why would you ever even have live ammo on a movie set ?next to prop guns loaded with blanks ,that is just asking for trouble. I would think not having live ammo anywhere around would be the smart thing

lol

Why would you ever have live ammo on a movie set?Ask the actor when he wants his paycheck why he chose a gun when he was against them.

what can hollyweird people know about firearms ?

blanks or live ?

So Alec Baldwin can Gakk someone...

I keep waiting for Varmint Guy to start his own thread on this.

I thought the guns would be prop guns, incapable of firing real ammo. I was wrong.

There’s a hundred good questions that could and have been asked. Just no answers yet.

Stupid people, diversity hires, egos.....

I'm actually amazed that stupid stuff like this doesn't happen more often.

Stupid does as stupid is.

It's a start!

They've been pushing this story that people had been upset and even walked out over "safety issues"...... They want to claim this was an "accident". They'll get away with it, too, I'm sure.

You don't "accidentally" put live ammo in a movie gun. Someone put that ammo in the gun ON PURPOSE. Period.

The gun was a real working revolver.

Since there was no adult supervision, the chuckleheads were doing recreational target practice with the guns, when the actors didn't need them on set.

A loaded revolver was returned to the armorer's cart, never cleared, never checked, and handed to Baldwin with the "cold gun' being spoken as it was handed to him by the assistant director.

The whole set sounds like a a total amateur-hour goat.f.u.c.k.

Im guessing one or more of the hypocrites has a ccw and mixed live ammo in?

Odds are, there were locals hired as extras, someone probably brought some ammo to work when they realized there were cool guns to play with.

Saw an article yesterday, can't find it today, that indicated some of the 'crew' were using the prop guns during down time for a little sport shooting..............

Azzhats got live and dummy mixed up no doubt...

There was a certain American Civil War movie filmed in S. Carolina a few years back where the armorer and prop people were packing for their own protection. Problems with the needed extras they were apparently taking in from every halfway house they could find. They were extremely hard up. They were doing things like shooting ramrods into the doors of the barracks they had rented to put them up in. And also throwing their production company owned musket over the security fence to a waiting acquaintance to take to the local pawn shop for booze & drug money.

Sounds rather Glorious.....

😉😉😉

I am not so sure. With how little some people and especially many "anti" gun people know about ammo, I could see this happening.
Who knows what the real truth is???

Sheesh !!!

Here it is.....

https://www.tmz.com/2021/10/23/alec-baldwin-rust-gun-accident-used-off-set-target-practice/

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...h-halyna-hutchins-fired-crew-off-set-fun

So is Baldwin any different from any other yahoo that picks up a gun points it at someone and pulls the trigger and then utters those famous words"I did`nt know it was loaded.Rule # 1 Don`t point a gun at anything you do not intend to shoot.But I guess bone head has no idea of gun rules.Manslaughter at least in my opinion.

Kind of like Petito and Co., how did it make news... WGAF?

Wouldn't bother me much if they made it mandatory to use live ammo in all Hollywierd productions. Then we can get back to the real news of the century, the adventures of the Petito family.

Murphy's law, idiots and live ammo on a movie set where there is no reason for having live ammo....what could go wrong.

Huntz: Maybe not. If pointing the gun at the vic and pulling the trigger was part of the movie making process, that could be considered "accidental" and not negligent.

Whole other case if he was dicking around with no job related reason for his actions.

The Mongos (and I ) would love him in prison. I bet he walks and ends up as a "victim" of the incident himself.

To kill someone.

Exactly. Is there really going to be a different answer?

Movie prop guns...always make me laugh. Actor is in a gun fight and empties his glock. Not one casing is thrown.

I dont know crap about making movies but I guess
I just assumed prop guns were not real firearms capable of shooting anything out of the barrel. Honestly I never even thought much about it.

Yep, thar is a reason they call them kind of folks Libtards..............

Should have had a steel plug welded in the barrel.
Then dumbass would have blown his hand off and hurt nobody else

I can't say about now days but they used to be actual guns. They were rented and used as period current weapons with blanks. I saw a video of Halle Barry at a range taking lessons with live ammo shooting three gun I think. They have to at least look like they're competent with firearms they are using whether they are or not. It's all smoke and mirrors. Whatever happened on that set is likely to remain a mystery for speculation unless someone fesses up and tells the truth.

Possibly someone on the set thought it would be neat to have his real gun in an actual movie and brought it in as a loaner. If so, it would have been the armorer's job to fill the cylinders with plumbers putty.

The newest rumor is that some of the crew used that gun for some actual target shooting the day before. If that is true, one scenario is that when they finished, they dropped the magazine, but failed to clear the live round in the chamber. And the gun was never inspected before the accident except to insert a magazine of blanks. (I'm assuming a semi-auto, but don't know.)

All of which violate many basic gun safety rules, as we know. But they didn't. Especially the idiot bimbo they hired as "armourer."

"Handle every firearm as loaded."

Target rich environment ? I think so….

Reading Cali "news" sites this morning they keep using the phrase "the gun went off".
I keep calling them out on that bullshaitt.

They had semi-autos in 1880? I did not know that...

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...

And, according to the one article, was sitting in the church "practicing" before the filming by aiming at cameras. It was probably the way they wanted the angle set up for the film. And the young lady was the unlucky one behind the camera he was aiming at.

Giant f' up all the way around.

I'm no expert, but can't a SAA revolver be fired by releasing the hammer when it's almost all the way back - without ever touching the trigger? Like when practicing your "draw"? Might be another explanation.

Yes, but mainly on old guns...new pistols have a hammer/pin block. But even then, live ammo shouldn't have been in the gun much less mixed in with blanks.

...

Maybe...I am not in the filming business and have no clue....but I would personally have a difficult time using a real and working gun, pointing it at folks and pulling the trigger even if I had cleared it. There are plenty of 100% accurate fake guns, as well as ways to make real guns totally inoperable. I guess I'd have to be in the filming business to "understand".

No they cannot. They had a half cock notch that would catch the 3/4 cocked hammer. Perhaps some super old ones may not have had the half cock notch. If the hammer is fully cocked and released it will not go forward without the trigger being pulled.

I will pitch $20 towards more live ammo for Hollywood.

Who's with me?

There is zero reason for live ammo on a set. If live looking ammo is needed, it's unprimed, or no powder charge. Occasionally there will be a close up of the front of the revolver and the ammo in the chambers is visible for effect. Obviously blanks can't be used (they would visually obvious as a blank), so the armorer can put in unprimed/no powder ammo with real bullets for full visual effect. Lots of movies now show the ammo being loaded from a box or the actor pulls out the mag and checks the ammo, again, a live looking round is needed. No need for it to be live though. Any reloader can make ammo that looks real, but won't fire, so can a good armorer. Top Shot on History channel required live ammo, that not was not a scripted western, it was more reality competition.

A little gun knowledge on the actor's part would also help. Antigun dip$hits like Baldwin might have benefited from a hunter safety or basic handgun class.

If I were in the business of movie guns I'd have a supply of cases with the primer pocket drilled out. If you have to ask why, Alec Baldwin is hiring.