Alec Baldwin just shot and KILLED a woman on a movie set

His was an accident while this was one was at best negligence, and at worst, intentional. There was a real bullet in the gun that Baldwin used to kill her. So either he or somebody intentionally put it there, or neither he nor anyone bothered to check to see if the stagehands emptied the gun after target practice. Masse's gun didn't contain a real bullet that would have been easily seen.

The Unkle wrote:

Ever notice how the media never addresses the most basic details on stories like this?

1. How many times did he pull the trigger?

2. Why was he firing the gun?

No answers

I have read in the media

1. Once

2. Rehearsal

Use Google if you want to find out for yourself.

Bald Always Win wrote:

His was an accident while this was one was at best negligence, and at worst, intentional. There was a real bullet in the gun that Baldwin used to kill her. So either he or somebody intentionally put it there, or neither he nor anyone bothered to check to see if the stagehands emptied the gun after target practice. Masse's gun didn't contain a real bullet that would have been easily seen.

They were both negligent accidents. How is Baldwin more culpable than Massee?

Masse had a competent staff and he checked his gun while Baldwin's gun wasn't checked by the staff or by himself. Had he peaked inside, a woman would be alive. This isn't a very high bar to clear in order to preserve life.

Wrong. Both did not check their guns, fired an improper munition as a part of their acting role, and that projectile killed someone.

Baldwin’s actions are no more culpable than Massee.

Thanks Tatar, that was good and well thought out response. I'm having a very difficult time trying to reconcile in my mind how posters are trying/using their political beliefs to acquit/ convict A. Baldwin.

All my posts I believe have been trying to show that the last person in the chain of custody of the gun, because they pulled the trigger, are more culpable than who handed them the gun or whoever loaded it. Guns are by design, designed to kill. Pure and simple. If you don't know how guns "actually" work, then take lessons.

This is a high profile case to be sure but In 2018, accidental gun deaths accounted for 1% (458) of total gun-related deaths (39,740) in the United States. wiki

I don't remember Let's Run posters getting their panties in a bunch by this 2018 statistic. It seems like Left and Right Loons just continue to find stupid shirt to fight about.

It was a bad thing that happened. But for some to claim no harm, no foul because an actor thought he had a "cold" weapon probably does not bring any solice to the victims Family and Friends. They don't care about the 20+ pages of "Whataboutism" on LRC. They will want some accountability and

closure. And I really hope none of her family/friends frequent this site.

Bald Always Win wrote:

Only if they knew it was loaded? My buddy hands me a gun and tells me that it is unloaded and I point it at him and pull the trigger and kill him. No crime? According to you, I can walk away. No big deal because I thought it was unloaded. Oh well. It's only a human life.

This exact situation occurred some years ago to a friend of my son's. One dead and one received 10 years probation and a ton of community service. No jail time.

There are so many unknowns here including the specific protocols and laws and how they would apply that it's impossible to say there will or won't be any criminal charges

danube steak wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

So when a cast of film extras unload their firearms in a battle scene you know for a fact they checked their weapons? It is "irrelevant" that there are people whose job it is to do that?

The buck ALWAYS stops with whoever is pulling the trigger.

ALWAYS

I take it back, that was a dumb statement.

The job of armorer only makes sense if this person controls all access to and use of guns. However..."The affidavit said that the three guns had been left on a gray cart outside the structure where Mr. Baldwin was working on a scene “due to Covid-19 restrictions.”

You are incorrect. Masse and staff checked the gun. Nobody checked Baldwin's gun because there was a bullet in it. That's a big difference. One was not reckless while the other was completely reckless.

Massey’s gun was absolutely not adequately checked. He and Baldwin have that in common.

knox harrington wrote:

In both cases, the actors were told that the guns were harmless.

In both cases, the actors were handed functional guns that contained primer, propellant, and projectile.

In both cases, the actors inadvertently shot and killed people.

For the the purposes of judging the actors, it makes no difference whether the bullet was in the casing or slightly in front of it; the gun was lethal either way. Either it is the actors' job to determine if the gun will fire a round, or it's not.

From the perspective of the victims, it makes no difference either.

This.

phony al wrote:

[quote]knox harrington wrote:

[quote]phony al wrote:

And even if it were "beyond obvious" that needs to happen, which it is not, Baldwin didn't aim his gun at another actor - he aimed it at the photographer. Why is it "beyond obvious" that actors in movies about people who point guns at each other necessarily need to aim their guns at the photographer? Why is it "beyond obvious" that Baldwin needed to aim his gun at his photographer?

He didn't aim his gun at the photographer, he aimed it at the camera, as was probably called for in the script. But I don't get why posters are claiming the Baldwin was solely responsible where there was someone hired specifically to manage the guns and ensure that safety protocols were followed by everyone on the set. Why was live ammo even present in the first place?

Suppose you took your car into a repair shop to have the brakes replaced. The mechanic tells you the repair is complete and the car is safe to drive. On the drive home you kill a pedestrian in the cross walk because your brakes failed even though you were driving the speed limit. Is this death your fault because you didn't inspect the brakes yourself before driving the car - which is also a deadly weapon if not handled properly? Is an airline pilot at fault when someone on the ground crew neglects a critical safety inspection and the plane crashes?

One follow up on this... Posters are suggesting that the actor is responsible for checking the gun themselves. But even if they have some training they are not experts. It's a lot more likely that an actor will make a mistake about if a weapon has live ammo than a firearms expert, especially since the actor is likely to be preoccupied. It should be the armorer that designates that the gun is safe and they should be the only one to handle the firearm and pass it directly to the actor.

It is my understanding that this protocol was not followed.

What is the point of giving these guys so many rational arguments for 27 pages?

They just double down on their dumbness because it conflicts with their political view. You are reduced to finding simpler and simpler examples so that a toddler can even understand, or even a chimpanzee, but still it bounces off their skulls.

Every single thread the same

I am Sam wrote:

What is the point of giving these guys so many rational arguments for 27 pages?

They just double down on their dumbness because it conflicts with their political view. You are reduced to finding simpler and simpler examples so that a toddler can even understand, or even a chimpanzee, but still it bounces off their skulls.

Every single thread the same

If I handed you a gun, told you it was unloaded, would you check it before you put it to your own head and pulled the trigger?

I know what the smartest posters in this thread would say.

jamb innn wrote:

I am Sam wrote:

What is the point of giving these guys so many rational arguments for 27 pages?

They just double down on their dumbness because it conflicts with their political view. You are reduced to finding simpler and simpler examples so that a toddler can even understand, or even a chimpanzee, but still it bounces off their skulls.

Every single thread the same

If I handed you a gun, told you it was unloaded, would you check it before you put it to your own head and pulled the trigger?

I know what the smartest posters in this thread would say.

According to Flagpole, if whoever gives you the gun has assured you that it is "safe" then you are good to go. No reason to check the gun yourself. Just stick it to your head and fire away. You need to trust that person with your life.

Guns don't kill people.

Alec Baldwin kills people.

Alec really hates the people on the other side of the camera

https://cms.prod.nypr.digital/images/129839/fill-661x496%7Cformat-jpeg%7Cjpegquality-80/