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 Reload)   Most claims that a gun "went off" on its own can be dismissed out of hand. In Alec Baldwin's case, it's very possible   (thereload.com) divider line
    More: Followup, Trigger, Safety, Robert Adams, M1911 pistol, Firearm components, Firearm, Firing pin, Firearms  
•       •       •

6375 clicks; posted to Main » and Entertainment » on 02 Dec 2021 at 11:11 AM (8 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-12-02 10:36:49 AM  
The devil and Steve Earle unavailable for comment.
 
2021-12-02 10:48:12 AM  
Yup. Pure bullshiat. Own all of it.
 
2021-12-02 11:03:32 AM  
My theory: The scene he was rehearsing sounds like a quick draw. So, while rehearsing it, he may have been pantomiming fanning the hammer, as one might when quick drawing and firing a single-action revolver.  If you pull back the hammer, but not enough to cock the gun, that hammer's just going to slam back down on the chamber, potentially firing the round inside.

So it's very possible that he could have never touched the trigger, but did brush the hammer, causing the gun to fire. And he might not have known that was even possible, because most modern guns include a physical barrier between the hammer and the chamber that prevents the hammer from striking a round unless there's at least some slack on the trigger.  A lot of safety emphasis is placed on keeping the booger hook off the boom switch, but comparatively less emphasis is put on not dicking around with the part of the gun that physically causes a round to fire.
 
2021-12-02 11:09:19 AM  

NewportBarGuy: Yup. Pure bullshiat. Own all of it.


I'll add this... A lot of people immediately came out to support Alec being a sad victim in this safety error by the prop lady and the AD. Even people who dislike him for his politics... no, not all.

But he's sh*tting on everyone who did support him by not owning this 100% and working with his money and time and CLOUT to help improve movie safety.

You pulled the trigger, Alec. That's how guns work.
 
2021-12-02 11:12:43 AM  

Nuuu: My theory: The scene he was rehearsing sounds like a quick draw. So, while rehearsing it, he may have been pantomiming fanning the hammer, as one might when quick drawing and firing a single-action revolver.  If you pull back the hammer, but not enough to cock the gun, that hammer's just going to slam back down on the chamber, potentially firing the round inside.

So it's very possible that he could have never touched the trigger, but did brush the hammer, causing the gun to fire. And he might not have known that was even possible, because most modern guns include a physical barrier between the hammer and the chamber that prevents the hammer from striking a round unless there's at least some slack on the trigger.  A lot of safety emphasis is placed on keeping the booger hook off the boom switch, but comparatively less emphasis is put on not dicking around with the part of the gun that physically causes a round to fire.


That's what the half-cock notch is there to prevent -  a safety feature going back to the earliest firearms that had a hammer.

Fanning would generally involve having the trigger already held back though, which of course defeats both modern and old timey safeties.
 
2021-12-02 11:14:08 AM  
Boy... what a shiatty armorer.
 
2021-12-02 11:15:23 AM  

NewportBarGuy: Yup. Pure bullshiat. Own all of it.


Remington & Taurus, read up.
 
2021-12-02 11:16:34 AM  
You can tell it was a non-union gun.
 
2021-12-02 11:16:47 AM  

JessieL: Nuuu: My theory: The scene he was rehearsing sounds like a quick draw. So, while rehearsing it, he may have been pantomiming fanning the hammer, as one might when quick drawing and firing a single-action revolver.  If you pull back the hammer, but not enough to cock the gun, that hammer's just going to slam back down on the chamber, potentially firing the round inside.

So it's very possible that he could have never touched the trigger, but did brush the hammer, causing the gun to fire. And he might not have known that was even possible, because most modern guns include a physical barrier between the hammer and the chamber that prevents the hammer from striking a round unless there's at least some slack on the trigger.  A lot of safety emphasis is placed on keeping the booger hook off the boom switch, but comparatively less emphasis is put on not dicking around with the part of the gun that physically causes a round to fire.

That's what the half-cock notch is there to prevent -  a safety feature going back to the earliest firearms that had a hammer.

Fanning would generally involve having the trigger already held back though, which of course defeats both modern and old timey safeties.


He went off half-cocked.

/I never thought about that figure of speech before
 
2021-12-02 11:17:06 AM  
"Immaculate percussion*
 
2021-12-02 11:19:07 AM  
I'll say it again, I'd watch a movie where actors just did finger-guns and said "bang", but still with all the effects and blood squibs.
 
2021-12-02 11:19:22 AM  

Nuuu: My theory: The scene he was rehearsing sounds like a quick draw. So, while rehearsing it, he may have been pantomiming fanning the hammer, as one might when quick drawing and firing a single-action revolver.  If you pull back the hammer, but not enough to cock the gun, that hammer's just going to slam back down on the chamber, potentially firing the round inside.

So it's very possible that he could have never touched the trigger, but did brush the hammer, causing the gun to fire. And he might not have known that was even possible, because most modern guns include a physical barrier between the hammer and the chamber that prevents the hammer from striking a round unless there's at least some slack on the trigger.  A lot of safety emphasis is placed on keeping the booger hook off the boom switch, but comparatively less emphasis is put on not dicking around with the part of the gun that physically causes a round to fire.


If it's super-old, worn out, busted springs, etc etc, that could be possible.  But my understanding is that it is a fairly new and fully functional modern gun.  So that seems unlikely.
 
2021-12-02 11:20:07 AM  

NewportBarGuy: NewportBarGuy: Yup. Pure bullshiat. Own all of it.

I'll add this... A lot of people immediately came out to support Alec being a sad victim in this safety error by the prop lady and the AD. Even people who dislike him for his politics... no, not all.

But he's sh*tting on everyone who did support him by not owning this 100% and working with his money and time and CLOUT to help improve movie safety.

You pulled the trigger, Alec. That's how guns work.


Movie safety doesn't need improvement when the firearm safety measures in place are followed. That's why you can only think of 3 deaths involving guns on a movie set over the last 35 years and 2 in the last 28.
 
2021-12-02 11:20:24 AM  
Was the revolver in question of the type that requires the hammer to be cocked manually?

Fark user imageView Full Size


If he readied the gun to fire as above and still considered it "safe" then he seems far too ignorant of gun safety to handle even a prop gun, IMHO.
 
2021-12-02 11:21:04 AM  
"I would never point a gun at anyone and pull the trigger at them," Baldwin said.

And yet, that's EXACTLY what you did.
 
2021-12-02 11:21:05 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-12-02 11:21:21 AM  
LIABILITY OFF THE PORT BOW, EVADE, EVADE!
 
2021-12-02 11:21:32 AM  

NewportBarGuy: NewportBarGuy: Yup. Pure bullshiat. Own all of it.

I'll add this... A lot of people immediately came out to support Alec being a sad victim in this safety error by the prop lady and the AD. Even people who dislike him for his politics... no, not all.

But he's sh*tting on everyone who did support him by not owning this 100% and working with his money and time and CLOUT to help improve movie safety.

You pulled the trigger, Alec. That's how guns work.


If he's lying about pulling the trigger, that's bad and is an attack on his character, but it doesn't change the fact that there were a thousand failures by professionals up the chain.  He can still be a victim of circumstance while being a selfish douche.  I mean, he is Alec Baldwin
 
2021-12-02 11:24:12 AM  
JFC.....the old I didn't do nuffin?

So if you're an elite 1% murder is okay with that excuse?  No idea how he got 59 bullets discharged in him I didn't even pull the trigger......."Sir your finger prints are on the trigger"
 
2021-12-02 11:24:35 AM  
Alex Baldwin did not pull the trigger or point the gun at anyone. His "character" he was playing did. It's all a matter of what the meaning of the word IS is.
 
2021-12-02 11:24:53 AM  
"I never even touched the trigger!"

In context, while what he said is possible, it doesn't matter at all.

Drawing the gun, pointing it at someone and the gun firing is that matters. Saying you didn't touch the trigger might have folks look harder at the gun, but it doesn't matter that much.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-12-02 11:24:56 AM  
Alec Baldwin the actor has plenty of places to lay the blame. The problem is Alec Baldwin the producer doesn't have that same luxury. The simple fact of the matter is you cut corners to make the production cheaper, and an accident happened. You're going to have to live with that the rest of your life, but to say you are completely blameless just isn't true.
 
2021-12-02 11:25:47 AM  

JessieL: That's what the half-cock notch is there to prevent -  a safety feature going back to the earliest firearms that had a hammer.

Fanning would generally involve having the trigger already held back though, which of course defeats both modern and old timey safeties.


The half-cock notch only works as a safety if the hammer gets pulled back to half-cock. If it gets pulled back less than that, say from an actor brushing the hammer during rehearsal not intending to either cock or half-cock the gun, it won't work.  Theoretically there shouldn't be enough physical force to cause the round to fire in that case.  But there's a reason modern guns have the physical safety to stop the hammer form even contacting the round unless the trigger is pulled.  It still happens.

And yes, fanning would generally involve having the trigger already held back if you were intending to fire. But if instead, you were an actor rehearsing a scene, your armorer likely told you to keep your booger hook off the boom switch.  So you do that, but you're still going to go through the motion of appearing to slap back that hammer, because that's the visual that's going to show up on screen. That's the motion you're going to rehearse.
 
2021-12-02 11:27:39 AM  
the responsibility of being the last person to have the gun mostly absolves anyone who came before him in the chain of responsibility. The issue of why live got mixed with blank on a movie set is just farknuts idiocy. Check your weapon, know what your gun has in it. Simple check would have avoided this entire thing.

also: Negligent Manslaughter
 
2021-12-02 11:28:30 AM  
Never should have been live rounds on set. Never should have been a functioning gun either.
 
2021-12-02 11:28:46 AM  
I can understand why Baldwin would use the defense, "I did not pull the trigger". I mean it's worth a shot.
 
2021-12-02 11:31:03 AM  

fragMasterFlash: Was the revolver in question of the type that requires the hammer to be cocked manually?

[Fark user image image 300x200]

If he readied the gun to fire as above and still considered it "safe" then he seems far too ignorant of gun safety to handle even a prop gun, IMHO.


It was apparently a Pietta replica of a Colt Single Action Army, the cheapest possible substitute. Some have a hammer bar that prevents it from firing if the trigger isn't pulled, some don't. It appears this one didn't. If the pistol had all 6 chambers loaded then the hammer was down with the firing pin in near contact with the primer of a live round, and could be fired by any substantial force applied to the hammer, without the trigger being touched.
 
2021-12-02 11:32:12 AM  
Kind of odd to remember this now. Don't you think he would have been shouting this right from the start? I would have, if I had a weapon fire unintendedly. Sounds like the lawyers have found the chump to take the fall, the gun manufacturer. Who could defend those death dealers? Finally, we know who the true victim is.
 
2021-12-02 11:32:38 AM  
"I would never point a gun at anyone and pull the trigger at them," Baldwin said.

"That sentence went on six words too long. Even on a movie set, you shouldn't be pointing a gun at anyone."

And this is why he should not be talking to anyone right now.
 
2021-12-02 11:32:48 AM  

flamark: Alex Baldwin did not pull the trigger or point the gun at anyone. His "character" he was playing did. It's all a matter of what the meaning of the word IS is.


and an SUV mowed down a parade...not the guy behind the wheel....the SUV did it!:)
 
2021-12-02 11:33:14 AM  

Nuuu: JessieL: That's what the half-cock notch is there to prevent -  a safety feature going back to the earliest firearms that had a hammer.

Fanning would generally involve having the trigger already held back though, which of course defeats both modern and old timey safeties.

The half-cock notch only works as a safety if the hammer gets pulled back to half-cock. If it gets pulled back less than that, say from an actor brushing the hammer during rehearsal not intending to either cock or half-cock the gun, it won't work.  Theoretically there shouldn't be enough physical force to cause the round to fire in that case.  But there's a reason modern guns have the physical safety to stop the hammer form even contacting the round unless the trigger is pulled.  It still happens.

And yes, fanning would generally involve having the trigger already held back if you were intending to fire. But if instead, you were an actor rehearsing a scene, your armorer likely told you to keep your booger hook off the boom switch.  So you do that, but you're still going to go through the motion of appearing to slap back that hammer, because that's the visual that's going to show up on screen. That's the motion you're going to rehearse.


Also true, but this is why Colt Model-Ps (and faithful replicas) also have a quarter-cock notch. You can barely move the hammer at all before it engages.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-12-02 11:34:06 AM  
99% probability is that he's lying/remembering it wrong.
That having been said, there is a lot of blame to go around here, and I hope it does.
Baldwin and everyone else in the role of producer failed in those roles.
The propmaster failed, the firearms expert failed - and it was all incredibly, inexcusably sloppy and negligent.
They all need to be shunned paupers when this is over.
 
2021-12-02 11:34:12 AM  

NewportBarGuy: NewportBarGuy: Yup. Pure bullshiat. Own all of it.

I'll add this... A lot of people immediately came out to support Alec being a sad victim in this safety error by the prop lady and the AD. Even people who dislike him for his politics... no, not all.

But he's sh*tting on everyone who did support him by not owning this 100% and working with his money and time and CLOUT to help improve movie safety.

You pulled the trigger, Alec. That's how guns work.


Did the article do something to you to make you not read it?  Where did it touch you?
 
2021-12-02 11:36:19 AM  

dogsafark: and an SUV mowed down a parade...not the guy behind the wheel....the SUV did it!


According to CNN
 
2021-12-02 11:38:49 AM  

Nuuu: My theory: The scene he was rehearsing sounds like a quick draw. So, while rehearsing it, he may have been pantomiming fanning the hammer, as one might when quick drawing and firing a single-action revolver.  If you pull back the hammer, but not enough to cock the gun, that hammer's just going to slam back down on the chamber, potentially firing the round inside.

So it's very possible that he could have never touched the trigger, but did brush the hammer, causing the gun to fire. And he might not have known that was even possible, because most modern guns include a physical barrier between the hammer and the chamber that prevents the hammer from striking a round unless there's at least some slack on the trigger.  A lot of safety emphasis is placed on keeping the booger hook off the boom switch, but comparatively less emphasis is put on not dicking around with the part of the gun that physically causes a round to fire.


My lil pea shooter .38 doesn't even have a hammer that i could "fan".  It does have a piece that strikes the bullet tho that moves when i pull the trigger.  So i couldn't even use the "it got caught on my waistband/tee shirt/blanket etc" excuse.
 
2021-12-02 11:39:15 AM  

fragMasterFlash: Was the revolver in question of the type that requires the hammer to be cocked manually?

[Fark user image 300x200] [View Full Size image _x_]

If he readied the gun to fire as above and still considered it "safe" then he seems far too ignorant of gun safety to handle even a prop gun, IMHO.


Sometimes it pays to read the article...  I wouldn't pretend to know if he's lying or not but the article seems believable anyways.
 
2021-12-02 11:39:35 AM  

stoli n coke: NewportBarGuy: NewportBarGuy: Yup. Pure bullshiat. Own all of it.

I'll add this... A lot of people immediately came out to support Alec being a sad victim in this safety error by the prop lady and the AD. Even people who dislike him for his politics... no, not all.

But he's sh*tting on everyone who did support him by not owning this 100% and working with his money and time and CLOUT to help improve movie safety.

You pulled the trigger, Alec. That's how guns work.

Movie safety doesn't need improvement when the firearm safety measures in place are followed. That's why you can only think of 3 deaths involving guns on a movie set over the last 35 years and 2 in the last 28.


And most of those deaths involved squibs (Not sure about this one as there is a shiatstorm of misinformation around it. I'm honestly waiting for the court case to pass judgement because shiat is farked.)
 
2021-12-02 11:41:19 AM  
I dunno, this reboot of Columbo just isn't holding my attention.

I miss Peter Falk
 
2021-12-02 11:42:13 AM  

jackandwater: Nuuu: My theory: The scene he was rehearsing sounds like a quick draw. So, while rehearsing it, he may have been pantomiming fanning the hammer, as one might when quick drawing and firing a single-action revolver.  If you pull back the hammer, but not enough to cock the gun, that hammer's just going to slam back down on the chamber, potentially firing the round inside.

So it's very possible that he could have never touched the trigger, but did brush the hammer, causing the gun to fire. And he might not have known that was even possible, because most modern guns include a physical barrier between the hammer and the chamber that prevents the hammer from striking a round unless there's at least some slack on the trigger.  A lot of safety emphasis is placed on keeping the booger hook off the boom switch, but comparatively less emphasis is put on not dicking around with the part of the gun that physically causes a round to fire.

My lil pea shooter .38 doesn't even have a hammer that i could "fan".  It does have a piece that strikes the bullet tho that moves when i pull the trigger.  So i couldn't even use the "it got caught on my waistband/tee shirt/blanket etc" excuse.


It has a hammer, just not an exposed hammer.
 
2021-12-02 11:45:12 AM  

skyotter: I'll say it again, I'd watch a movie where actors just did finger-guns and said "bang", but still with all the effects and blood squibs.


These were fun and non-leathal
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-12-02 11:45:56 AM  

Jeff5: jackandwater: Nuuu: My theory: The scene he was rehearsing sounds like a quick draw. So, while rehearsing it, he may have been pantomiming fanning the hammer, as one might when quick drawing and firing a single-action revolver.  If you pull back the hammer, but not enough to cock the gun, that hammer's just going to slam back down on the chamber, potentially firing the round inside.

So it's very possible that he could have never touched the trigger, but did brush the hammer, causing the gun to fire. And he might not have known that was even possible, because most modern guns include a physical barrier between the hammer and the chamber that prevents the hammer from striking a round unless there's at least some slack on the trigger.  A lot of safety emphasis is placed on keeping the booger hook off the boom switch, but comparatively less emphasis is put on not dicking around with the part of the gun that physically causes a round to fire.

My lil pea shooter .38 doesn't even have a hammer that i could "fan".  It does have a piece that strikes the bullet tho that moves when i pull the trigger.  So i couldn't even use the "it got caught on my waistband/tee shirt/blanket etc" excuse.

It has a hammer, just not an exposed hammer.


Thank you.  I just didn't express myself well.  Not enough coffee yet, late riser, retired.
 
2021-12-02 11:48:04 AM  

thatboyoverthere: stoli n coke: NewportBarGuy: NewportBarGuy: Yup. Pure bullshiat. Own all of it.

I'll add this... A lot of people immediately came out to support Alec being a sad victim in this safety error by the prop lady and the AD. Even people who dislike him for his politics... no, not all.

But he's sh*tting on everyone who did support him by not owning this 100% and working with his money and time and CLOUT to help improve movie safety.

You pulled the trigger, Alec. That's how guns work.

Movie safety doesn't need improvement when the firearm safety measures in place are followed. That's why you can only think of 3 deaths involving guns on a movie set over the last 35 years and 2 in the last 28.

And most of those deaths involved squibs (Not sure about this one as there is a shiatstorm of misinformation around it. I'm honestly waiting for the court case to pass judgement because shiat is farked.)


To kill one and seriously wound another pretty conclusively shows it was a live round. It's starting to look like it was likely one of a batch of reloads, which adds the question of what primers were used, some are considerably more sensitive than what is normal for factory ammo.

The cheapest functional replica combined with shiatty reloads is the textbook recipe for an accident.
 
2021-12-02 11:49:01 AM  
Very possible, as in totally nearly impossible except under this exact xyz scenario.

If he had an old style SAA in his hand, there's no way the hammer got hit hard enough to "just go off".

That's drop it on the ground, straight down on the hammer from 3-4' level of hit.
 
2021-12-02 11:49:25 AM  
How about "no live ammo on a movie set" policy?
 
2021-12-02 11:50:17 AM  

jackandwater: Jeff5: jackandwater: Nuuu: My theory: The scene he was rehearsing sounds like a quick draw. So, while rehearsing it, he may have been pantomiming fanning the hammer, as one might when quick drawing and firing a single-action revolver.  If you pull back the hammer, but not enough to cock the gun, that hammer's just going to slam back down on the chamber, potentially firing the round inside.

So it's very possible that he could have never touched the trigger, but did brush the hammer, causing the gun to fire. And he might not have known that was even possible, because most modern guns include a physical barrier between the hammer and the chamber that prevents the hammer from striking a round unless there's at least some slack on the trigger.  A lot of safety emphasis is placed on keeping the booger hook off the boom switch, but comparatively less emphasis is put on not dicking around with the part of the gun that physically causes a round to fire.

My lil pea shooter .38 doesn't even have a hammer that i could "fan".  It does have a piece that strikes the bullet tho that moves when i pull the trigger.  So i couldn't even use the "it got caught on my waistband/tee shirt/blanket etc" excuse.

It has a hammer, just not an exposed hammer.

Thank you.  I just didn't express myself well.  Not enough coffee yet, late riser, retired.


Those "shrouded" hammers were intended for carrying in a pocket, the shroud keeps it from hanging up when you pull it out.
 
2021-12-02 11:50:24 AM  
Little known fact, this happened on the set in Pulp Fiction.

Gun goes off on set of Pulp Fiction
 
2021-12-02 11:51:21 AM  

AnotherBluesStringer: Alec Baldwin the actor has plenty of places to lay the blame. The problem is Alec Baldwin the producer doesn't have that same luxury. The simple fact of the matter is you cut corners to make the production cheaper, and an accident happened. You're going to have to live with that the rest of your life, but to say you are completely blameless just isn't true.


This can't be emphasized enough.
The argument I've heard in the defense of Alec, the producer, is that he did not assume the traditional responsibilities of that role.  He 'merely' financed the film.  Someone needs to tell him you can't contractually remove yourself from any and all liability when the law says otherwise.

Kudos to his agent.  They got ahead of the story to the degree that the public believes he is the victim rather than the woman he killed.
 
2021-12-02 11:52:47 AM  

Jeff5: thatboyoverthere: stoli n coke: NewportBarGuy: NewportBarGuy: Yup. Pure bullshiat. Own all of it.

I'll add this... A lot of people immediately came out to support Alec being a sad victim in this safety error by the prop lady and the AD. Even people who dislike him for his politics... no, not all.

But he's sh*tting on everyone who did support him by not owning this 100% and working with his money and time and CLOUT to help improve movie safety.

You pulled the trigger, Alec. That's how guns work.

Movie safety doesn't need improvement when the firearm safety measures in place are followed. That's why you can only think of 3 deaths involving guns on a movie set over the last 35 years and 2 in the last 28.

And most of those deaths involved squibs (Not sure about this one as there is a shiatstorm of misinformation around it. I'm honestly waiting for the court case to pass judgement because shiat is farked.)

To kill one and seriously wound another pretty conclusively shows it was a live round. It's starting to look like it was likely one of a batch of reloads, which adds the question of what primers were used, some are considerably more sensitive than what is normal for factory ammo.

The cheapest functional replica combined with shiatty reloads is the textbook recipe for an accident.


Pietta's are perfectly fine guns though. He pulled the trigger.
 
2021-12-02 11:53:34 AM  

dogsafark: flamark: Alex Baldwin did not pull the trigger or point the gun at anyone. His "character" he was playing did. It's all a matter of what the meaning of the word IS is.

and an SUV mowed down a parade...not the guy behind the wheel....the SUV did it!:)


Lol... trolls alt opinion slingers trolling chumming each other.
 
2021-12-02 11:53:37 AM  

ISmartAllMyOwnPosts: Very possible, as in totally nearly impossible except under this exact xyz scenario.

If he had an old style SAA in his hand, there's no way the hammer got hit hard enough to "just go off".

That's drop it on the ground, straight down on the hammer from 3-4' level of hit.


He had a Pietta replica SAA, possibly pretty worn from use as a prop. The Saturday Night Special of Single Action Army revolvers.
 
Displayed 50 of 166 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | 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.