Crew member killed when shot by prop gun on set of Baldwin movie

[Leadeye]

I couldn't find much info on this but was wondering if problem is a more modern one. Movie filming has been around for more than 100 years , but the only stats I could find went back to 1990 on injuries from guns in filming. Trying to break out the numbers on this to see if it's just more involvement in firearms in films or maybe people getting less familiar with firearms in general.

 

[Twangbanger]

I'm not sure I find a lot to disagree with, in what Baldwin said in that particular video clip. He said changes have to happen within the film industry. If current practice is that "Prop Guns" are allowed to be real guns which retain the ability to chamber and fire a live round of ammunition, and the Four Rules are not universally applied, then that needs to change. (But I also don't think it necessarily saves his personal bacon in this situation, to say that).

The Four Rules of safe gunhandling must apply everywhere real guns are being touched. No exceptions. Movie sets, a Point Blank Range employee checking a gun and handing it to you to look at...everywhere.

If the definition of "Prop Gun" can include a "Real Gun" which retains the mechanical ability to fire a live round, there is simply no way around this.

If movie sets can't follow rules, then they need to use fake guns.

 

[Hkindiana]

I have been involved in WWII re-enacting for forty years. There are 50-100 events every year, and all of the firearms, tanks, and planes are real. There has never been a shooting with a live round that I am aware of, and we DO NOT follow the four rules of safe gun handling, which is impossible in a combat atmosphere. We are all responsible for our own weapons, and we are very careful. However, I must admit that the first time I pointed my weapon at a fellow re-enactor, I could not get myself to pull the trigger until I moved my weapon to the side of him. This was, I’m sure, due to the four rules being stressed to me my whole life.

 

[qwerty]

 

[BugI02]

It's not the same as shooting your gun with live ammo at the range. The rules are not the same. The responsibilities are not the same. There is no comparison. Your NRA four gun rules are not relevant to prop guns and blanks on a movie set. You're not using logic because you already hated Alec Baldwin and your emotions dictate that you rationalize the feeling that it's his fault.

This is specious. The purpose of those four rules is to have one take a lethal weapon AND TREAT IT THE SAME WAY EVERY TIME ONE HANDLES IT! It is the idea that others can absolve you from that responsibility, that some guns are not dangerous because someone else told you so, that keeps getting people maimed and killed

It sounds more like you desperately want to absolve Baldwin for some reason rather than that we want to hang him

 

[BugI02]

Well it's probably useless since you are "done with this topic". But I couldn't care one bit who the actor was holding the gun. What I have seen/heard from others in the film industry since this happened has indicated that Alec should have been shown the gun was clear and seen it for himself before accepting it from the AD.
I'm not going to harp on the 4 rules. I get that it's a movie set and things are done differently.
Regardless if they are using live ammo or blanks, the actor should see that the gun is either "hot" or "cold" before accepting it. Never said that Alec should have manipulated the the gun in any way, just he should have witnessed it being clear.

The comparison examples you continue to give aren't even close to being a parallel just apples to watermelons.

What he doesn't seem to comprehend is, we are saying don't point a real ass gun at someone unless you INTEND to shoot them. It has nothing to do with whether Baldwin has manipulated the weapon or not

Even if THEY have cleared the weapon, if someone carelessly points it deliberately at me I will drop kick them into next week

Everything I have read says they were REHEARSING a scene, so even if the script calls for pointing the gun directly at the camera in the scene why would you need to point it directly at people in a rehearsal of that scene and for God's sake what would ever make anyone think their finger needs to be on the trigger

If a scene calls for pyrotechnics and it is being rehearsed, does he think the special effects guy has the charges wired and his finger on the detonator in any other situation besides cameras rolling? SMH

 

[BugI02]

.

 

[Alpo]

This is specious. The purpose of those four rules is to have one take a lethal weapon AND TREAT IT THE SAME WAY EVERY TIME ONE HANDLES IT! It is the idea that others can absolve you from that responsibility, that some guns are not dangerous because someone else told you so, that keeps getting people maimed and killed

It sounds more like you desperately want to absolve Baldwin for some reason rather than that we want to hang him

It's not specious.

Force on force training violates the 4 rules.

You guys are stuck in a rut and can't see over the top of it.

 

[BugI02]

This isn’t the first such instance of a negligent discharge on a movie set.

It wasn't even the first incident of an ND on THAT movie set

 

[Alpo]

It wasn't even the first incident of an ND on THAT movie set

The first incident was with a stuntman. A skilled stuntman.
The second was by the property master.

 

[BugI02]

I have tens of thousands of rounds fired and don’t have any incidents, let alone 3...

You people do whatever you want... I don’t care, it’s your life and if someone is stupid enough to stand in front of an actual firearm and trust that someone else has loaded blanks into it that’s their choice. There is no reason, with our technology and abilities, any human being should stand in front of a functional firearm and have another human being pull a trigger... I don’t care if it doesn’t have the magazine in, I’m not trusting anybody to aim any weapon at me at any time for any reason.

Hear, hear

I bet if the scene called for another actor to point and shoot at Baldwin he would have wanted to personally see that the weapon was cold

 

[Twangbanger]

It's not specious.

Force on force training violates the 4 rules.

You guys are stuck in a rut and can't see over the top of it.

Can you post up link to a reputable trainer, advertising FoF training employing real guns capable of chambering and firing real ammunition? (Simunition is not real ammo, so don't try to sell that ).

I personally will not participate in simunition drills because of the possibility of somebody in the fun house not having their gear checked out. That is my choice, but I'm not going to let you get away with confusing simunition training with firearms capable of chambering and firing real ammo.

The bullet which ripped through Halyna Hutchins was real-ass ammunition fired from a real-ass gun. Real guns means the Four Rules apply, no exceptions.

 

[tbhausen]

Is crawling under your car before driving every day the normal course of due caution? I have never met a person that held the belief that inspection of the brake lines before each use was a common and prudent act.

But, the belief that a weapon be checked and handled with due caution is a widespread belief. The 4 rules are not an obscure belief but are quite commonly known and adhered to.

I believe in this case a sound argument could be made that extra caution was warranted due to recent events on the set.

 

[Alpo]

Can you post up link to a reputable trainer, advertising FoF training employing real guns capable of chambering and firing real ammunition? (Simunition is not real ammo, so don't try to sell that ).

I personally will not participate in simunition drills because of the possibility of somebody in the fun house not having their gear checked out. That is my choice, but I'm not going to let you get away with confusing simunition training with firearms capable of chambering and firing real ammo.

The bullet which ripped through Halyna Hutchins was real-ass ammunition fired from a real-ass gun. Real guns means the Four Rules apply, no exceptions.

You've answered your own question, amigo.

The Tragedy of Training Accidents

When an officer is shot and killed in a training session, odds are some other officer pulled the trigger. The result is devastating for the officers of the agency involved and for the friends and families of both officers.

www.policemag.com

 

[cbhausen]

3 Rules, not 4. Maybe just 2 rules. - Notes from KR

On several of the blogs I read, people often refer to the “4 rules of gun safety” and quote the rules defined by Jeff Cooper of Gunsite. They are All guns are always loaded! Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy! Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights...

blog.krtraining.com

Read the last sentence y’all (penned in 2011)… prophetic!

 

[Twangbanger]

You've answered your own question, amigo.

The Tragedy of Training Accidents

When an officer is shot and killed in a training session, odds are some other officer pulled the trigger. The result is devastating for the officers of the agency involved and for the friends and families of both officers.

www.policemag.com

That's an nice attempt at muddying the waters, but you posted an example where the training "advertised" use of Simunition rounds. Bzzt! No cigar:

"...A little more than three years ago, De Kraai was participating in a force-on-force training exercise using guns outfitted to fire Simunition marking rounds..."

Alec Baldwin's gun was not outfitted for Simunition rounds.

We'll try this again: can you provide evidence of a reputable training entity which advertises and defends the use of _real_* firearms in FoF training scenarios in violation of the Four Rules?

(*for enhanced reading comprehension: meaning retaining the ability to chamber and fire real ammunition)

 

[bwframe]

Can you post up link to a reputable trainer, advertising FoF training employing real guns capable of chambering and firing real ammunition?...

You've answered your own question, amigo.

The Tragedy of Training Accidents

When an officer is shot and killed in a training session, odds are some other officer pulled the trigger. The result is devastating for the officers of the agency involved and for the friends and families of both officers.

www.policemag.com

Not sure about that. No trainers were named in that article, let alone a reputable one.

Looked to me like cops shooting each other under the guise of "training?" Maybe on the clock? Without instruction or supervision?

 

[Butch627]

I wish all the 4 rules guys would explain why they think these people would have followed those rules when the standard film rules that have not had a fatality in decades were not followed.

 

[jamil]

Can you post up link to a reputable trainer, advertising FoF training employing real guns capable of chambering and firing real ammunition? (Simunition is not real ammo, so don't try to sell that ).

I personally will not participate in simunition drills because of the possibility of somebody in the fun house not having their gear checked out. That is my choice, but I'm not going to let you get away with confusing simunition training with firearms capable of chambering and firing real ammo.

The bullet which ripped through Halyna Hutchins was real-ass ammunition fired from a real-ass gun. Real guns means the Four Rules apply, no exceptions.

In the scene, The actor does by design something that is against the rules. So I think it’s true that we don’t apply the same rules to movies which use real guns as props. Applying the rules would prohibit that scene as written.

But, that does not mean Baldwin isn’t responsible. Everyone who handled that gun up to the point the trigger was pulled had a chance to make sure it was empty (It was a rehearsal; everyone expected a click not a bang).

Baldwin was the guy pointing a real ass gun at real ass people—people who presumably did not need shot. He was the last person who could have prevented this. His “I have people for that” doesn’t absolve him of that responsibility. It was low budget. You get low budget performance when you hire low budget people. He obviously did not have people for that. Or the gun would have clicked.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

I wish all the 4 rules guys would explain why they think these people would have followed those rules when the standard film rules that have not had a fatality in decades were not followed.

I wish the people involved in the 3 incidents would tell me which rules they would rather have followed.


Again. Feel free to trust that someone else has put blanks into a functional firearm, and let them aim at your face and pull the trigger. I will not.


With the technology we have there is no reason they can’t record those scenes in a way that doesn’t require someone aiming a functional firearm at another human being and pulling the trigger. Not sure why you keep defending the practice. It’s obviously had 3 victims.

I have tens of thousands of rounds fired. 0 incidents. Then again, I don’t aim my **** at another person and claim it’s safe to do so because I checked the mag