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

[jamil]

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

Even the NRA’s 3 rules are broken on movie sets by necessity.

 

[bwframe]

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.

Because the first time they didn't follow one of the four rules, they would have been sent home for the day. Second time they didn't follow the four rules, termination. That's why.

There is no room for not following the safety rules at the shooting range.

 

[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.

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

You either did not read all the links and vids in this thread or just choose to ignore what they said. Everyone wants to talk about the three fatalities. One of them was a clown who put a blank gun to his head and pulled the trigger for fun. One gun fired a piece of shrapnal, the rules have been changed to keep that from happening. Now this incident probably broke every rule regarding firearm handling.

You do know this gun was a revolver and didnt have a mag....right?

You do know that if the film firearm rules are followed that no one is handed a firearm with dummy rounds without them being verified as dummy rounds for everyone to see....right?

You do know that the rounds in this case were supposed to be dummy rounds, not blanks.....right?

How many people have ND's every year outside of the film industry?

 

[Alpo]

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?

C'mon Man!

He asked for an example in a simunition situation. I gave him exactly what can happen in a simunition "situation".

 

[Alpo]

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)

The way to stop going deeper in the hole is to stop digging.

Move along.

Next shooter!

 

[Hatin Since 87]

You either did not read all the links and vids in this thread or just choose to ignore what they said. Everyone wants to talk about the three fatalities. One of them was a clown who put a blank gun to his head and pulled the trigger for fun. One gun fired a piece of shrapnal, the rules have been changed to keep that from happening. Now this incident probably broke every rule regarding firearm handling.

You do know this gun was a revolver and didnt have a mag....right?

You do know that if the film firearm rules are followed that no one is handed a firearm with dummy rounds without them being verified as dummy rounds for everyone to see....right?

You do know that the rounds in this case were supposed to be dummy rounds, not blanks.....right?

How many people have ND's every year outside of the film industry?

Ok. 1, I’m not sure why it matters it was a revolver instead of a magazine fed firearm. The point is the same. Now you’re just arguing semantics for the sake of arguing.

You’re not getting the point. I’ll lay this out slowly.

I do not care if they were supposed to be blanks. I do not care if they are supposed to be dummy rounds. I do not care if it’s magazine fed. I do not care if it’s a revolver. Do not point any firearm capable of firing a projectile at another human being, and nobody will ever be hurt. Pretty simple.


Again. If you wanna stand in front of a firearm while someone pulls the trigger, more power to ya. But you’ll never convince me it isn’t ****ing stupid.

 

[Butch627]

Because the first time they didn't follow one of the four rules, they would have been sent home for the day. Second time they didn't follow the four rules, termination. That's why.

There is no room for not following the safety rules at the shooting range.

You see because on a properly run set any deviation from following the film firearm safety rules and anyone on the crew points it out and everything is shut down until the problem is corrected.

If they didn't follow any of the film rules why do you think they would have followed the 4 standard rules? The film rules allow pretty much anyone on the set to stop things if they do not feel safe, but you already knew that.....right?

 

[Trapper Jim]

Skill set observations trumps resume accomplishments any day.

 

[Alpo]

Ok. 1, I’m not sure why it matters it was a revolver instead of a magazine fed firearm. The point is the same. Now you’re just arguing semantics for the sake of arguing.

You’re not getting the point. I’ll lay this out slowly.

I do not care if they were supposed to be blanks. I do not care if they are supposed to be dummy rounds. I do not care if it’s magazine fed. I do not care if it’s a revolver. Do not point any firearm capable of firing a projectile at another human being, and nobody will ever be hurt. Pretty simple.


Again. If you wanna stand in front of a firearm while someone pulls the trigger, more power to ya. But you’ll never convince me it isn’t ****ing stupid.

Well, having spent a couple of decades heavily involved with single action revolvers of the 19th century, there is a considerable difference in setting the fire control system. With a single action, the index finger is inserted into the trigger guard, an additonal 2 or 3 fingers are wrapped around the grip and the thumb is used to cock the revolver. It isn't unusual for the trigger to be slightly compromised by the placement of the index finger, thereby moving the sear out of position. When the revolver is then cocked, release of the thumb can cause the hammer to fall, setting off a charge. It happens in competition (with the revolver pointed safely downrange) on occasion. It certainly happens more often with people who aren't training with a single action.

So, I would suspect that both the propman and stuntman incidents are of this nature. Best guess.

 

[Butch627]

Ok. 1, I’m not sure why it matters it was a revolver instead of a magazine fed firearm. The point is the same. Now you’re just arguing semantics for the sake of arguing.

You’re not getting the point. I’ll lay this out slowly.

I do not care if they were supposed to be blanks. I do not care if they are supposed to be dummy rounds. I do not care if it’s magazine fed. I do not care if it’s a revolver. Do not point any firearm capable of firing a projectile at another human being, and nobody will ever be hurt. Pretty simple.


Again. If you wanna stand in front of a firearm while someone pulls the trigger, more power to ya. But you’ll never convince me it isn’t ****ing stupid.

Your the one that brought a mag into the discussion I don't know why.

The point I am getting is someone who has never set foot on a film set and seen how firearms are supposed to be and typically handled knows all about how it should be done. I am not trying to convince you of anything, I just didn't think anyone could watch the vids from industry people linked in this thread and not understand just how seriously the industry takes firearm safety.

I would have no issue with standing in front of a firearm if all the safety rules on set were followed just as they are thousands of times a year, year after year with no ill effects.

 

[hoosierdoc]

I can honestly say i did not expect this thread to become contentious

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Your the one that brought a mag into the discussion I don't know why.

The point I am getting is someone who has never set foot on a film set and seen how firearms are supposed to be and typically handled knows all about how it should be done. I am not trying to convince you of anything, I just didn't think anyone could watch the vids from industry people linked in this thread and not understand just how seriously the industry takes firearm safety.

I would have no issue with standing in front of a firearm if all the safety rules on set were followed just as they are thousands of times a year, year after year with no ill effects.

I brought magazine into the conversation as an example of how ****ing stupid a person would be to trust another human being enough to stand in front of an object capable of killing them.


If you would have no issue standing in front of any firearm, I truly hope you are at peace with your maker. I do not care what rules are followed, aiming something capable of killing somebody at another human being and pulling the trigger is plain ****ing stupid, I don’t care what industry it’s in.


All it takes is the 1 mistake that could easily be avoided by not using functional firearms. But by all means, again, I don’t care, stand in front of whatever you want. Write Alec Baldwin and let him know you ain’t skeert you’ll film his movies.


You obviously have more faith in humanity than me. Good luck to you sir.

 

[cbhausen]

Your the one that brought a mag into the discussion I don't know why.

The point I am getting is someone who has never set foot on a film set and seen how firearms are supposed to be and typically handled knows all about how it should be done. I am not trying to convince you of anything, I just didn't think anyone could watch the vids from industry people linked in this thread and not understand just how seriously the industry takes firearm safety.

I would have no issue with standing in front of a firearm if all the safety rules on set were followed just as they are thousands of times a year, year after year with no ill effects.

So you WOULD trust someone to point a real gun at you and pull the trigger if you knew they followed the industry rules…

Problem is, lots of rules were broken along the way here. Again I say this: everyone is over complicating things.

If it’s a real gun, capable of firing a real projectile, ALWAYS keep it pointed in a safe direction.

ALWAYS keep your finger off the trigger until you’re ready to shoot. Was a shot supposed to be fired in this scene, a rehearsal?

And finally, ALWAYS keep guns unloaded until ready to use. This means unless a gun is being carried on your person or staged in a location to be ready for personal protection, training, etc. keep it unloaded. Obviously, this gun was not unloaded.

That’s breaking all 3 of the simplest set of firearm safety rules you could ever have. All three contain the word ALWAYS and if followed, would’ve prevented this and many other negligent shootings.

When you think about it, all of the set rules in the world really boil down to these 3.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Well, having spent a couple of decades heavily involved with single action revolvers of the 19th century, there is a considerable difference in setting the fire control system. With a single action, the index finger is inserted into the trigger guard, an additonal 2 or 3 fingers are wrapped around the grip and the thumb is used to cock the revolver. It isn't unusual for the trigger to be slightly compromised by the placement of the index finger, thereby moving the sear out of position. When the revolver is then cocked, release of the thumb can cause the hammer to fall, setting off a charge. It happens in competition (with the revolver pointed safely downrange) on occasion. It certainly happens more often with people who aren't training with a single action.

So, I would suspect that both the propman and stuntman incidents are of this nature. Best guess.

Ya I know how a single action works. Grandpa had a couple when I was younger. I’ve never shot competition, but a single action revolver would be a challenge if it’s a timed thing.


I wasn’t really focused on the type of firearm, per se. I’m more focusing on the fact a human being actually aims a weapon capable of firing at another human, in the year 2021 when we can literally edit people onto different planets. Just doesn’t make sense to me.


I don’t trust other humans, especially with my life.

 

[Ingomike]

I can honestly say i did not expect this thread to become contentious

Other contentious issues are getting stale. LOL

 

[actaeon277]

I can honestly say i did not expect this thread to become contentious

New here?

 

[Twangbanger]

C'mon Man!

He asked for an example in a simunition situation. I gave him exactly what can happen in a simunition "situation".

This is a simple reading comprehension problem on your part.

In #732, I asked you to post-up an example of a legit training entity, advertising a curriculum violating the 4 rules and which ***does not*** use Simunitions:

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 )...

...it's ok, it happens. You just read my comment too fast.

 

[bwframe]

You see because on a properly run set any deviation from following the film firearm safety rules and anyone on the crew points it out and everything is shut down until the problem is corrected...

I'm not being critical of you sir. I think you believe what you are saying and your own track record seems to back it up, for your experiences.

The question is how many movie sets are properly run vs not?

How were there any crew left for Alex to shoot, if that is the case? After the blatant negligent discharges and first crew walking off set?

How did the "armorer" and AD even have jobs, with their reported track records?

This is just the stuff we have heard of, relevant to a death investigation. How much of the film industry is just another unreported ND, waiting to find a human target to bring more to light?

 

[actaeon277]

 

[BugI02]

ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED
The only exception to this occurs when one has a weapon in his hands and he has personally unloaded it for checking. As soon as he puts it down, Rule 1 applies again

NEVER LET THE MUZZLE COVER ANYTHING YOU ARE NOT PREPARED TO DESTROY
You may not wish to destroy it, but you must be clear in your mind that you are quite ready to if you let that muzzle cover the target. To allow a firearm to point at another human being is a deadly threat, and should always be treated as such.

KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER TIL YOUR SIGHTS ARE ON THE TARGET
This we call the Golden Rule because its violation is responsible for about 80 percent of the firearms disasters we read about.

BE SURE OF YOUR TARGET
You never shoot at anything until you have positively identified it. You never fire at a shadow, or a sound, or a suspected presence. You shoot only when you know absolutely what you are shooting at and what is beyond it.


Straight out of Jeff Coopers commentaries. Volume Six, 1998