# Alec Baldwin Will Likely Be Charged



## win231 (Aug 14, 2022)

FBI testing of the gun used in the fatal shooting on the movie set of "Rust" found that the weapon handled by actor Alec Baldwin could not be fired without pulling the trigger while the gun was cocked, according to a newly released forensics report.
Baldwin had the gun while rehearsing a scene of the Western film at the Bonanza Creek Ranch in New Mexico in October when a shot fired, killing cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and injuring director Joel Souza.
In December, Baldwin told ABC News he never pulled the trigger of the gun that shot Hutchins. "The trigger wasn't pulled. I didn't pull the trigger," Baldwin said.

People lie.  Guns don't.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/14/entertainment/rust-shooting-gun-trigger/index.html


----------



## Jace (Aug 14, 2022)

And..._have it *go  *__*nowhere!  *_


----------



## GAlady (Aug 14, 2022)

I think he has known from Day 1 that he was going to be charged.


----------



## Lavinia (Aug 14, 2022)

Hopefully lessons will be learned.


----------



## terry123 (Aug 14, 2022)

GAlady said:


> I think he has known from Day 1 that he was going to be charged.


I agree.


----------



## MarciKS (Aug 14, 2022)

i can totally see it if he accidentally shot someone but i've never seen a gun go off without the trigger being pulled. do they make guns that go off by themselves?


----------



## Alligatorob (Aug 14, 2022)

Hopefully some kind of justice is done.  At a minimum he is guilty of gross negligence, he needs to pay the price.  

Can't think of a better example to set.  It should make guns and gun handlers a bit safer.


----------



## hollydolly (Aug 14, 2022)

Lavinia said:


> Hopefully lessons will be learned.


never... cuz they never are...


----------



## hollydolly (Aug 14, 2022)

Alligatorob said:


> Hopefully some kind of justice is done.  At a minimum he is guilty of gross negligence, he needs to pay the price.
> 
> Can't think of a better example to set.  It should make guns and gun handlers a bit safer.


it won't... According to an estimate by the Associated Press (AP), there have been 43 fatalities on American film sets since 1990, with another 150 actors or crew members left with life-altering injuries as a result of accidents, often the result of botched stunts staged on location.

No lessons have EVER been learned


----------



## Murrmurr (Aug 14, 2022)

hollydolly said:


> it won't... According to an estimate by the Associated Press (AP), there have been 43 fatalities on American film sets since 1990, with another 150 actors or crew members left with life-altering injuries as a result of accidents, often the result of botched stunts staged on location.
> 
> No lessons have EVER been learned


They have, though. "Hollywood" stunts have to pass safety inspections every little step of the way before and after a stunt is performed. They used to not even use harnesses. Post production crews hated them (still do), and some stuntmen didn't like them, but now they have to use harnesses, like it or not. Explosions used to be exactly that; some TNT or C-4, a detonator, and a big boom. Now they're mostly CGI.

Stunts still cause injuries, and like in this case, sometimes death. Stuntmen are very well paid, and they're aware of the risks. In Baldwin's case, though, there should not have been any type of projectile in that gun. That should never have happened. He's not at fault for that...well, unless he didn't like her, or whatever, and paid someone to put a live round in it. Movie weapons are supposed to be inspected by 2 or 3 different people before they're handed to an actor. Clearly, the last person to check it before handing it to Baldwin is at fault.


----------



## hollydolly (Aug 14, 2022)

Murrmurr said:


> They have, though. "Hollywood" stunts have to pass safety inspections every little step of the way before and after a stunt is performed. They used to not even use harnesses. Post production crews hated them (still do), and some stuntmen didn't like them, but now they have to use harnesses, like it or not. Explosions used to be exactly that; some TNT or C-4, a detonator, and a big boom. Now they're mostly CGI.
> 
> Stunts still cause injuries, and like in this case, sometimes death. Stuntmen are very well paid, and they're aware of the risks. In Baldwin's case, though, there should not have been any type of projectile in that gun. That should never have happened. He's not at fault for that...well, unless he didn't like her, or whatever, and paid someone to put a live round in it. Movie weapons are supposed to be inspected by 2 or 3 different people before they're handed to an actor. Clearly, the last person to check it before handing it to Baldwin is at fault.


Frank you don't have to tell me.. a person who has worked in TV & Film.. and whose husband still does.. anything at all about Rules and Regs, regarding stuntmen.. really!! My point is that despite all that's happened , it's STILL happening...  and it will continue to happen..


----------



## Murrmurr (Aug 14, 2022)

hollydolly said:


> Frank you don't have to tell me.. a person who has worked in TV & Film.. and whose husband still does.. anything at all about Rules and Regs, regarding stuntmen.. really!! My point is that despite all that's happened , it's STILL happening...  and it will continue to happen..


Something in common (sort of)! I moved vehicles for a few film studios one summer. I got to go to a lot of shooting locations. It was a lot of fun! Ooo! I moved vehicles for the downtown LA filming of the first Spiderman movie.


----------



## win231 (Aug 14, 2022)

Murrmurr said:


> They have, though. "Hollywood" stunts have to pass safety inspections every little step of the way before and after a stunt is performed. They used to not even use harnesses. Post production crews hated them (still do), and some stuntmen didn't like them, but now they have to use harnesses, like it or not. Explosions used to be exactly that; some TNT or C-4, a detonator, and a big boom. Now they're mostly CGI.
> 
> Stunts still cause injuries, and like in this case, sometimes death. Stuntmen are very well paid, and they're aware of the risks. In Baldwin's case, though, there should not have been any type of projectile in that gun. That should never have happened. He's not at fault for that...well, unless he didn't like her, or whatever, and paid someone to put a live round in it. Movie weapons are supposed to be inspected by 2 or 3 different people before they're handed to an actor. Clearly, the last person to check it before handing it to Baldwin is at fault.


Except for that one elementary rule:  _"Never point a gun at anything you aren't willing to destroy."_
Baldwin not only pointed the gun at her, he cocked it & pulled the trigger.


----------



## FastTrax (Aug 14, 2022)

Murrmurr said:


> Something in common (sort of)! I moved vehicles for a few film studios one summer. I got to go to a lot of shooting locations. It was a lot of fun! Ooo! I moved vehicles for the downtown LA filming of the first Spiderman movie.



I would have paid the production company to move the getaway car in Heat.


----------



## Murrmurr (Aug 15, 2022)

win231 said:


> Except for that one elementary rule:  _"Never point a gun at anything you aren't willing to destroy."_
> Baldwin not only pointed the gun at her, he cocked it & pulled the trigger.


True, but for all intents and purposes that gun was a toy. Sure it went bang, made smoke, and probably kicked a bit, but as far as Baldwin knew it was just a prop. Someone was responsible for ensuring it was nothing more than that, and that someone wasn't Baldwin.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Alec Baldwin. He strikes me as an unscrupulous narcissist. But he's an actor. Narcissism is a job requirement, and a lack of scruples practically guarantees an actor's success.


----------



## Alligatorob (Aug 15, 2022)

win231 said:


> Except for that one elementary rule: _"Never point a gun at anything you aren't willing to destroy."_
> Baldwin not only pointed the gun at her, he cocked it & pulled the trigger.


Absolutely, Baldwin may not be the only one at fault, but he certainly was.


----------



## hollydolly (Aug 15, 2022)

Murrmurr said:


> True, but for all intents and purposes that gun was a toy. Sure it went bang, made smoke, and probably kicked a bit, but as far as Baldwin knew it was just a prop. Someone was responsible for ensuring it was nothing more than that, and that someone wasn't Baldwin.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Alec Baldwin. He strikes me as an unscrupulous narcissist. But he's an actor. Narcissism is a job requirement, and a lack of scruples practically guarantees an actor's success.


yep... that's true in part, but no seasoned actor would ever point a gun and pull the trigger at  anyone, even knowing it was a prop .. before ensuring that the gun was not loaded..


----------



## Alligatorob (Aug 15, 2022)

Murrmurr said:


> True, but for all intents and purposes that gun was a toy.


I was taught at a very early age not to point any gun, even if I thought it was a toy, at anyone.  He was responsible!


----------



## hollydolly (Aug 15, 2022)

Alligatorob said:


> I was taught at a very early age not to point any gun, even if I thought it was a toy, at anyone.  He was responsible!


yep...and being an American..as well as a seasoned actor, he would have known that more than anyone..


----------



## Murrmurr (Aug 15, 2022)

Alligatorob said:


> I was taught at a very early age not to point any gun, even if I thought it was a toy, at anyone.  He was responsible!


I disagree. Do not point a toy gun? Really? I pointed them at my friends and they pointed theirs at me, all of us completely confident that nobody was gonna die or even be injured. Unless Baldwin planned a murder, he was equally confident that everyone around him would go home safely that day.

Someone is responsible, but it isn't Baldwin.


----------



## Murrmurr (Aug 15, 2022)

hollydolly said:


> yep...and being an American..as well as a seasoned actor, he would have known that more than anyone..


And as an actor, it's reasonable he'd practice/rehearse that shot. He has to get the angle and blocking right, has to get a feel for the gun. They don't just hand an actor a prop gun and say "Action!".


----------



## hollydolly (Aug 15, 2022)

Murrmurr said:


> And as an actor, it's reasonable he'd practice/rehearse that shot. He has to get the angle and blocking right, has to get a feel for the gun. They don't just hand an actor a prop gun and say "Action!".


There you go again Frank telling me what happens on a Film set..


----------



## win231 (Aug 15, 2022)

Murrmurr said:


> I disagree. Do not point a toy gun? Really? I pointed them at my friends and they pointed theirs at me, all of us completely confident that nobody was gonna die or even be injured. Unless Baldwin planned a murder, he was equally confident that everyone around him would go home safely that day.
> 
> Someone is responsible, but it isn't Baldwin.


Just a FYI.  It was not a toy gun.  It was a real gun - as used in movies.  (Pietta .45 Colt, made by Century Arms)


----------



## Alligatorob (Aug 15, 2022)

Murrmurr said:


> I disagree. Do not point a toy gun? Really?


I guess I overstated.  What I should have said was anything that looked like a real gun.  We were allowed to play with squirt guns, rubber band guns and the like.  But if we were ever seen pointing a bb gun or anything that looked like it could be real at someone we were in trouble.

Baldwin's gun obviously looked real.


----------



## Murrmurr (Aug 15, 2022)

win231 said:


> Just a FYI.  It was not a toy gun.  It was a real gun - as used in movies.  (Pietta .45 Colt, made by Century Arms)


I know. I said "for all intents and purposes"...like, from Baldwin's perspective, it may as well have been a toy. It's quite reasonable for him to assume it had been through all the checks and inspections every movie set requires, rendering it as innocuous as a toy.


----------



## Murrmurr (Aug 15, 2022)

Alligatorob said:


> I guess I overstated.  What I should have said was anything that looked like a real gun.  We were allowed to play with squirt guns, rubber band guns and the like.  But if we were ever seen pointing a bb gun or anything that looked like it could be real at someone we were in trouble.
> 
> Baldwin's gun obviously looked real.


Yes, of course it looked real. Prop guns even weigh the same as a real gun.


----------



## Alligatorob (Aug 15, 2022)

Murrmurr said:


> Yes, of course it looked real. Prop guns even weigh the same as a real gun.


And as it turned out this one sadly was real.


----------



## Murrmurr (Aug 15, 2022)

Alligatorob said:


> And as it turned out this one sadly was real.


It was certainly as deadly. They _are_ real, they just don't (normally) use real ammunition.


----------



## Alligatorob (Aug 15, 2022)

Movie industry guidelines do not generally allow pointing a firearm at anyone.  I believe Baldwin was in violation of these guidelines.

This can be found several places, a lot got posted on it back shortly after the incident occurred.  Here is an example from the Actors' Equity Association, you can find similar wording other places:

_Never point a firearm at anyone including yourself. Always cheat the shot by aiming to the right or left of the target character. If asked to point and shoot directly at a living target, consult with the property master or armorer for the prescribed safety procedures.  _

I don't think Baldwin was told to point and shoot directly...


----------



## Lawrence (Aug 15, 2022)

When the guns are used during a movie scene with live ammunition the person in charge of the guns should load the gun and then more important unload all of the live ammunition when the scene is over. When the movie actors shoot at people it should be to the side of any person.


----------



## win231 (Aug 15, 2022)

Lawrence said:


> When the guns are used during a movie scene with live ammunition the person in charge of the guns should load the gun and then more important unload all of the live ammunition when the scene is over. When the movie actors shoot at people it should be to the side of any person.


Live ammunition is never used in a movie scene.  People who shoot recreationally (like myself) can tell the difference between live ammo & blanks.  For one thing, blanks produce flame, sparks & noise, but no recoil (sometimes referred to as "Kick."  Guns in movies never have any recoil because there is no bullet weight - which is what generates most of the recoil.
You may see what looks like empty shells being ejected from a semi auto or fully automatic firearm, but that is for effect.
If you've ever watched the beginning of each episode of _"The Rifleman" _TV series, when Chuck Connors walks down the street, rapid firing his rifle, you'll notice sparks & empty shells coming out of the rifle for effect.
You may also have noticed that 11 shots are fired - but that particular Winchester rifle only holds 10.  The 11th shot was dubbed in.


----------



## win231 (Aug 15, 2022)

Alligatorob said:


> Movie industry guidelines do not generally allow pointing a firearm at anyone.  I believe Baldwin was in violation of these guidelines.
> 
> This can be found several places, a lot got posted on it back shortly after the incident occurred.  Here is an example from the Actors' Equity Association, you can find similar wording other places:
> 
> ...


Often, they will shoot the scene with someone pointing & shooting directly at someone who isn't there.  Then, they will re-shoot the scene after adding the "victim."  Safer that way.


----------



## Nathan (Aug 15, 2022)

I read through the posts but may have missed mention of one very primary question:  
 WHY was there a real gun with real bullets on the set???
...pardon me if someone did ask this.(raise your hand).


----------



## Alligatorob (Aug 15, 2022)

Nathan said:


> I read through the posts but may have missed mention of one very primary question:
> WHY was there a real gun with real bullets on the set???


That is a good question, and we discussed it at some length a while back.  Don't remember that we ever came to a satisfactory answer though.

This thread is more about Baldwin's culpability, and I don't think anyone believes that he knew it was a loaded gun.

If and when your question is answered I suspect others will face stiffer charges than Baldwin.  Hope so anyway.


----------



## win231 (Aug 15, 2022)

Nathan said:


> I read through the posts but may have missed mention of one very primary question:
> WHY was there a real gun with real bullets on the set???
> ...pardon me if someone did ask this.(raise your hand).


A few weeks ago, I read that the actors were doing some plinking & target shooting with live ammo during breaks.  Maybe the guns were not checked before work resumed.  Or, maybe a live round was overlooked in the gun.  Since they were single action revolvers, the cylinder doesn't swing out like a double action revolver, so you can check all the chambers at the same time.  On a Single Action, you have to open the loading gate & manually turn the cylinder to check each chamber separately.
For those unfamiliar:


----------



## Jeni (Aug 15, 2022)

I doubt anyone will really charge him with anything ..... even though many safety measures were not followed.....
it is the society we live in where no one is at fault it is all an accident a misunderstanding .... the gun shot itself .....


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Aug 15, 2022)

hollydolly said:


> it won't... According to an estimate by the Associated Press (AP), there have been 43 fatalities on American film sets since 1990, with another 150 actors or crew members left with life-altering injuries as a result of accidents, often the result of botched stunts staged on location.
> 
> No lessons have EVER been learned


The one that broke my heart was when Jon Erik Hexum accidentally shot himself. He only 26 years old, was gorgeous, seemed like such a nice person and a Jersey boy at that. The gun that killed him while he played Russian roulette had blank cartridges in it ! I guess he figured with blanks he was in no danger. Just goes to prove that one should never play with guns...no matter what. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon-Erik_Hexum


----------



## win231 (Aug 16, 2022)

OneEyedDiva said:


> The one that broke my heart was when Jon Erik Hexum accidentally shot himself. He only 26 years old, was gorgeous, seemed like such a nice person and a Jersey boy at that. The gun that killed him while he played Russian roulette had blank cartridges in it ! I guess he figured with blanks he was in no danger. Just goes to prove that one should never play with guns...no matter what.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon-Erik_Hexum
> View attachment 234683


At that time, there wasn't much priority on gun education or safety.  He probably wasn't aware of what's contained in a blank cartridge or the pressure involved.  After that tragedy, there was lots of safety training on movie sets.  One demo involved firing a blank at a head of cabbage at a distance of 1 inch.  Completely disintegrated it.


----------



## Alligatorob (Aug 19, 2022)

Some of the latest on what Baldwin is saying, and some of the issues discussed here:
Ten months after the 'Rust' shooting​Baldwin is quoted as saying he doesn't believe he or anyone else will face criminal charges.

He may be right, or it may just be wishful thinking.


----------



## Jace (Oct 5, 2022)

News stated...He settled! 

And, the movie is " back on" with him.


----------



## Ruthanne (Oct 6, 2022)

Jace said:


> News stated...He settled!
> 
> And, the movie is " back on" with him.


That's what I heard too..


----------



## win231 (Oct 6, 2022)

Jace said:


> News stated...He settled!
> 
> And, the movie is " back on" with him.


Money talks.


----------



## Jace (Oct 6, 2022)

Yup!


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Oct 6, 2022)

Does anyone else think it's strange that one of the terms of the settlement with her husband is that he'll be an executive producer of the movie? https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ba...th-slain-cinematographer-deadline-2022-10-05/


----------



## Alligatorob (Oct 6, 2022)

OneEyedDiva said:


> Does anyone else think it's strange that one of the terms of the settlement with her husband is that he'll be an executive producer of the movie? https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ba...th-slain-cinematographer-deadline-2022-10-05/


As Win said: 


win231 said:


> Money talks.


----------



## ohioboy (Oct 6, 2022)

OneEyedDiva said:


> Does anyone else think it's strange that one of the terms of the settlement with her husband is that he'll be an executive producer of the movie? https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ba...th-slain-cinematographer-deadline-2022-10-05/


The Studio/Production company hires the staff, so if it is true, it was approved by them.


----------



## chic (Oct 16, 2022)

What would be his motive for killing her?


----------

