Is Alec Baldwin Guilty or Not of Involuntary Manslaughter

In the case of Alec Baldwin Guilty has the Jury reached a Verdict?

  • Guilty

    Votes: 8 47.1%
  • Not Guilty

    Votes: 9 52.9%

  • Total voters
    17

Russ Smith

The Original Whizzinator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
84,779
Reaction score
33,759
Impossible to answer without evidence we can't see. That said, now that I know he was one of the directors on the show, and he apparently refused to attend a gun safety course, I'm inclined to say he's probably in trouble.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
89,177
Reaction score
62,527
Impossible to answer without evidence we can't see. That said, now that I know he was one of the directors on the show, and he apparently refused to attend a gun safety course, I'm inclined to say he's probably in trouble.
this is really inexcusable. not only from a safety standpoint, but as a lead actor and producer, sets a terrible example for the rest of the crew.
 

Shane

Current STAR
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
66,451
Reaction score
32,880
Location
Las Vegas
Nobody can say… but I would lean toward guilty and nothing but a sentence of probation.
 

puckhead

Waxing Gibbous
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Posts
16,218
Reaction score
14,580
Location
Moment, AZ
Impossible to answer without evidence we can't see. That said, now that I know he was one of the directors on the show, and he apparently refused to attend a gun safety course, I'm inclined to say he's probably in trouble.

this is really inexcusable. not only from a safety standpoint, but as a lead actor and producer, sets a terrible example for the rest of the crew.

I was leaning innocent until being made aware of these details. Gun safety-ignorant actor just taking a prop that was handed to him vs. a co-producer refusing to take the safety course are two very different stories. The facts should come out so I guess we'll hear what the truth is eventually.
 

Russ Smith

The Original Whizzinator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
84,779
Reaction score
33,759
I was leaning innocent until being made aware of these details. Gun safety-ignorant actor just taking a prop that was handed to him vs. a co-producer refusing to take the safety course are two very different stories. The facts should come out so I guess we'll hear what the truth is eventually.

Slight correction to what I said. This story says he skipped a gun training session not refused gun training. But I'm not sure the difference matters, he should have been there he wasn't just an actor.

 

Russ Smith

The Original Whizzinator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
84,779
Reaction score
33,759
Slight correction to what I said. This story says he skipped a gun training session not refused gun training. But I'm not sure the difference matters, he should have been there he wasn't just an actor.


Also he's one of the producers not director, I got them confused
 

oaken1

Stone Cold
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 13, 2004
Posts
16,774
Reaction score
13,448
Location
Modesto, California
from what I heard he was told it was clear or green or whatever the code word is, meaning there is zero live ammo on the set.
If the paid professional expert on site told him the weapon was safe then I dont see him at fault.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,062
Reaction score
11,596
Anyone who has been around guns knows that you always check to see if it's loaded or not. In this case he should have checked to make sure it had blanks in it before anything else. No matter what anyone else told him. It's the number one rule when handed a gun.
He probably didn't know since he didn't take the class, lol.
 

puckhead

Waxing Gibbous
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Posts
16,218
Reaction score
14,580
Location
Moment, AZ
I'm only watching this story from the sidelines, but has anyone explained why live ammunition was anywhere near the set? Are they fending off wild animals in between setups or what?
 

Devilmaycare

Chief Brah Officer
Moderator
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Posts
6,368
Reaction score
9,001
Location
Scottsdale
I'm only watching this story from the sidelines, but has anyone explained why live ammunition was anywhere near the set? Are they fending off wild animals in between setups or what?
Allegedly the armorer was taking cast and crew members into the desert around the set and was shooting targets. Some of the live rounds from it got mixed into the blanks. If true it's a really stupid move.
 

puckhead

Waxing Gibbous
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Posts
16,218
Reaction score
14,580
Location
Moment, AZ
Allegedly the armorer was taking cast and crew members into the desert around the set and was shooting targets. Some of the live rounds from it got mixed into the blanks. If true it's a really stupid move.

Hard to screw the pooch worse than that.
 

UncleChris

Shocking, I tell you!
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2003
Posts
30,585
Reaction score
14,095
Location
Prescott, AZ
It was a tragic error and only the aromorer should be found guilty of any crime. Involuntary manslaughter is waaaaayyyyyyy over the top for whatever they might convict Baldwin of, based on the info I have.

BTW..... Do we know whether or not Baldwin has ever attended a gun safety class before?
 

Shane

Current STAR
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
66,451
Reaction score
32,880
Location
Las Vegas
It was a tragic error and only the aromorer should be found guilty of any crime. Involuntary manslaughter is waaaaayyyyyyy over the top for whatever they might convict Baldwin of, based on the info I have.

BTW..... Do we know whether or not Baldwin has ever attended a gun safety class before?
Completely and totally disagree. Anyone who handles a real functioning weapon has a duty to make sure it’s safe before handling. It’s just straight common sense. You literally NEVER should ever rely on anyone else to tell you a gun is safe. It’s complete and total negligence at many levels including his. He wasn’t born yesterday and had a history of handling weapons on movie shoots. He also apparently as. A producer and actor in the movie failed to attend a class prior to shooting the film(more negligence)…
 
OP
OP
SissyBoyFloyd

SissyBoyFloyd

Pawnee, Skidi Clan
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Posts
5,077
Reaction score
2,384
Location
Mesa, AZ
Completely and totally disagree. Anyone who handles a real functioning weapon has a duty to make sure it’s safe before handling. It’s just straight common sense. You literally NEVER should ever rely on anyone else to tell you a gun is safe. It’s complete and total negligence at many levels including his. He wasn’t born yesterday and had a history of handling weapons on movie shoots. He also apparently as. A producer and actor in the movie failed to attend a class prior to shooting the film(more negligence)…
I disagree with your disagreement. I do agree with your general gun safety rules in general. However, in many arenas, like a movie set, the lay person is not expected to know or be a good judge if something is safe or not. That is why the movie industry has 2 people responsible for gun safety and procedure on the set. They have 2 people responsible, not just one, who are supposed to make sure everything is safe, gun wise.

Just like an actor in a fast car scene or falling off or over any tall obstacle relies on the stunt coordinators to set things up to be safe. They are in character and should be mentally free to walk on the set and perform their scene, knowing all is set up and done completely, safely, and properly.

The actor has a lot on his mind, could not stay in character, and should not have to be concerned with such an important thing as that. Professionals rely on other professionals to do their job correctly, not do it for them. Alex was the actor, his job was to be mentally absorbed in character for that scene.
 

Shane

Current STAR
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
66,451
Reaction score
32,880
Location
Las Vegas
I disagree with your disagreement. I do agree with your general gun safety rules in general. However, in many arenas, like a movie set, the lay person is not expected to know or be a good judge if something is safe or not. That is why the movie industry has 2 people responsible for gun safety and procedure on the set. They have 2 people responsible, not just one, who are supposed to make sure everything is safe, gun wise.

Just like an actor in a fast car scene or falling off or over any tall obstacle relies on the stunt coordinators to set things up to be safe. They are in character and should be mentally free to walk on the set and perform their scene, knowing all is set up and done completely, safely, and properly.

The actor has a lot on his mind, could not stay in character, and should not have to be concerned with such an important thing as that. Professionals rely on other professionals to do their job correctly, not do it for them. Alex was the actor, his job was to be mentally absorbed in character for that scene.
Ya no. When it comes to handling real guns safety cannot be compromised ever and ignorance isn’t an excuse. It’s not an excuse ever when people lives at stake. This isn’t the first Hollywood accidental shooting the potential is always there. There is no excuse. Do freaking better.

Even as a law enforcement officer on the range during training you have to check it yourself and have a buddy check your firearm before you do dry fire drills. Often times the range staff will check again. And we’re the supposed “experts”

Just no….
 

Devilmaycare

Chief Brah Officer
Moderator
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Posts
6,368
Reaction score
9,001
Location
Scottsdale
I disagree with your disagreement. I do agree with your general gun safety rules in general. However, in many arenas, like a movie set, the lay person is not expected to know or be a good judge if something is safe or not. That is why the movie industry has 2 people responsible for gun safety and procedure on the set. They have 2 people responsible, not just one, who are supposed to make sure everything is safe, gun wise.

Just like an actor in a fast car scene or falling off or over any tall obstacle relies on the stunt coordinators to set things up to be safe. They are in character and should be mentally free to walk on the set and perform their scene, knowing all is set up and done completely, safely, and properly.

The actor has a lot on his mind, could not stay in character, and should not have to be concerned with such an important thing as that. Professionals rely on other professionals to do their job correctly, not do it for them. Alex was the actor, his job was to be mentally absorbed in character for that scene.
No excuses for the actor. It doesn't matter if he has a lot on his mind. We all do. That doesn't excuse not handling a weapon correctly, for anyone. "They're a lay person" holds no water either. Part of their job is learning to be the person they're playing. That includes proper handling of of guns if your roll calls for using one. I'd be shocked if we saw someone like Keanu or Cruise in a situation like this thanks to the roll prep they do. They're not skipping the training like Alec did.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
113,392
Reaction score
53,061
A few thoughts. Always handle a gun as if it is loaded and never point it at anything that you don't want to shoot.

Guns loaded with blanks can and have killed people. It is not always easy to distinguish a blank from a live round because they are often meant to look real. Supposedly they have a different feel or sound about them and perhaps have other distinguishing characteristics but they do not all look the same.

I guess if I were an actor I'd try not to point a gun loaded with blanks at another person unless totally necessary and even then I would want it double-checked. Even so, I would aim to miss.

Lastly, I wish the Alec Baldwin case wasn't handled as a criminal matter. I can't help but wonder why the armorer is not on trial as well but maybe that has already been covered. I haven't followed the case closely.
 

Devilmaycare

Chief Brah Officer
Moderator
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Posts
6,368
Reaction score
9,001
Location
Scottsdale
Lastly, I wish the Alec Baldwin case wasn't handled as a criminal matter. I can't help but wonder why the armorer is not on trial as well but maybe that has already been covered. I haven't followed the case closely.
Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, the armorer, was charged. Both her and Alec got charged with 2 counts of involuntary manslaughter. Assistant director David Halls also signed a plea agreement for the charge of negligent use of a deadly weapon
 

puckhead

Waxing Gibbous
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Posts
16,218
Reaction score
14,580
Location
Moment, AZ
Can we all agree there is zero reason to keep a real working gun or real ammo anywhere near a movie set that isn't security related? The fact that similar incidents have occurred and companies are still engaging in this practice is asinine.

Now, if Keanu or whomever wants to go train so they look like they know what they're doing on the set, have at it. In a professionally monitored and controlled environment where everyone is crystal clear on the status of weapons.

There isn't a single production that needs the 'realism' of an operational weapon on the set. The first time this happened should have absolutely been the last.
 

jf-08

Guy Smiley
Administrator
Super Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
26,107
Reaction score
20,348
Location
Eye in the Sky
Can we all agree there is zero reason to keep a real working gun or real ammo anywhere near a movie set that isn't security related? The fact that similar incidents have occurred and companies are still engaging in this practice is asinine.

Now, if Keanu or whomever wants to go train so they look like they know what they're doing on the set, have at it. In a professionally monitored and controlled environment where everyone is crystal clear on the status of weapons.

There isn't a single production that needs the 'realism' of an operational weapon on the set. The first time this happened should have absolutely been the last.
Makes so much sense.
 
Top