Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hollywood Reporter)   Alec Baldwin feels ignored, wants to remind you that he shot and killed someone. ABC "News" happy to help   (hollywoodreporter.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Good Morning America, Charles Gibson, first sit-down interview, Diane Sawyer, This Week, Alec Baldwin, ABC World News, ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos  
•       •       •

925 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 01 Dec 2021 at 9:50 AM (24 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



61 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-12-01 9:53:24 AM  
I just assume that this will be soon weaved into Q-lore.
 
2021-12-01 9:56:02 AM  
It's going to be a ratings killer (soory), and there will be four Fark threads about it.  What's your problem?  Isn't everybody getting PAID?
Then it's no problem, is it?  Point out your good taste to me when you stop shopping for a hobby.
 
2021-12-01 9:59:47 AM  
But did he cross state lines?
 
2021-12-01 10:02:01 AM  
Serious question here; no snark.

Under these circumstances, when would an interview NOT be considered news?
 
2021-12-01 10:15:19 AM  

Rapmaster2000: I just assume that this will be soon weaved into Q-lore.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-12-01 10:15:29 AM  
Baldwin shot two people and killed one
 
2021-12-01 10:18:56 AM  
genuine class
 
2021-12-01 10:25:16 AM  
The well-oiled machine that the film crew was had already had multiple safety incidents which is why the Union crew walked.  Baldwin is absolutely spinning BS here.
 
2021-12-01 10:29:53 AM  

borg: Baldwin shot two people and killed one


with one shot! using some crappy 100-year-old handgun!
I mean, c'mon. I'd interview him.
 
2021-12-01 10:49:36 AM  
Yes, yes, I'm sure it was Baldwin who floated the idea of being interviewed.
 
2021-12-01 10:59:58 AM  

mjbok: The well-oiled machine that the film crew was had already had multiple safety incidents which is why the Union crew walked.  Baldwin is absolutely spinning BS here.


It is basically trying to get out in front of the story and lawsuits.

Were he not a movie start producer and this was a story about a death on any other job site, lawyers would be telling the boss to say, "I can't really comment on an ongoing investigation," with maybe a "we're all heartbroken and our thoughts and prays go out to the families".

But the lawyers and PR hacks know they can't keep Baldwin quiet. Even worse they know if he doesn't talk to the press (or talks to the wrong press), they'll likely vilify Baldwin.

So they find an interviewer who's known for softballs and will likely be sympathetic and let Baldwin spin the story, not under oath (and that's important). Later they can settle civil suits with an NDA and his story becomes THE OFFICIAL ACCOUNT regardless of the actual facts.

As for criminal charges - he likely won't face any, unless you can prove he personally brought real, live ammo to the set or was willfully disregarding safety instructions he'd just been given (neither very likely, IMHO).

Yep, it'll kill in the ratings. I just really believe Baldwin will be treated as a victim here and the story will push the "horrific, freak accident" angle, pushing what little blame they assign down to the armorer and AD.

To be clear (and I keep saying this), I don't think Baldwin the actor is to blame for what happened. I think Baldwin the producer is for prioritizing budgets and schedules over the health and safety of his crew. And that is the angle I don't think ABC will cover.

But what do I know?
 
2021-12-01 11:00:05 AM  
Ignored?

the80sruled.comView Full Size
 
2021-12-01 11:01:03 AM  
Who the hell are his lawyers?
 
2021-12-01 11:04:29 AM  
Number of people alec Baldwin has killed: 1 (that we know of)

Number of people I (AmbassadorBooze) has killed: zero.  (That we know of).

Let that sink in. Baldwin is objectively more dangerous to be around than me.  Especially for women, since he has a history of killing women.  Not just killing them.  Shooting them with a gun and watching them die.  Just as he said he desired to do in a tweet.
 
2021-12-01 11:13:02 AM  

chewielouie: Who the hell are his lawyers?


Rich people have lawyers who are probably pretty competent, but in my experience, rich people often don't listen to their lawyers.
 
2021-12-01 11:15:01 AM  

SirEattonHogg: Ignored?

[the80sruled.com image 525x301]


...The Boo Box.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-12-01 11:40:17 AM  
This article add some more pertinent details that were left out. It turns out that in additions to Gutierrez-Reed serving as the armorer on set, the producers brought in a second, more experienced armorer, Seth Kenney, as "Armorer-Mentor." Kenney is the one who supplied the guns and ammunition, likely including the deadly live round. The rounds were supplied by Starline Brass, which sells marked blanks and dummies for film sets., and were brought in by Kenney in a can of mixed ammo left over from other films. However, someone (Kenney, Thell Reed, or another armorer) had reloaded some of the ammunition, which was in the mixed can. This is a new layer of messed up and actually does support Gutierrez-Reed's claim of "sabotage."
 
2021-12-01 11:45:01 AM  
All this is certainly more entertaining than the film could ever have been, and it will make a few lawyers more money than they could have dreamed of.
 
2021-12-01 12:17:41 PM  
Feck also shot and killed a guy so don't you try anything.
 
2021-12-01 12:28:35 PM  
Sincere question - I think I've read on a Fark thread that the work they were doing didn't even call for Baldwin to pull the trigger.  Has that been confirmed or refuted?  It's hard to wade through the thousands of links on this story.
 
2021-12-01 12:29:23 PM  

smurfco: genuine class


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-12-01 12:42:09 PM  

greentea1985: This article add some more pertinent details that were left out. It turns out that in additions to Gutierrez-Reed serving as the armorer on set, the producers brought in a second, more experienced armorer, Seth Kenney, as "Armorer-Mentor." Kenney is the one who supplied the guns and ammunition, likely including the deadly live round. The rounds were supplied by Starline Brass, which sells marked blanks and dummies for film sets., and were brought in by Kenney in a can of mixed ammo left over from other films. However, someone (Kenney, Thell Reed, or another armorer) had reloaded some of the ammunition, which was in the mixed can. This is a new layer of messed up and actually does support Gutierrez-Reed's claim of "sabotage."


I won't pretend to be the least bit knowledgeable about guns, but "can of mixed ammo" seems like one of the worst ideas in the history of bad ideas.
 
2021-12-01 12:55:42 PM  

NOLAhd: greentea1985: This article add some more pertinent details that were left out. It turns out that in additions to Gutierrez-Reed serving as the armorer on set, the producers brought in a second, more experienced armorer, Seth Kenney, as "Armorer-Mentor." Kenney is the one who supplied the guns and ammunition, likely including the deadly live round. The rounds were supplied by Starline Brass, which sells marked blanks and dummies for film sets., and were brought in by Kenney in a can of mixed ammo left over from other films. However, someone (Kenney, Thell Reed, or another armorer) had reloaded some of the ammunition, which was in the mixed can. This is a new layer of messed up and actually does support Gutierrez-Reed's claim of "sabotage."

I won't pretend to be the least bit knowledgeable about guns, but "can of mixed ammo" seems like one of the worst ideas in the history of bad ideas.


Yes. There were so many violations of gun stunt safety rules it isn't funny.

1.) The different types of ammo should never be stored together. A can of mixed, leftover ammunition has no business on set.

2.) Live, real ammunition consisting of all 4 parts (casing, primer, powder, projectile) should never be on set and really shouldn't be present at all.

3.) Live blank (case, primer, powder) or dummy ammunition (case, projectile, rarely primer) should never be "reloaded" to make it real live ammunition. The blank and dummy ammo are usually marked to let a person know on sight if it is dummy or a blank. Reloading (putting the missing components back in) increases the odds of an accident.

4.) Armorer should carefully inspect and load gun with the correct ammo for the gun stunt in front of the actor and assistant director. The armorer wasn't allowed onto the set and didn't check the gun, nor did the assistant director who was on the set.

There are a dozen more rule breaks, including clear chain-of-custody issues, but these are the most glaring ones at the moment.
 
2021-12-01 1:43:38 PM  

Rapmaster2000: I just assume that this will be soon weaved into Q-lore.


Thought it already was with the victim working on a documentary about Hollywood pedophiles.
 
2021-12-01 1:54:40 PM  
memegenerator.netView Full Size
 
2021-12-01 2:24:28 PM  
"I didn't pull the trigger."

Uh, yes you did, son. That's how those things work.
 
2021-12-01 2:32:14 PM  
George Snuffleupagus is actually more annoying than Baldwin.
 
2021-12-01 2:50:59 PM  

FLMountainMan: Sincere question - I think I've read on a Fark thread that the work they were doing didn't even call for Baldwin to pull the trigger.  Has that been confirmed or refuted?  It's hard to wade through the thousands of links on this story.


So keep a few things in mind:

Baldwin isn't "a gun guy" (to put it mildly) and has limited experience with them. All (or almost all) of it on movie sets, trying to do dramatic looking things with fake or unloaded guns. If he was drawing the gun for an action scene, he likely would have been cocking the gun and had his finger on the trigger for the scene.

Forget all the Internet gun safety experts piping in with "never put your finger on the trigger until you're ready to shoot, never point a gun at someone". This is Hollywood with their own set of gun safety rules for movies that, to be fair, have worked pretty well when followed. The scene called for him to perform a dramatic, "ready for action" draw. That means a fairly complicated draw, cock and aim routine, all while in motion, with his finger on the trigger. If Baldwin was unfamiliar with the gun, especially if it had a light trigger pull, it's possible he pulled the trigger by accident.

I know it sounds silly but just the draw/cock/aim routine while standing still is complicated enough that many target ranges specifically ban it.

And then there's the gun. The weapon in question is Colt Single Action Army. The design of that handgun left the hammer sitting on the primer, meaning they were prone to going off if the gun was jarred (and it didn't take much). This was a known issue with the old "Cowboy Revolvers", not just the SAA. That's why many people feel the only safe way to carry a revolver is with an empty chamber under the hammer, even with modern revolvers.

And, from what I've read, the gun was "vintage". That term is kind of vague, but we can assume in this case it means old. The part of a gun that holds the hammer back is called the sear. A worn or defective sear can result in a true misfire, even if the trigger is not pulled. While uncommon, sear failures due to bad design, manufacturing defect or wear are not unheard of.

Plus, of course, scenes get rewritten on the fly all time. Indiana Jones shooting the swordsman in the original movie is probably the most famous case of that. Harrison Ford wasn't even supposed to draw his gun, let alone pull the trigger.

No, him pulling the trigger did not cause this. A chain of failures, apparently involving multiple people, in following Hollywood safety protocols led to this. Had everyone else involved done their job, it wouldn't have mattered what the scene called for.
 
2021-12-01 2:54:04 PM  

phenn: "I didn't pull the trigger."

Uh, yes you did, son. That's how those things work.


See my comment above.
 
2021-12-01 3:03:55 PM  
Oh, do fark off, Alec.
 
2021-12-01 3:04:58 PM  
I mean obviously he physically pulled the trigger, but not metaphorically
 
2021-12-01 3:06:20 PM  
Clearly he's devastated if he needs to go on television and talk about it.
 
2021-12-01 3:21:30 PM  

greentea1985: This article add some more pertinent details that were left out. It turns out that in additions to Gutierrez-Reed serving as the armorer on set, the producers brought in a second, more experienced armorer, Seth Kenney, as "Armorer-Mentor." Kenney is the one who supplied the guns and ammunition, likely including the deadly live round. The rounds were supplied by Starline Brass, which sells marked blanks and dummies for film sets., and were brought in by Kenney in a can of mixed ammo left over from other films. However, someone (Kenney, Thell Reed, or another armorer) had reloaded some of the ammunition, which was in the mixed can. This is a new layer of messed up and actually does support Gutierrez-Reed's claim of "sabotage."


I don't see where Kenny was "Armorer-Mentor" to the woman who was supposed to be the film's CHIEF armorer. In fact, Kenny denies working for the production.

I don't see where the article says Kenny brought in a mixed can of ammo from other films. Although possible, it's a huge leap to make based on the article.

And the article provides no real evidence of conspiracy, just possible carelessness and incompetence.

What it does say is the armorer's father may know where the bullet came from. But it appears the brand of ammo used was a fairly common product in Hollywood and so it hardly proves anything by itself. Further it says this was standard ammo, not something special made up to look like a dummy. And try this one, daddy admits he had Starline ammo. Who's to say Hanna didn't "borrow" some of daddy's gear for work?

Even if Kenny did mix live rounds in with dummies (quite possible, I admit), it was the armorer's job to load the weapons. If she couldn't tell the difference between a dummy and a live round, she shouldn't have had the job. If she was unsure, she should have put the rounds in question aside.

And it doesn't address the previous firearm mishaps on set, the failure to properly secure weapons, failure in the chain of possess or the AD declaring the gun safe.

There was no conspiracy. This is just garden varity human carelessness and incompetence, even if the chain of events started with Kenny.
 
2021-12-01 3:29:03 PM  

p89tech: phenn: "I didn't pull the trigger."

Uh, yes you did, son. That's how those things work.

See my comment above.


Not even a "vintage" SAA is going to go off by itself simply by pointing it. It'd have to be jarred about in some way. Even a slppy quick draw and aim shouldn't do that. Or you're talking about an incredibly poor condition firearm. There was supposed to have been some live round 'target practice', right? If that damaged the gun enough, if it really was old and poorly maintained-not some modern Uberti or Cimmeron model that are in wide use in movies-then it didn't belong anywhere near that set.

Or he had the hammer back and unknowingly touched the trigger. Maybe he knew about the carrying on an empty chamber thing and figured he might be able to spin this with this type of revolver and only this type of revolver.
 
2021-12-01 3:46:44 PM  
I was flagged by a cretin at the range way back in the day. He flagged me with an "empty" M1. And was stupefied when I quietly walked to my car and drove off.

A few years later I was at a party, everyone having a good time, most were buzzed or drunk. Then the host decides it's a good time to show off his new revolver. I quietly exited.

A few years later my construction crew decided to take the day off, buy a gallon of booze, and go plinking with what looked like a rusty AR platform. I declined.

I have an amazing sense of stupidity when it's located near firearms. And I can steer clear.

If one fourth of what I've read about the Rust set is true, I would have walked off that set on day one.
 
2021-12-01 3:57:25 PM  

Your_Huckleberry: p89tech: phenn: "I didn't pull the trigger."

Uh, yes you did, son. That's how those things work.

See my comment above.

Not even a "vintage" SAA is going to go off by itself simply by pointing it. It'd have to be jarred about in some way. Even a slppy quick draw and aim shouldn't do that. Or you're talking about an incredibly poor condition firearm. There was supposed to have been some live round 'target practice', right? If that damaged the gun enough, if it really was old and poorly maintained-not some modern Uberti or Cimmeron model that are in wide use in movies-then it didn't belong anywhere near that set.

Or he had the hammer back and unknowingly touched the trigger. Maybe he knew about the carrying on an empty chamber thing and figured he might be able to spin this with this type of revolver and only this type of revolver.


Umm, about that. I saw an SAA clone go off when it was put down on a shooting stand once. Might have dropped an inch or so, I guess, but the owner swore he just put it down. Fortunately it was pointed down range.

A worn or defective sear will cause misfires. Sig Sauer paid millions accidental discharges due to the design of the P320. Worn sears have been known to turn semi-auto firearms into full auto (or at least burst fire).

And, while he technically would have pulled the trigger, a light trigger pull could have caused the gun to fire without him realizing he pulled the trigger.

I'm no fan of Baldwin, I just feel like as the actor, he's not responsible for what happened. I do feel like as the producer he failed in his responsibility to provide a safe environment for his cast and crew. He should be held liable for that.
 
2021-12-01 4:01:54 PM  
His fault is as a producer, you're right.
 
2021-12-01 4:17:24 PM  
I read a Baldwin quote from another source, saying that he believes police officers should be on every set, supervising gun safety or something.

The amount of stupid swells to a crescendo.
 
2021-12-01 4:17:35 PM  

SirEattonHogg: chewielouie: Who the hell are his lawyers?

Rich people have lawyers who are probably pretty competent, but in my experience, rich people often don't listen to their lawyers.


Even competent lawyers for the rich make bad decisions and mistakes. There is absolutely no reason why he should be giving any statements or interviews at this time.
 
2021-12-01 4:41:35 PM  
"I didn't pull the trigger." - Alec Baldwin

Yes you did, Alec. Yes you did.
 
wee
2021-12-01 4:44:47 PM  

imashark: I read a Baldwin quote from another source, saying that he believes police officers should be on every set, supervising gun safety or something.

The amount of stupid swells to a crescendo.


It's stupid because it's not necessary. They had an armorer. The only person who is allowed to touch a gun on set behind the cameras is the armorer, who is the only person allowed to give a gun to an actor.

The minute the scene is over, the actor gives the gun back to the armorer who unloads and secures it.

At no point does the AD, or anyone else, get to touch the guns. Live ammo is never, ever allowed on set. You never take the guns out "plinking". Nobody should have access to the guns except the armorer, who has the only key and is on-set every single second a gun is out. All those failures happened on Rust.

The armorer is 100% responsible for gun safety on set. No police needed.

Honestly, I question why they were using guns that could take live ammo in the first place. The ones I saw used had chamber and barrel inserts that prevented real ammo from being loaded or fired.
 
2021-12-01 6:05:42 PM  

p89tech: mjbok: The well-oiled machine that the film crew was had already had multiple safety incidents which is why the Union crew walked.  Baldwin is absolutely spinning BS here.

It is basically trying to get out in front of the story and lawsuits.

Were he not a movie start producer and this was a story about a death on any other job site, lawyers would be telling the boss to say, "I can't really comment on an ongoing investigation," with maybe a "we're all heartbroken and our thoughts and prays go out to the families".

But the lawyers and PR hacks know they can't keep Baldwin quiet. Even worse they know if he doesn't talk to the press (or talks to the wrong press), they'll likely vilify Baldwin.

So they find an interviewer who's known for softballs and will likely be sympathetic and let Baldwin spin the story, not under oath (and that's important). Later they can settle civil suits with an NDA and his story becomes THE OFFICIAL ACCOUNT regardless of the actual facts.

As for criminal charges - he likely won't face any, unless you can prove he personally brought real, live ammo to the set or was willfully disregarding safety instructions he'd just been given (neither very likely, IMHO).

Yep, it'll kill in the ratings. I just really believe Baldwin will be treated as a victim here and the story will push the "horrific, freak accident" angle, pushing what little blame they assign down to the armorer and AD.

To be clear (and I keep saying this), I don't think Baldwin the actor is to blame for what happened. I think Baldwin the producer is for prioritizing budgets and schedules over the health and safety of his crew. And that is the angle I don't think ABC will cover.

But what do I know?


It's 100% the armorer's fault. It was her job to ensure gun safety and to have procedures in place, which if followed, would not have had the gun incident (or the previous gun incident).

Budgets and schedules have fark-all to do with gun safety, unless you mean that they shouldn't have hired this young woman to be armorer and should have hired some greybeard or a former special ops guy to be armorer, in which case, uh, ok.
 
2021-12-01 6:45:16 PM  

greentea1985: NOLAhd: greentea1985: This article add some more pertinent details that were left out. It turns out that in additions to Gutierrez-Reed serving as the armorer on set, the producers brought in a second, more experienced armorer, Seth Kenney, as "Armorer-Mentor." Kenney is the one who supplied the guns and ammunition, likely including the deadly live round. The rounds were supplied by Starline Brass, which sells marked blanks and dummies for film sets., and were brought in by Kenney in a can of mixed ammo left over from other films. However, someone (Kenney, Thell Reed, or another armorer) had reloaded some of the ammunition, which was in the mixed can. This is a new layer of messed up and actually does support Gutierrez-Reed's claim of "sabotage."

I won't pretend to be the least bit knowledgeable about guns, but "can of mixed ammo" seems like one of the worst ideas in the history of bad ideas.

Yes. There were so many violations of gun stunt safety rules it isn't funny.

1.) The different types of ammo should never be stored together. A can of mixed, leftover ammunition has no business on set.

2.) Live, real ammunition consisting of all 4 parts (casing, primer, powder, projectile) should never be on set and really shouldn't be present at all.

3.) Live blank (case, primer, powder) or dummy ammunition (case, projectile, rarely primer) should never be "reloaded" to make it real live ammunition. The blank and dummy ammo are usually marked to let a person know on sight if it is dummy or a blank. Reloading (putting the missing components back in) increases the odds of an accident.

4.) Armorer should carefully inspect and load gun with the correct ammo for the gun stunt in front of the actor and assistant director. The armorer wasn't allowed onto the set and didn't check the gun, nor did the assistant director who was on the set.

There are a dozen more rule breaks, including clear chain-of-custody issues, but these are the most glaring ones at the moment.


Baldwin is also claiming that he didn't pull the trigger. There have been some reports on Twitter that the gun used on set is known to misfire. Like it is a known thing for that particular gun. I have no idea if that hold any merit or not.
 
2021-12-01 6:46:57 PM  

chewielouie: "I didn't pull the trigger." - Alec Baldwin

Yes you did, Alec. Yes you did.


I mean it is possible, but there might be video proving or disproving what he said. There has been many misfires on set before this happened. So that tends to mean the gun just went off for no reason. It does happen, but very rarely.
 
2021-12-01 6:48:40 PM  

wee: imashark: I read a Baldwin quote from another source, saying that he believes police officers should be on every set, supervising gun safety or something.

The amount of stupid swells to a crescendo.

It's stupid because it's not necessary. They had an armorer. The only person who is allowed to touch a gun on set behind the cameras is the armorer, who is the only person allowed to give a gun to an actor.

The minute the scene is over, the actor gives the gun back to the armorer who unloads and secures it.

At no point does the AD, or anyone else, get to touch the guns. Live ammo is never, ever allowed on set. You never take the guns out "plinking". Nobody should have access to the guns except the armorer, who has the only key and is on-set every single second a gun is out. All those failures happened on Rust.

The armorer is 100% responsible for gun safety on set. No police needed.

Honestly, I question why they were using guns that could take live ammo in the first place. The ones I saw used had chamber and barrel inserts that prevented real ammo from being loaded or fired.


It's a period film using period weapons. Barrel blocks and other means of rendering the gun unable to fire live ammo don't work with period revolvers well because the barrel is exposed and visible to the audience. So they tend to go with unloaded weapons or weapons with dummy rounds.
 
2021-12-01 6:52:29 PM  

demonfaerie: greentea1985: NOLAhd: greentea1985: This article add some more pertinent details that were left out. It turns out that in additions to Gutierrez-Reed serving as the armorer on set, the producers brought in a second, more experienced armorer, Seth Kenney, as "Armorer-Mentor." Kenney is the one who supplied the guns and ammunition, likely including the deadly live round. The rounds were supplied by Starline Brass, which sells marked blanks and dummies for film sets., and were brought in by Kenney in a can of mixed ammo left over from other films. However, someone (Kenney, Thell Reed, or another armorer) had reloaded some of the ammunition, which was in the mixed can. This is a new layer of messed up and actually does support Gutierrez-Reed's claim of "sabotage."

I won't pretend to be the least bit knowledgeable about guns, but "can of mixed ammo" seems like one of the worst ideas in the history of bad ideas.

Yes. There were so many violations of gun stunt safety rules it isn't funny.

1.) The different types of ammo should never be stored together. A can of mixed, leftover ammunition has no business on set.

2.) Live, real ammunition consisting of all 4 parts (casing, primer, powder, projectile) should never be on set and really shouldn't be present at all.

3.) Live blank (case, primer, powder) or dummy ammunition (case, projectile, rarely primer) should never be "reloaded" to make it real live ammunition. The blank and dummy ammo are usually marked to let a person know on sight if it is dummy or a blank. Reloading (putting the missing components back in) increases the odds of an accident.

4.) Armorer should carefully inspect and load gun with the correct ammo for the gun stunt in front of the actor and assistant director. The armorer wasn't allowed onto the set and didn't check the gun, nor did the assistant director who was on the set.

There are a dozen more rule breaks, including clear chain-of-custody issues, but these are the most glaring ones at the moment.

Baldwin is also claiming that he didn't pull the trigger. There have been some reports on Twitter that the gun used on set is known to misfire. Like it is a known thing for that particular gun. I have no idea if that hold any merit or not.


It is a known hazard of 19th century revolvers, including the model of Colt revolver Baldwin was using. It's why a lot of people who handle revolvers prefer to keep at least the chamber under the hammer unloaded to avoid accidental discharge.
 
2021-12-01 7:06:36 PM  

greentea1985: demonfaerie: greentea1985: NOLAhd: greentea1985: This article add some more pertinent details that were left out. It turns out that in additions to Gutierrez-Reed serving as the armorer on set, the producers brought in a second, more experienced armorer, Seth Kenney, as "Armorer-Mentor." Kenney is the one who supplied the guns and ammunition, likely including the deadly live round. The rounds were supplied by Starline Brass, which sells marked blanks and dummies for film sets., and were brought in by Kenney in a can of mixed ammo left over from other films. However, someone (Kenney, Thell Reed, or another armorer) had reloaded some of the ammunition, which was in the mixed can. This is a new layer of messed up and actually does support Gutierrez-Reed's claim of "sabotage."

I won't pretend to be the least bit knowledgeable about guns, but "can of mixed ammo" seems like one of the worst ideas in the history of bad ideas.

Yes. There were so many violations of gun stunt safety rules it isn't funny.

1.) The different types of ammo should never be stored together. A can of mixed, leftover ammunition has no business on set.

2.) Live, real ammunition consisting of all 4 parts (casing, primer, powder, projectile) should never be on set and really shouldn't be present at all.

3.) Live blank (case, primer, powder) or dummy ammunition (case, projectile, rarely primer) should never be "reloaded" to make it real live ammunition. The blank and dummy ammo are usually marked to let a person know on sight if it is dummy or a blank. Reloading (putting the missing components back in) increases the odds of an accident.

4.) Armorer should carefully inspect and load gun with the correct ammo for the gun stunt in front of the actor and assistant director. The armorer wasn't allowed onto the set and didn't check the gun, nor did the assistant director who was on the set.

There are a dozen more rule breaks, including clear chain-of-custody issues, but these are the most glaring ones a ...


Thanks for the information, I didn't know that. So he very well could be telling the truth that he didn't pull the trigger.
 
2021-12-01 7:30:18 PM  
I don't think it is wise for him to be doing this right now. This is all moving toward litigation, now.
IANAL, but if I were his, I'd be telling him to STFU.
 
2021-12-01 7:59:58 PM  

greentea1985: demonfaerie: greentea1985: NOLAhd: greentea1985: This article add some more pertinent details that were left out. It turns out that in additions to Gutierrez-Reed serving as the armorer on set, the producers brought in a second, more experienced armorer, Seth Kenney, as "Armorer-Mentor." Kenney is the one who supplied the guns and ammunition, likely including the deadly live round. The rounds were supplied by Starline Brass, which sells marked blanks and dummies for film sets., and were brought in by Kenney in a can of mixed ammo left over from other films. However, someone (Kenney, Thell Reed, or another armorer) had reloaded some of the ammunition, which was in the mixed can. This is a new layer of messed up and actually does support Gutierrez-Reed's claim of "sabotage."

I won't pretend to be the least bit knowledgeable about guns, but "can of mixed ammo" seems like one of the worst ideas in the history of bad ideas.

Yes. There were so many violations of gun stunt safety rules it isn't funny.

1.) The different types of ammo should never be stored together. A can of mixed, leftover ammunition has no business on set.

2.) Live, real ammunition consisting of all 4 parts (casing, primer, powder, projectile) should never be on set and really shouldn't be present at all.

3.) Live blank (case, primer, powder) or dummy ammunition (case, projectile, rarely primer) should never be "reloaded" to make it real live ammunition. The blank and dummy ammo are usually marked to let a person know on sight if it is dummy or a blank. Reloading (putting the missing components back in) increases the odds of an accident.

4.) Armorer should carefully inspect and load gun with the correct ammo for the gun stunt in front of the actor and assistant director. The armorer wasn't allowed onto the set and didn't check the gun, nor did the assistant director who was on the set.

There are a dozen more rule breaks, including clear chain-of-custody issues, but these are the most glaring ones at the moment.

Baldwin is also claiming that he didn't pull the trigger. There have been some reports on Twitter that the gun used on set is known to misfire. Like it is a known thing for that particular gun. I have no idea if that hold any merit or not.

It is a known hazard of 19th century revolvers, including the model of Colt revolver Baldwin was using. It's why a lot of people who handle revolvers prefer to keep at least the chamber under the hammer unloaded to avoid accidental discharge.


I've read the gun was a modern repro made by Pietta, and some of those have a transfer bar that allows for safe carrying of a bullet under the hammer (in a proper functioning gun). I don't know if that particular gun had a transfer bar though.
 
2021-12-01 8:11:17 PM  

p89tech: mjbok: The well-oiled machine that the film crew was had already had multiple safety incidents which is why the Union crew walked.  Baldwin is absolutely spinning BS here.

It is basically trying to get out in front of the story and lawsuits.

Were he not a movie start producer and this was a story about a death on any other job site, lawyers would be telling the boss to say, "I can't really comment on an ongoing investigation," with maybe a "we're all heartbroken and our thoughts and prays go out to the families".

But the lawyers and PR hacks know they can't keep Baldwin quiet. Even worse they know if he doesn't talk to the press (or talks to the wrong press), they'll likely vilify Baldwin.

So they find an interviewer who's known for softballs and will likely be sympathetic and let Baldwin spin the story, not under oath (and that's important). Later they can settle civil suits with an NDA and his story becomes THE OFFICIAL ACCOUNT regardless of the actual facts.

As for criminal charges - he likely won't face any, unless you can prove he personally brought real, live ammo to the set or was willfully disregarding safety instructions he'd just been given (neither very likely, IMHO).

Yep, it'll kill in the ratings. I just really believe Baldwin will be treated as a victim here and the story will push the "horrific, freak accident" angle, pushing what little blame they assign down to the armorer and AD.

To be clear (and I keep saying this), I don't think Baldwin the actor is to blame for what happened. I think Baldwin the producer is for prioritizing budgets and schedules over the health and safety of his crew. And that is the angle I don't think ABC will cover.

But what do I know?


So you think he didn't pull the trigger, too?
 
Displayed 50 of 61 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.