Alec Baldwin's 'prop firearm' kills one, injures another

Cuckoman · Oct 31, 2021

Menotaur said:
Check out your avatar before thinking I'm a faggot.

I think it is hilarious I get called dense and I think there are about 2-3 other people on this entire forum that have actually read every court doc related to the Stolen elections, Sidney Powell, Derek, Mike Lindell which is why projections on results in all these matters has been fairly straight forward.

But to you Einsteins, it all boils down to what you think that day and who you hate. You guys can't predict the outcome of a Donut eating competition because you guys can't or don't read.

But hey, keep the dream on Baldwin being jailed alive. I understand since Trump got trashed in the elections you've got a hard-on for anyone who disrespected your orange Religious Leader.

And trust me, I'm gonna be a fucking dildo in your ass as I get to watch Balwdin walk free as a fucking bird and watch you chumps whine like the little faggots you actually are.

You are any fucking entertainment, and you don't dis

Menotaur said:
I think it is rather odd we haven't had a case laid out before the public at this point in time. Some odd things have certainly surfaced about the rounds in the gun. While the news is ambiguous to say the least, if I am reading into it right there is a train of thought that there was a single live round mixed in with the others. Which would mean the live round was loaded into the chamber to be the first to go off before the others.

What if the Armourer - for a moment - we assume is telling the truth and she swears on her life she loaded safe rounds? And the Assistant Producer was being a dick and just passed it off the Baldwin (either way this is true for the Assistant Producer)?

Is it possible a disgruntled crew member loaded a live round to get back at the company?

I'd normally throw this sort of an idea into the realms of fantasy, but given what happened at the set that day, are we looking at something more disturbing?

Of course the armourer would claim they loaded all safe rounds, but the fact that it appears just one was live is very strange. However, there is also a report from someone else that states the Armourer actually took the gun away and removed all the casings from the gun.

I can't wait for the investigation to tell us what actually happened. There is so much speculation.

It is not odd at all. All the people involved are semi-sane and listen to their lawyers.

You only think it is odd that they forgo the court of twitter because you are even more faggotnigger than Ryu<number>
You are terminally online and you are tarded, that is why you think it is odd that they don't do the lawsuit on twitter.
Faggot.

I will spell it out to you. The reason you think it is odd that they don't do the courtcase via tweets is becacuse you are a fucking mongoloid.

SITHRAK! · Oct 31, 2021

Menotaur said:
Or, maybe she is telling the truth and did believe she loaded safe rounds.

In that case she's fucked, as even though the weapon should have been empty, there was at least one round with an intact primer and an undrilled case.

MadStan · Oct 31, 2021

Cuckoman said:
It is not odd at all. All the people involved are semi-sane and listen to their lawyers.

You only think it is odd that they forgo the court of twitter because you are even more faggotnigger than Ryu<number>
You are terminally online and you are tarded, that is why you think it is odd that they don't do the lawsuit on twitter.
Faggot.

Do you have anything to add to your diatribe of worthless content?

This thread is at 70 pages because most are interested in what happened rather than what should have happened.

Generally the police or DA generally outline for the public concepts of an incident the broad strokes that has garnished attention - often even before charges are leveled. What appears to be a simple case of protocols being ignored is from reports and statements looking to be more complex than merely saying "so and so" didn't follow protocols.

As with all serious incidents whether that be a chemical plant blowing up, an industrial accident or air accident or even accidental killing of a civilian by police, there is usually a confluence of factors that bring about the event. I think most on here are interested in the nuts and bolts of it.

Try and add a speculation that is interesting; or offer up something other than "so and so" should be jailed and instead get into the nuts and bolts of it - if your feeble mind is capable fo such. It doesn't take a fucking Einstein to know what should have happened, but it will take more than that to figure out what happened. She isn't dead because protocols were not followed anymore than 300 dead bodies are on the ground from a pilot error. It is a simpleton approach to blame lack of protocols, and it doesn't explain why on this set on this day she died. These protocols could have been lax a thousand times on a thousand sets and not resulted in death, so to investigators they need to understand exactly what happened this time to cause death.

Try and flex that blob in your head a little more and get it working, others on this thread - even if I disagree with them - are at least adding something to the conversation other than childish shit like you with simpleton thinking.

Cuckoman · Oct 31, 2021

Menotaur said:
Generally the police or DA generally outline for the public concepts of an incident the broad strokes that has garnished attention - often even before charges are leveled. What appears to be a simple case of protocols being ignored is from reports and statements looking to be more complex than merely saying "so and so" didn't follow protocols.

No, they fucking don't.
It is an active investigation and very likely courtcase with criminal charges.

No, they don't do this menopause tard "so and so didn't follow protocols" or any fucking statements like that on twitter. That is saved for the actual courtcase, in front of a judge.

Fucking tard.

SITHRAK! · Oct 31, 2021

Menotaur said:
She isn't dead because protocols were not followed

…
…
WHAT?
That’s EXACTLY why she’s dead, you fucking simpleton.
Here’s a list of protocols violated on the Rust set, that apply on EVERY SET OF EVERY FILM MADE IN CA:
No live ammo on set.
No issuing weapons with ammo loaded, including dummies or blanks.
Nobody to be issued a weapon without it being cleared before handover.
Nobody to accept a ‘cleared’ weapon without cross checking on receipt.
No using loaded weapons to rehearse scenes.
When loading a weapon immediately before filming, check each round to verify whether they are blanks or inert.
No aiming weapons at other people under any circumstances, ever.

If even one or two of these rules had been followed instead of ignored, we wouldn’t have this fucking thread in the first place.

You clearly, CLEARLY know nothing about firearms or firearm safety. Why you keep posting here as if you do is a mystery to me, and I’m sure I’m not alone in that.

MadStan · Oct 31, 2021

No.

You've missed the point entirely. Which is why you think the Actor should be held accountable.

Safety protocols are there to prevent an accident. But seldom are safety protocols followed to the letter. The investigators can not establish her cause of death is simply because "safety protocols were not followed", that is a reason why she is dead but not the cause. It is insufficient.

A 100 times in a factory a machine is altered to fit a more smooth running operation - let's take a stamping machine as an example that requires two hands to activate to avoid an arm getting in the machine. Most factories deactivate these so the machine operator can use one hand to grab the material while the other keeps the machine active. But seldom do arms get lost. it speeds up an operation.

Sure, one can say when a guy loses an arm that "safety protocols were not followed" but thousands of people used these machines without incident for decades prior to the machines being altered to require 2-hand activation. So would the protocol prevent the factory from having just one person using the machine and another feeding it? No it would not, but it would prevent it most of the time. If an incident happens they investigate why it happened on that instance because obviously there was an exceptional set of circumstances that happened that made that stamping incident different from all others. It can still happen with just one operator too.

As an example, why have 2 people check the guns? Surely one person is enough - it is either OK or not OK, the gun is good or it is not, so why have 2 people do it? Hell, why not lets have 5 do it? It is a protocol to calculate in redundancy. And that is all. It is not a guarantee as to any accident not happening.

Before we decide this was even an accident, we have to PROVE it was an accident. How did the live round get in there? Did the Armourer put it in there or did another employee?

How do you know the live round wasn't made to look like a blank? You do not. How do you know someone else didnt put it in there? You do not.

But yet you are willing to dismiss the whole thing and say "If protocols were followed it NEVER would have happened" and this is utterly false. Because guess what? The protocols were followed and a death did happen. How the protocols were used is subject to circumstance. We can blame the Assistant Director, but how the fuck did the Armourer miss it? These questions have to be answered.

So first we have to establish that an accident even happened. So when I say simpleton, I mean it - you are not thinking outside the square. Even for a murder case it is never black and white - you have to PROVE a murder and not a death took place.

With this incident, they first have to prove there was even an accident and not a homicide, and then they have to prove how the accident happened, and then from there establish if there was negligence.

Gun safety is one thing, but with anything that has the capacity to kill, there will always be a "what if". It is not enough to say the protocols if followed would have prevented death because the idea of 100% safety is never a guarantee.

Brandon Lee was killed not from a live round but a piece of shrapnel in the barrel - so spare me the 100% full proof "could never happen" routine. I agree that if the rules you laid out were followed she would not be dead, but so what? I can make a million rules that prevent all car deaths, but do you really want to go 10MPH for the rest of your life?

If you can't explain how an accident or death happened then you can't find a responsible party. Your banging away about safety protocols does not explain how this incident happened. It only explains how it could not have happened and that is not the same thing.

SITHRAK! said:
…
…
WHAT?
That’s EXACTLY why she’s dead, you fucking simpleton.
Here’s a list of protocols violated on the Rust set, that apply on EVERY SET OF EVERY FILM MADE IN CA:
No live ammo on set.
No issuing weapons with ammo loaded, including dummies or blanks.
Nobody to be issued a weapon without it being cleared before handover.
Nobody to accept a ‘cleared’ weapon without cross checking on receipt.
No using loaded weapons to rehearse scenes.
When loading a weapon immediately before filming, check each round to verify whether they are blanks or inert.
No aiming weapons at other people under any circumstances, ever.

If even one or two of these rules had been followed instead of ignored, we wouldn’t have this fucking thread in the first place.

You clearly, CLEARLY know nothing about firearms or firearm safety. Why you keep posting here as if you do is a mystery to me, and I’m sure I’m not alone in that.

Standardized Profile · Oct 31, 2021

Some guy on Powerline (archive) speculates the final, fatal sequence of events occurred thusly:

The actor, as reported, was sitting in the pew of the church, practicing. He was trying mightily to get the draw-cock rhythm down and that was his focus, though dangerously adding the element of speed. It never occurred to him that the gun was loaded. (Rule No. 1: All guns are always loaded.) He was unaware that his muzzle had drifted onto the camera crew where Ms. Hutchins and director Joel Souza were crouched. (Rule No. 2: Never let your muzzle cover anything you aren’t willing to destroy.)

In practicing the draw-while-cocking integration, his index finger had wandered onto the trigger, depressing it just far enough to bypass the cocking function. (Rule No. 3: Don’t touch the trigger until you’re ready to shoot.) Struggling awkwardly, he released the hammer under the impression he had cocked the pistol. He hadn’t. The hammer flew forward. The gun fired. (Rule No. 4: Always know what your target is.) It is quite possible that absent knowledge of these mechanics, he still believes the gun fired on its own, out of some defect. The defect was his.

After repeated firing, the index finger sometimes anticipates its role and finds its way into the trigger guard accidentally. It takes training and presence of mind to prevent that. The actor was missing one or both.

DrunkJoe · Oct 31, 2021

If you point a gun and pull the trigger your responsible for the outcome. God your a dense faggot Menotaur. It doesnt matter what some one says about it being cold or what ever it is your fucking responsibility to check and if you don't know the difference between live roinds and blanks you shouldnt be handling it.

Pocket Dragoon · Oct 31, 2021

@Menotaur
And you were doing so well there for a minute....
@Cuckoman
You just sound like Menotaur arguing with himself. Fuck off with that shit.

In practicing the draw-while-cocking integration, his index finger had wandered onto the trigger, depressing it just far enough to bypass the cocking function. (Rule No. 3: Don’t touch the trigger until you’re ready to shoot.) Struggling awkwardly, he released the hammer under the impression he had cocked the pistol. He hadn’t. The hammer flew forward. The gun fired. (Rule No. 4: Always know what your target is.) It is quite possible that absent knowledge of these mechanics, he still believes the gun fired on its own, out of some defect. The defect was his.

I get what he's saying (and technically is possible); but not intending to dry-fire is a lot like using just the tip, just to see how it feels. One doesn't learn anything (especially muscle memory) by only going halfway, and only dumb cunts believe those who say they intend otherwise.

East_Clintwood · Oct 31, 2021

Product Placement said:
The whole production set became unsafe due to various factors, including lack of safety meetings. This was not the fault of Hannah.

Bitch it was your fault. The entire point of your job is safety. If you raise concerns about it, which are ignored you are both morally, and probably legally, required to fucking quit and/or raise your issues with the relevant authorities. Continuing with an action you know to be unsafe makes you just as fucking culpable for the result you cunt.

Menotaur said:
Is it possible a disgruntled crew member loaded a live round to get back at the company?

Possible, theoretically. Likely, no. Even if someone did that it still should have been caught before a shooting. Given the blatantly unqualified staff and the multiple allegations of unsafe working conditions it's probably best to remember Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity.

whoishomermynameis · Oct 31, 2021

Product Placement said:

MadStan · Oct 31, 2021

DrunkJoe said:
If you point a gun and pull the trigger your responsible for the outcome. God your a dense faggot Menotaur. It doesnt matter what some one says about it being cold or what ever it is your fucking responsibility to check and if you don't know the difference between live roinds and blanks you shouldnt be handling it.

No, you are not responsible.

That is the entire point of why the actor will not be charged. He is not responsible. The reason why he is not responsible is what you need to understand and comes to terms with.

I guess if you sit on a chair with a needle sticking out that gives you a disease we can say you are responsible for your own infection for failing to take the elementary step of checking the chair - unless of course we hired 2 people to check the chair before you sat down, you might think in some crazy world that they might be responsible.

I would never ask an Actor to be an expert on firearms. They are just actors. ACTORS. I would not expect a need to send them for training on live rounds or blanks and expect them to keep up with every manufacturers production of blanks or otherwise to know the difference form maker to maker, set to set, know every gun type and how they work. Should we ask the cast of Star Trek to know how to operate an electrical console in a movie that might electrocute them?

But I would instead pay hired people - 2 in fact - to take that responsibility for the actors. Just the same as I would not ask an Actor to check a power point and demand he become an electrician. Or a car used on a set, open up it's hood and take it to Muffler City to absolutely verify before driving it or to become a mechanic, that it was indeed safe. Instead we hire people to do these jobs for safety reasons. A machine operator at a factory is usually a pretty unskilled guy, didn't finish top of his class, but I would not demand that they know or understand a complex piece of machinery and know and attest it is safe prior to operation - but I would hire factory staff that go around and test and know the machines are safe to use.

Do you check the gas lines before you turn on the stove every you go to use it? No? Well where is your safety?? When was the last time you opened up your power outlets to ensure there were no frayed wires? Or would you hire an electrician to do it? And would you even if you got an electrician to do it, claim you had to inspect it yourself to be certain?

No DA in any state is going to find the Actor guilty or liable. If you can not understand why or think it's political, then you've been gobsmacked by your own ignorance.

The Actor could have checked the gun. There is no reason to believe he would not have made the same exact mistake that the Armourer did and that the Assistant Producer did. Assuming we even know what that exact mistake was. But the Actor wasn't being paid to be an expert, but the other 2 were.

No actor in Baldwin's shoes would or should face charges.

If a 7 year old kid picks up a gun and dad says it is empty and points it at dad and it goes off, I guess in your world you could charge the kid with murder. But only in your world of black and white which doesn't work in the real world or in a court room.

RodgerDodger · Oct 31, 2021

Menotaur said:
I think it is rather odd we haven't had a case laid out before the public at this point in time. Some odd things have certainly surfaced about the rounds in the gun. While the news is ambiguous to say the least, if I am reading into it right there is a train of thought that there was a single live round mixed in with the others. Which would mean the live round was loaded into the chamber to be the first to go off before the others.

What if the Armourer - for a moment - we assume is telling the truth and she swears on her life she loaded safe rounds? And the Assistant Producer was being a dick and just passed it off the Baldwin (either way this is true for the Assistant Producer)?

Is it possible a disgruntled crew member loaded a live round to get back at the company?

I'd normally throw this sort of an idea into the realms of fantasy, but given what happened at the set that day, are we looking at something more disturbing?

Of course the armourer would claim they loaded all safe rounds, but the fact that it appears just one was live is very strange. However, there is also a report from someone else that states the Armourer actually took the gun away and removed all the casings from the gun.

I can't wait for the investigation to tell us what actually happened. There is so much speculation.

You think it is odd because you are an idiot who has no idea what he is looking at or talking about. Law Enforcement said the investigation will take at least a month or two. This is normal. There is no benefit to speed here.

Pocket Dragoon · Oct 31, 2021

Menotaur said:
No, you are not responsible.

That is the entire point of why the actor will not be charged. He is not responsible. The reason why he is not responsible is what you need to understand and comes to terms with.

I guess if you sit on a chair with a needle sticking out that gives you a disease we can say you are responsible for your own infection for failing to take the elementary step of checking the chair - unless of course we hired 2 people to check the chair before you sat down, you might think in some crazy world that they might be responsible.

I would never ask an Actor to be an expert on firearms. They are just actors. ACTORS. I would not expect a need to send them for training on live rounds or blanks and expect them to keep up with every manufacturers production of blanks or otherwise to know the difference form maker to maker, set to set, know every gun type and how they work. Should we ask the cast of Star Trek to know how to operate an electrical console in a movie that might electrocute them?

I take it back; you're just a broken clock.

Checking the status of a firearm doesn't take an expert you fucking mong. It's not like unlocking a goddamn missile silo, needing three people to do it; yet the industry still has at least as many failsafe measures, doing the same thing. But your boy Baldwin & Co literally ignored them, which ≠ accidentally forgot.

MadStan · Oct 31, 2021

Pocket Dragoon said:
I take it back; you're just a broken clock.

Checking the status of a firearm doesn't take an expert you fucking mong. It's not like unlocking a goddamn missile silo, needing three people to do it; yet the industry still has at least as many failsafe measures, doing the same thing. But your boy Baldwin & Co literally ignored them, which ≠ accidentally forgot.

I guess we will have to disagree. Clearly, checking the firearm does take an expert.

Expert 1 (the Armourer) got it wrong.
Expert 2 (the Assistant Director) got it wrong.

If an Expert can look at a round that is not live and get it wrong - and the next expert also gets it wrong, then asking the Actor to have more sense than the 2 actual experts is a real stretch.

Good luck with your point of view. I guess the lack of charges for Negligent Homicide against the Actor we will just have to chalk up to being a really good looking actor with incredible influence and money. It's the only explanation.

DrunkJoe · Oct 31, 2021

Pocket Dragoon said:
I take it back; you're just a broken clock.

Checking the status of a firearm doesn't take an expert you fucking mong. It's not like unlocking a goddamn missile silo, needing three people to do it; yet the industry still has at least as many failsafe measures, doing the same thing. But your boy Baldwin & Co literally ignored them, which ≠ accidentally forgot.

No shit. Baldwin is a raging anti gun fag that preaches common sense gun control yet he can't do common sense gun safety.

PFM · Oct 31, 2021

Menotaur said:
I guess we will have to disagree. Clearly, checking the firearm does take an expert.

Two idiot didn't do their job so you conclude it takes an expert to spot live rounds? I try to assume you're just being a contrarian faggot but I don't know anymore

Still Anonymous For This · Oct 31, 2021

Obviously if you point a gun at someone and pull the trigger, you're responsible for the repercussions.

The real question is if you work up @Menotaur into a tard rage over this, are you all responsible for his next heart attack?

Edit: I am not an expert at telling the difference between a dummy round, a blank, and a live round. But I bet if you spent five minutes a day showing me pictures of all three and stressing the life and death differences of all three, I could probably figure that shit out.

I'm also not a dumb Hollywood faggot, so I am ahead of the curve here.

Reporterward · Oct 31, 2021

BBChannel said:
Sure. There were unintelligible parts and the clip does a sudden cut to repeat itself. I snipped the repeat text out at "sudden cut".

Alec: Let's go--let's go.

Interviewer: I will

Alec: What do you want to know?

Interviewer: Hey Alec, what's the current state of what's going on the case--

Alec: I'm not allowed to make any comments because this is an on-going investigation. I've been ordered by the Sheriff's Department in Santa Fe. I can't answer any questions about the investigation; I can't. It's an active investigation in terms of a woman dying. She was my friend! She was my friend. The day I arrived in Santa Fe to start shooting, I took her to dinner with Joel the director. We were a very very--excuse me. We were a very very, you know well-oiled crew, shooting a film together and then this horrible event happened. Now, I've been told multiple times, "Don't make any comments about the on-going investigation", and I can't! I can't I can't. That's it.

Interviewer: When you met--

Alec: Wha-

Interviewer: Sorry.

Alec: What other questions do you have for me?

Interviewer: Have you met with the--um--um-sorry I forget her name at the moment. Have you met with her family?

Alec and his wife: Halyna

Alec: Halyna Hutc--
Wife: Her name is Halyna! If you're spending this much time waiting for us, you should know her name--

Alec: --You don't know her name.

Wife: her name is Halyna

Alec: Halyna Hutchins, I met with her husband Mathew and her son, yeah, that's right.

Interviewer: And how did that make you feel?

Alec: Uhhh, I wouldn't know how to characterize it. The-They-They're mortified--

Wife: You guys, you guys, you know what--no details.

Alec: Wo-Would you do me a favor? I'm gonna ask some questions.

Interviewer: While I appreciate it that he probably was very upset.

Alec: The-the-the guy is overwhelmed with grief. This is something that, you know, there are incidental accidents, uhh on film sets, um from time to time; but nothing like this. This is a one in a trillion episode. It's a one in a trillion death. And so, he is in shock; has a nine-year-old son; you know we are in constant contact with him, because we're very worried about his family. And uhh his kid, and uhh. That said, we're eagerly awaiting for the Sheriff's Department to tell us what the investigation has yielded. What else do you know?

Interviewer: Would you ever work on another film set that involves uhh firearms of that nature?

Alec: I couldn't answer that question. I really--I really dont have any--I have no sense of it all. I do know that an on-going effort to limit the use of firearms in--on film sets is something I'm extremely interested in--yeah but--where you--but remember. Something that I think is important, that is, how many bullets have been fired in films and tv shows in the last 75 years? This is America. How many bullets have gone off? in movies--[Sudden CUT]--and on tv sets before. Probably billions. And in less than 75 years and nearly, all of them without incident. So, what has to happen that was. You have to realize that when it does go wrong and if this horrible catastrophic thing. Some new measures have to take place. Rubber guns, plastic guns, no live--no real[unintelligible] that's not for me to decide. It's urgent. It's urgent that you understand that I'm not an expert in this field. So, whatever other people decide is the best way to go in terms of protecting people's safety on film sets. I'm all in favor of and I will cooperate with that in any way I can.

Interviewer: Do you have any further projects? Any other works at the moment or is everything on hold--

Alec: No no. That's irrelevant to what we're talking about.

Interviewer: alright, fair enough.
Do you think production will start up again?

Alec: no, I doubt it. [unintelligible] Was there anything else?

Interviewer: Why Vermont, Alex--

Wife&Alec: because we--just that's private
Alec: No no, that's because--yeah that's private. Anything else?

Interviewer: okay.

Alec: So just do me a favor if you don't mind. My kids are in the car, crying.

Wife: because you guys are following and they know.

Alec: All we want to do, as a courtesy to you, I came to talk to you. Look, I'm not allowed to comment on the investigation. I talk to the cops every day. I'm with them every day to find out what hap--

Interviewer: with or you were?

Alec: both both. you know I'm cooperating with them. My point is that. Is that I'm just asking. We sat down as a courtesy to have a talk to you. Now please would you just stop following us for the rest of--

Wife: just just go home

Alec: we gave you everything we could possibly give you

Wife: just go home.

Interviewer: thank you. condolences and thank you

Wife: just turn it off.

The “journalist” isn’t even professional enough to know the victim’s name.
What an astounding glimpse at the state of corporate media.

murdered meat bag · Oct 31, 2021

has he been charged with manslaughter yet?

Alec Baldwin's 'prop firearm' kills one, injures another

Sheriff's office: Alec Baldwin discharged prop gun that killed crew member, wounded director

Cuckoman

Xoogler

SITHRAK!

“…an alt-right villain.” RIP @Arm Pit Cream

MadStan

Cuckoman

Xoogler

SITHRAK!

“…an alt-right villain.” RIP @Arm Pit Cream

MadStan

Standardized Profile

DrunkJoe

Pocket Dragoon

Инициатива трахает инициатора

East_Clintwood

whoishomermynameis

MadStan

RodgerDodger

Pocket Dragoon

Инициатива трахает инициатора

MadStan

DrunkJoe

PFM

resting meanie face

Still Anonymous For This

I've never even been to Vienna.

Reporterward

murdered meat bag