Thread: Should movie stars be allowed to outsource personal responsibility?

From Baldwin's tweet he seems to believe that checking firearms is somebody else's job...

Getting handed a loaded gun is a unfortunate. That's happened to me and i'm sure its happened to many who have worked in the firearm industry. Customers used to courier in loaded guns every now and then. Its a dick move yes, but that's the reason we treat all guns like they're loaded. Are there separate gun laws for movie stars and for plebs in the USA?
I fail to see him as blameless here. He's had lots of training so he should know to clear the gun and not to point it directly at anyone...

It was his finger on the trigger…

There were three people at fault there.

The star for not che king it himself.
The person who passed it to him.
And the person who had it pointed at her, she should have also checked.

Nobody here seems to have ever heard of that other actor who got shot on set...

Originally Posted by T.FOYE

From Baldwin's tweet he seems to believe that checking firearms is somebody else's job...

Getting handed a loaded gun is a unfortunate. That's happened to me and i'm sure its happened to many who have worked in the firearm industry. Customers used to courier in loaded guns every now and then. Its a dick move yes, but that's the reason we treat all guns like they're loaded. Are there separate gun laws for movie stars and for plebs in the USA?
I fail to see him as blameless here. He's had lots of training so he should know to clear the gun and not to point it directly at anyone...

I get what you're saying, but the job of checking the firearm belongs literally with the set armourer. The nature of the business means firearms WILL be routinely pointed in the direction of other people, and fired. It's the armourer's job to make sure that happens safely.

Originally Posted by T.FOYE

Are there separate gun laws for movie stars and for plebs in the USA?
.

dont worry the lawyers will be feasting on this for a long time (the only winners here).....the cops will likely charge baldwin and the prop guy , months will pass copious amounts of money will change hands and eventually everyone will carry on ......except the poor woman who died and the bloke that got wounded and their families.....

It has happened previously and it will no doubt happen again. We would check thoroughly no matter which of the positions we were in but clearly there are many that would not.

Definitely the fault of the set armourer who has total responsibility for the firearms and blank ammunition on set. Actors, by and large, are nothing more than presentable monkeys who perform as the script instructs them. I have had a fair bit to do with some of them over the years while performing the duties of set armourer, and neither worldly intelligence nor common sense is the forte of many of them.

Originally Posted by gundoc

Actors, by and large, are nothing more than presentable monkeys .

i like this description........pretty well sums it up

Originally Posted by scotty

i like this description........pretty well sums it up

Nz herald is reporting 2x UD on the set before this happened. Armourer needs to be held responsible

Originally Posted by gundoc

Definitely the fault of the set armourer who has total responsibility for the firearms and blank ammunition on set. Actors, by and large, are nothing more than presentable monkeys who perform as the script instructs them. I have had a fair bit to do with some of them over the years while performing the duties of set armourer, and neither worldly intelligence nor common sense is the forte of many of them.

Totally.
BUT, everyone including the dumb bastards out there know all about 'Murphy's law' and that old saying "if it can happen, it will happen"

I reckon the armourer is rightfully going to get the whip for this. But everyone else who touched that gun or had it scripted to be pointed at them is a dam fool for not personally checking it.

Just another example of shit happening.

Poor lady. Hope it was quick.

It seems that although screen armourers take a noble approach in trying to assume total responsibility, they in fact do not.

Found on another gun forum:

Here is the Screen Actors' Guild (SAG) safety bulletins and guidelines. These are the standards crew and actors are held to on a set. There is a specific section for firearms. It has the obvious rules of gun safety and a bit more. This is the first statement of the entire document:

"AS AN ACTOR, YOU ARE ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY AND THE SAFETY Of YOUR FELLOW CAST MEMBERS. Production management and crew are responsible for creating and maintaining safe conditions, but it is your right and responsibility to double check the set up to ensure your own Safety."

Here is an excerpt from the Actor's Equity Association page on gun use on set. This association is the union for the actual actors, and Alec Baldwin is a confirmed member:

"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."

Intetesting huh. Im glad they put the these rules in place, they seem to be working great. A production team can literally walk off set 6 hours (in disgust) and the senior management claim they didnt know??? How is that possible either? How does that make them look MORE responsible in how they were overseeing things?

One would hope that despite all the layers of safety (supposedly) in play, the judge and jury focus on the trgger finger, and who it belonged to.

Could all stunt guns not be ‘pinned’ across the chamber so that only blanks can inserted - not longer live loads?

Or is that too simplistic?

I guess the Screen Actors Guild guidelines take precedence in the current case. My experience in that field is limited to NZ.

Modifying guns is generally only done in the case of semi-automatic and fully-automatic firearms to get them to function with blanks, usually by the addition of a bore restrictor to generate back pressure. Locked-breech semi-auto pistols are quite drastically modified to achieve reliable functioning. Conventional bolt, lever, pump, and revolver firearms are usually left untouched.