are unfamiliar with the engineering spaces and can easily get lost or not be able to find the eductors, critical valves etc, especially with heavy smoke and heat. And you’re at the lowest level of compartmentalizition, with many compartments that can’t be sealed without compromising shore power, fire main water, AFFF, or whatever else.

    We got the major fuel oil leak and major conflagration alert within maybe a minute from the duty engineer and if it would have taken him another minute to notice it, I’m not confident we could have contained it without extreme damage to the ship. And that was on a destroyer. I can easily easily see the same situation being drastically more severe on a much larger amphib. I don’t think this shows necessarily a degradation of damage control skill or fighting spirit. Ironically a Moskit in the mess decks when you’re at GQ is probably more manageable and less likely to destroy the ship than an smouldering fire in an unmapped compartment when you’re in 5 section shipyard duty.

    • Thanks: That Would Be Telling
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @GeologyAnon Mk 3


    The others not assigned to repair lockers during GQ have only nominal damage control training. During in port watch stations you don’t have the regular repair lockers roster also, you have whoever is DC qualified on the watchbill.
     
    “Nominal” would have been an improvement. Judging by the USNI News article, on the docked BH (pronounced bey asch?) it looks like there was effectively zero DC training and zero DC qualified personnel present. Plain old common sense at the scene also seems to have been lacking. Of course, much of the problem goes up the chain of command. After the USS Miami fire there is no excuse for lack of DC readiness, whether at sea or in port. Jack D’s comment concluded thus:

    On this set, they were doing what Feynman called cargo cult science. They were observing (some of) the forms and rituals of Hollywood movie making but without the substance. There was someone called an “armorer” but she didn’t maintain custody and control of the weapons. Someone called “cold gun” as tradition requires, but without actually checking to see if it was a cold gun. If you did this on an aircraft carrier, tragedy would likewise ensue in short order.
     
    My comparison of the set of Rust to conditions on the Bonhomme Richard still stands.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

  310. @Anonymous
    @peterike

    Oh, come on! There is no "BeagleGate". There is a sad reality of animal studies and the fact that many of them cannot be restricted to mice, flies and worms.

    Nothing is black and white - in real life, compromises are made. If you're given a choice between keeping your son or an average beagle alive, the decision is obvious, right? Same with animal experiments: Many of them are cruel but on the other scale is that more people will die without them. E.g., the cancer-beating Rituximab antibody would not exist without animal studies.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Catdompanj

    Tell us how removing a dog’s vocal chords saves human lives?

  311. @Not Raul
    @Rob McX

    In her defense; maybe she came to the funeral straight from work.

    Replies: @Catdompanj

    Is she a Rockette? Lol.

    • Replies: @Not Raul
    @Catdompanj


    Is she a Rockette? Lol.
     
    She says that she’s a “dancer”, so maybe.
  312. Steve, you must be a precog. Here is a queer, female, armorer, MIT grad, Hugo-winner armorer.

    https://www.slhuang.com/

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
    @Anonymous

    She's absolutely MIT, not at all sure about the "genderqueer," you can't tell that from her her Twitter account or web site except for this last line in her About page, emphasis added "I am part of the Queer Asian SFF Illuminati," which goes to a dead link. It's only coming us in reference to her fiction where being published by Tor starting in looks like 2018 almost certainly requires saying that sort of thing and having characters that are queer. Wikipedia says she was "the first woman to be a professional armorer in Hollywood" and obviously she didn't fatally screw up those jobs.

    Read her Twitter feed into sometime in October 23rd, would seem to know her stuff WRT to filming, guns, and safety, said for example she'd never depend on blanks dissipating in 15 feet or Lexan plastic armor protecting film crew. Emphases the exact roles of the assistant director (AD) and what we've been hearing from armorers like her and prop masters, that the AD should never be touching any guns, that's not in his remit which she did go into some detail about. And you've got to love this:


    How Working in the US Film Industry Helped Me Write a Criminal Underworld

    By S. L. Huang

    October 2, 2018

    I grew up in New Jersey, which I like to think gives me street cred—until I remember I was raised in the suburbs a few blocks away from cow pastures, my parents both had office jobs, and I went to a well-funded public high school where we were best known for our math team.

    So after college, I naturally moved out to LA to become a Hollywood stuntwoman and weapons expert [including per Wikipedia some major works like the remake of Battlestar Galactica and a four season Fox TV series].

    And looking back, I couldn’t have written the Cas Russell books otherwise. Not just because the books have a lot of fights and guns in them—though, they do!—but because I don’t think I could have written a book that straddles into a gritty criminal underworld without, well, having worked in film.

    Hollywood has its corporate side, sure, and the big studio pictures tend to be as shiny and well-run as you’d expect. But there’s also the vast world of indie and low-budget films—and there, work can feel a lot more like a Wild West where people are constantly coloring outside the lines of what is legal or normal....
     
    (Disclaimer, while she's not an MIT EECS major as I also wasn't, she was math, I was biology then chemistry, she and I did take the relevant CS course back in the day, and she clearly was part of EECS community which was easy when they were 40% of the undergraduate body.)
  313. @J1234
    @mcohen

    You might be conflating eras, which is easy to do when you're talking about the late 19th century, when firearms technology was rapidly evolving. The gun that Hickok45 is demonstrating is called a cap and ball revolver - typical of the 1860's - which is different than what was typically found by the 1880's, even in remote parts of the western US. I only watched a few seconds of this video, so I don't know if he mentioned this or showed other variants of the gun.

    Early cap and ball revolvers were still in use during the late 1800's, but most of them had probably been converted to fire cartridge rounds, just like the famous Colt Single Action Army of 1873 which was designed for cartridges. This involved replacing or modifying the cylinder and maybe making a few other mods. Wild Bill Hickok frequently used converted cap and ball revolvers, but .36 cal., I think.

    The converted guns were more difficult to load cartridges into than the SAA, but for budget conscious frontiersmen it was cheaper than buying a new gun and was still much easier than loading powder, primer and projectile for every chamber in the cylinder. (I've read that during the Civil War the common procedure was to fire six rounds from your cap and ball, then put it back in your holster and forget it because it would be too involved to try to reload during a battle. )

    If Baldwin was firing a Dragoon as you say, it could've been in cap and ball form, but it's much more likely it was a cartridge conversion since the story takes place in the 1880's. Regardless, the use of this type of gun might be critical in explaining why this accident happened. In either cap and ball or cartridge form, it's very difficult to tell at a glance whether the gun is loaded or not (other than looking at the gun from the front, which generally isn't cool.) If it was cap and ball, though, one could remove the primer caps and pretty much ensure it wasn't going to fire.

    And speaking of looking at revolvers from the front, I've noticed that revolvers in movies have projectiles (bullets) visible in the cylinder when filmed from the front...for authenticity, I guess. I assume they use dummy rounds to create that look. Maybe another factor? Who knows. BTW, speaking of conflating eras of firearms, the Winchester model 92 was the most frequently used lever action rifle used in westerns back when I was a kid, but was produced too late (1892) to have been available when most of those western stories were supposed to have taken place.

    Replies: @mcohen

    I read it was a colt dragoon but you might be right about it being cartridge ammo.The search warrant revealed all sorts of ammo on site so it will be interesting to see what comes of that.
    By way have you been following the Diana smay and Jonathan toebbe spying case.They were trying to sell american nuclear submarine data to a foreign entity for cryptocurrency
    They all live in a yellow submarine

  314. @Anonymous
    @El Dato

    You can refer to a sub as a ship or a boat. Boat is sort of the cute familiar term, but obviously they are ships of the fleet. If you had a collection of 3 submarines and 3 skimmers, I mean 3 surface ships, you'd probably say 6 ships, not 3 boats and 3 ships.

    I've heard the rationale for calling subs boats is they don't have any boats on them (not counting life rafts). Don't have a whale boat, don't have a captain's gig.

    -served on two 637 class out of Sand Dog and Mare Island.

    Replies: @El Dato, @Right_On

    Isn’t it just because the originals were “Unterseeboote”, and they remained “Boote” even when they became large-ish like “Seekuh” submarine tenders.

    637 class: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon-class_submarine

    Pretty cool.

    I still can’t really understand how these things can be successfully designed, built and then actually run. It is a mystery of hierarchical design!

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @El Dato

    Skimmers (surface pukes, SWOdogs) don't like it if you call their ships, boats. Since boats are things they carry. But sub sailors don't care if you say boat or ship. It's just not reciprocal.

    The US has pretty much always been a (or even the) leader in military submarines. This is not a field like rocketry where we base a lot on the Germans. There's no exact Wright brothers equivalent, but a lot of people would say Holland was key step in the chain.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Philip_Holland

    Also, look at our record in the Pacific for instance. It's not well understood by general public the amazing things they did, but very much still felt by West Coast sub sailors (especially on "boats named after fish", we had plaques from the WW2 name equivalents in our wardrooms). PAC war patrols against the Japs turned into specops off of you know who after the war and are even numbered sequentially.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_submarines_in_the_Pacific_War

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  315. The question about the crew members using the prop guns for plink shooting during breaks is an interesting one.

    Why was the armorer not able to put a stop to this, and to ban live ammunition from the set? What about the executive producer and the assistant director? Would they not have been able to hear the shooting?

    Could it be that any or all of the executive producer, the armorer, and the assistant director were somehow involved in the plinking? Could that be the reason that the union employees walked, rather than addressing the safety violations constructively?

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Jonathan Mason

    Exactly how could the armourer enforce the banning of live ammunition on the set? A through search of every worker purse, tote bag, backpack coffee cup by security guards and only one entrance with workers lined up as in an airport line?

    Making workplace or any rules and enforcing them are two very different things.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Tex, @HA

  316. @El Dato
    Either this guy:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXh4Qhmt3xA

    or this guy:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SR3aIzfNMXM

    Replies: @Oh the irony

    Interestingly, Eli Wallach said about the scene that he had no experience with guns and had no idea what he was doing. Sergio Leone hadn’t given him exact orders so he did what he thought would make sense.

  317. @Johann Ricke
    @Jack D

    It appears that her dad was an experienced gun handler, and taught her everything he knew, from an early age:

    https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2021-10-23/hannah-gutierrez-reed-rust-shooting-armorer

    She expressed nervousness about being an armorer. My guess is that she was worried about the non-customary nature of this particular use of firearms - preparing weapons for use on a movie set where success involved the gun *not* wounding or killing the person at which it was aimed.

    It's more than likely that the amoral Hollywood pros working alongside her are engaged in a little pre-emptive backstabbing via carefully calculated lies leaked to the media so as to pin all the blame on her. They might have been the major impediments to her doing her job properly by pulling rank, thereby cowing someone new to this particular job into submission, and reducing her to the role of rubber stamp for their unsafe work practices.

    Replies: @Jack D

    No, I meant the source for the idea that it was a cap and ball gun. This makes no sense in the context of what appears to have happened. They have now found numerous live cartridges on the set – apparently the staff was bringing in live ammo that they could use for “plinking” beer cans and such, using the production’s guns.

    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/investigators-still-seeking-key-answers-alec-baldwin-shooting-case-2021-10-25/

    As I said before, my wager is that the gun was used for plinking at lunch and a cartridge was left behind in the chamber. Cap and ball loading is such a pain that it wouldn’t have happened with a cap and ball gun.

    If in fact it was a Dragoon (doubtful) it was probably converted to cartridge loading.

    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
  318. @Anonymous
    @El Dato

    You can refer to a sub as a ship or a boat. Boat is sort of the cute familiar term, but obviously they are ships of the fleet. If you had a collection of 3 submarines and 3 skimmers, I mean 3 surface ships, you'd probably say 6 ships, not 3 boats and 3 ships.

    I've heard the rationale for calling subs boats is they don't have any boats on them (not counting life rafts). Don't have a whale boat, don't have a captain's gig.

    -served on two 637 class out of Sand Dog and Mare Island.

    Replies: @El Dato, @Right_On

    served on two 637 class out of Sand Dog and Mare Island

    Respect. My uncle served on Royal Navy subs – the last of the diesel-electric kind. (So with a big carbon footprint compared to your environmentally friendly nuclear ones!)

    What about that hoary claim that, while we laymen say sub-marin-er, actual crew members prefer submarine-er?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Right_On

    The latter pronunciation is more correct but it's not that big a thing. Only one that bugs me (and not that much) is