Alex Baldwin will be charged with involuntary manslaughter

veggie quesadilla

🌮: 4, 11, 18, 25
OT Supporter
Aug 6, 2010
10,904
I still don't know that being a producer makes him criminally liable simply because I wasn't on set and haven't looked into this case enough to know if there are any reports on the armorer's obvious or intentional negligence noted by staff on set. I have no idea, the court will figure that out I guess. Financially, however, I think it's perfectly fitting he hold the bag for any lawsuits and so on related to the incident.

That said. Expecting Alec to know anything about firearms just because he has waved a couple around in a few movies beforehand while being pretty outspoken about his disdain of firearms in his personal life is about as responsible and reasonable as expecting Angelina Jolie to be an accomplished computer hacker in real life due to her previous role portraying one. The shits make believe and actors are just professional liars and actual charlatans.I think this one firmly lands at the feet of the armorer who fucked up bigly here- If this was their first mistake or just the culmination of a ton of super obvious mistakes that should've had them ejected from the set before the incident that lead to the death of whoever, I have no idea and I suppose that's for the DA to prove and court to decide on at this point.
I don't mean to suggest that Baldwin knows how to safely handle a gun or knows anything at all about guns. I'm suggesting that he knows the safety protocols that are in place on a film set when it comes to guns. He's not going to blindly start firing a gun handed to him by some rando he doesn't know, for example. It's unclear who handed him the gun, and it's unclear whether the gun was inspected in any way before handing it to him. Baldwin's experience with handling guns on film sets would suggest that he knows what protocols are expected to be followed when a firearm is exchanged. Was someone supposed to inspect the gun in front of him before handing it to him? I don't know. But he would know. That's all I'm saying. Again, I don't know the degree to which he ought be considered culpable here. But I could see it being greater than zero.
 

B-Line

Stand Up Philosopher
OT Supporter
Mar 8, 2009
24,929
Los Angeles
I can tell the difference 90% of the time. But given the choice between worker safety and more realistic gunshots, I'll choose worker safety.

And in the past 100 years, how many people have accidentally been shot on film sets resulting in worker death? Making it sounds like this is an industry ongoing issue is kind of funny.
 

Kafka

PaulGiamattiFan420
OT Supporter
Feb 16, 2007
51,881
America
Still needs to show Baldwin acted with some gross negligence and acted "without due caution"

New Mexico: "Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act [which] that might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection."
Yeah I understand that but that’s why negligence is the standard and not intent. You said you need to show intent. But you don’t for involuntary. Hell the name of the offense itself tells you that no intent is involved.
 

MiseryIndex

open your eyes child, your sea is changing.
Nov 9, 2000
165,488
heaven's fence.
Yeah I understand that but that’s why negligence is the standard and not intent. You said you need to show intent. But you don’t for involuntary. Hell the name of the offense itself tells you that no intent is involved.

if its in the article i'm sorry for this question. but is he being charged as the one who pulled the trigger, or a producer responsible for the set? because they'd be different questions here.

i don't see how an actor is necessarily responsible.

when brandon lee died there was a lawsuit but no criminal charges.
 

sp00n155

You underestimate the insignificance of my penis
OT Supporter
Jan 30, 2006
21,535
Bisbee, AZ
I'm not sure, but iirc the armorer wasn't even on set. Nobody should have been handling guns at all.
Not a big enough yikes in the universe if that's the case and I'd completely reverse my opinion on Baldwin and the AD being charged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Cool

Boots

I'm wearing a disguise
Jul 2, 2001
14,321
🇨🇦
That's dumb. If he got into a stunt harness to film some cgi scenes and the harness failed causing him to fall onto someone and kill them, is it his fault he didn't inspect the stunt harness before getting into it? He's not a stunt coordinator, he's an actor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Twinsen

Bob Sandvagene

Calcutta Viper
OT Supporter
Oct 18, 2004
108,942
Calcutta
Based off the limited amount I know of this, I don't think anyone other than the armorer should be charged. Alec was told it was a prop gun, I think its unreasonable for him to expect a live round to be in a weapon like that.

I'm guessing they're going to get him for being the producer on this and for 1. hiring an inexperienced or unqualified armorer 2. approving the armorer to go shooting with live rounds in the gun / approving using movie budget for live rounds (so he knows live rounds are around and therefore would have a duty to check and ensure the live round wasn't in the gun at the time of the incident) 3. not putting in redundancies like an extra employee to make sure all guns on set were loaded with only blanks, cutting budget so that the armorer did not have an assistant, not having more than one armorer for the number of guns on this set at this time etc.

Involuntary manslaughter here is determined on the grounds of negligence - so it boils down to "did Alec / armorer / director guy use the care a reasonable person would have in this situation." I think its a bit of a stretch to argue that Alec, who will argue that he is inexperienced with guns, would need to check the gun himself when "a reasonable person would trust the professional armorer to make sure the gun is loaded with the correct blank cartridge." The negligence is probably higher up in the decision chain that lead to the accident - hiring choices, budget management etc.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out. I'm guessing he'll end up pleaing to something instead of going through trial on it. He's been coached to show that he is remorseful and deeply saddened by the killing here and that'll help with sentencing if he goes through trial and loses.
 

veggie quesadilla

🌮: 4, 11, 18, 25
OT Supporter
Aug 6, 2010
10,904
He's been coached to show that he is remorseful and deeply saddened by the killing here and that'll help with sentencing if he goes through trial and loses.
I doubt he had to be "coached" to be deeply saddened that he accidentally murdered his colleague. :rofl:
 

sp00n155

You underestimate the insignificance of my penis
OT Supporter
Jan 30, 2006
21,535
Bisbee, AZ
why does being an actor absolve him of the responsibility of checking the weapon?
Why do you assume he knows how or what to look for or should be trusted in any capacity to be able to identify safe prop ammunition vs live ammo?
 

MiseryIndex

open your eyes child, your sea is changing.
Nov 9, 2000
165,488
heaven's fence.
why does being an actor absolve him of the responsibility of checking the weapon?

because its literally not the actors job according to the actors equity association’s guidelines :dunno:

think about a movie like john wick, or worse a war movie. how much extra time it would add to filming if each actor had to check before each shot and figure out if the gun has a blank or dummy bullet or actual bullet? even if they were trained on it. there's a liability that doesn't and shouldn't fall on them.

in the case of this movie, it was 1800s period piece with old guns too.
 

Twinsen

Resident Negro
OT Supporter
Mar 12, 2006
70,684
Memphis, TN
Maybe there’s an attractive woman involved in the trial so we can repeat your amber heard meltdown 😂😂😭
Shots fired.


















in a shots fired thread.























nxqNRD.gif
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bearsdidit

Chuck Finley

Florida Man | Infamous ROFL Spammer
Super Moderator
May 1, 2002
96,239
St Pete, FL
well hopefully what actually happens is that the film industry wakes up and stops using real guns on set. it's already convincing enough with props; add in post production and then it's a wonder why you'd even have to use real guns at all

you'll never actually satisfy gunbros on realism anyway, so better to avoid the liability in the first place
:rofl: No, it’s painfully obvious when that shit is faked.
 

Swiftie

not a troll account
Jun 4, 2004
49,815
OKC
because its literally not the actors job according to the actors equity association’s guidelines :dunno:

think about a movie like john wick, or worse a war movie. how much extra time it would add to filming if each actor had to check before each shot and figure out if the gun has a blank or dummy bullet or actual bullet? even if they were trained on it. there's a liability that doesn't and shouldn't fall on them.

in the case of this movie, it was 1800s period piece with old guns too.

  • Treat all guns as if they are loaded and deadly.

  • Never point a firearm at anyone including yourself. Always cheat the shot by aiming to the right or left of the target character. If asked to point and shoot directly at a living target, consult with the property master or armorer for the prescribed safety procedures.

  • State and federal safety laws must be honored at all times.

 

Ron

OT Supporter
Sep 21, 2003
157,237
Based off the limited amount I know of this, I don't think anyone other than the armorer should be charged. Alec was told it was a prop gun, I think its unreasonable for him to expect a live round to be in a weapon like that.

I'm guessing they're going to get him for being the producer on this and for 1. hiring an inexperienced or unqualified armorer 2. approving the armorer to go shooting with live rounds in the gun / approving using movie budget for live rounds (so he knows live rounds are around and therefore would have a duty to check and ensure the live round wasn't in the gun at the time of the incident) 3. not putting in redundancies like an extra employee to make sure all guns on set were loaded with only blanks, cutting budget so that the armorer did not have an assistant, not having more than one armorer for the number of guns on this set at this time etc.

Involuntary manslaughter here is determined on the grounds of negligence - so it boils down to "did Alec / armorer / director guy use the care a reasonable person would have in this situation." I think its a bit of a stretch to argue that Alec, who will argue that he is inexperienced with guns, would need to check the gun himself when "a reasonable person would trust the professional armorer to make sure the gun is loaded with the correct blank cartridge." The negligence is probably higher up in the decision chain that lead to the accident - hiring choices, budget management etc.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out. I'm guessing he'll end up pleaing to something instead of going through trial on it. He's been coached to show that he is remorseful and deeply saddened by the killing here and that'll help with sentencing if he goes through trial and loses.
They’re arguing repeated safety negligence by the production team and armorer
 

MiseryIndex

open your eyes child, your sea is changing.
Nov 9, 2000
165,488
heaven's fence.
  • Treat all guns as if they are loaded and deadly.

  • Never point a firearm at anyone including yourself. Always cheat the shot by aiming to the right or left of the target character. If asked to point and shoot directly at a living target, consult with the property master or armorer for the prescribed safety procedures.

  • State and federal safety laws must be honored at all times.


he didn't point it at an actor on set, it was a cinematographer that got shot. :dunno:

even with those guidelines, what did he do wrong?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

About Us

  • Please do not post anything that violates any Local, State, Federal or International Laws. Your privacy is protected. You have the right to be forgotten. Site funded by advertising, link monetization and member support.
OT v15.13.2 Copyright © 2000-2023 Offtopic.com
Served by fx.offtopic.com

Online statistics

Members online
435
Guests online
116
Total visitors
551

Forum statistics

Threads
79,412
Messages
7,731,550
Members
87,089
Latest member
olegarchy