Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire why would you have live ammo on a movie set ?

it was a single-action revolver.

Ahh. I had not heard the gun type. I retract my thoughts.

Why is everything a conspiracy? Its already been stated that people were using the guns for recreational target practice prior. And the set being full of liberal retards, nobody knew basic gun safety...

Yeah....Glocks were common in the 1870's.

Go off twice?

Or did Alec get a Two-Fer?

Jim, all I had read before making my post above referred only to "a gun" and "a movie set" I had not read any further to learn it was an Old West movie. My fault for not doing do.

I have since done some more reading of online stories, and am completely stunned by the many instances of dumbshittery that took place on that set.

Is that right?

Probably just a matter of time before someone was killed then.

Jim, and all...here's the summary and an embedded link to a much longer story. LINK

Baldwin might have been an idiot for hiring an untrained, air headed girl for a very responsible position, but it was her job to do and she failed at it.

The information on this case is being managed.
If it goes to trial, we may learn more.

My guess is that since this is a "western", the firearm was most likely a single action revolver, not a "magazine" fed pistol.

I heard it went through the girl and hit the guy standing behind her.

Thanks Rocky,

Interesting in the one linked article that the woman who called 911 was telling them the Assistant Director was responsible for making sure the weapon was safe to use before handing it to an actor. And he didn't.

Starting to sound to me like multi-level safety procedures failed, utterly.

Why did he even POINT the gun at this woman in the first place- let alone pull the effing trigger? Pointing a gun, even a prop gun at someone would have me saying something about it.

I don't like him but that isn't why he needs to be prosecuted.


Reminds me of the idiot on Tiger King that held the Ruger to his head and pulled the trigger to prove it wouldn't go off with the magazine out of it.. Well it did. No do over.

Don't forget, the firearm used was a single action revolver. That meant that Baldwin had to deliberately cock the hammer, aim at the woman, and pull the trigger. BAM!!

That action might bring about a charge of "reckless endangerment," or "negligent homicide." Maybe. It'll depend on what the S.F. Sheriff's homicide detectives determine after all their interviews and forensic samples are investigated.

A lot of uninformed disinformation and misinformation coming out of Hollywood and the internet gossip mongers.

Just sayin'.

L.W.

Also the entire crew had taken a lunch break, and upon returning nobody rechecked the gun for safety...the director handed gun to Baldwin and yelled "cold gun".

This will be a criminal and civil case in the end, it's only a matter of who gets hung for it....but I wouldn't expect anyone to be protecting Balwin if he's guilty, because they are going to prison and owing millions.

The assistant director, or armorer or whomever it is that on paper was "responsible" for gun safety on set may have screwed up, but that doesn't change who ultimately pulled the trigger. It is no different than taking a gun from a gun store clerk who "cleared" it, then pulling the trigger. The gun store clerk may have been wrong, but wouldn't have been ultimately responsible for the negligent discharge.

There's so much uncertainty but in the end, Baldwin is who pulled the trigger and is ultimately responsible for what happened. I wouldn't have been acting with real guns to begin with but that is beside the point.

It appears according to the experts, including armorers on here, that is a common occurrence using "real" guns as "props"

Gun to be used in all future movies...