Did the armorer point the gun? I'm sorry, but the one ultimately responsible is the one holding/shooting the firearm.
I'm sorry that Alec is a stupid SOB, but stupid should hurt.
You are not familiar at all with how a movie set works, are you?
If industry standards are followed, the actor isn't finger fuucking the gun to "check" it, and, even if it was a rare actor/actress with a clue, dummy ammo looks like live ammo, so often "checking" would just show you that SOMETHING is in the firearm.
Baldwin had a single-action revolver. It wasn't his job to "check" it, there are multiple safety layers built into industry standard processes.
The fact that these amateur hour idiots obviously were not following industry standards is gonna result in a person or persons being liable, but if Baldwin is on that list, it'll be as a producer who hired the idiots, not as the actor who pulled the trigger.
I'll admit that I don't know first hand how a movie set works with firearms or anything else for that matter, but I cannot think of a single situation including a movie set that trumps basic firearm safety. If this situation doesn't reinforce that for you then I don't know what would. You say it wasn't his job to "check" it then why not? I know I would and I also know that after "checking" it to verify the condition I still would not point it at anything I didn't intend to shoot.
That is the responsibility of EVERY person that has a firearm in his or her hand regardless of whether it is a movie set or not.
Right?
I must have missed the part about not being responsible if you are from Hollywood in the NRA's 10 Commandments of Gun Safety
Maybe Goalie can point it out.
Somehow, industry standard procedures for gun handling on movie sets have allowed people to shoot at each other literally millions of times while making movies with a pretty damn impressive safety record.
Maybe ask why those long-used industry standards were not used on this set.......
