Lsherm:there shouldn't be REAL guns on a movie set, and it sounds like that's what happened.
OK, this is my literal, actual job. Almost all my recent credits have been as a gun wrangler instead of a full fight director, because there's a lot more call for guns over swords in films and plays these days.
Your statement is wrong.
There are, occasionally, instances where blank-adapted (ie, live) firearms are on set. This is very often the case for firearm models where no substitute is available (blank-firing weapons, electric non-guns, etc), or a prop house is unwilling to make modifications to a live firearm. All of the military firearms at the end of The Avengers 2012, for example (to use a film I worked on that you may have seen) were live firearms. The M2HB, in particular, was just a National Guard-issue M2HB which fired full-load .50BMG blank rounds.
There are, occasionally, instances where CGI cannot be used to fake everything about firearms. Having the actor stand there with a rubber prop and pretend to feel recoil always looks fake, for example, and if no electric non-gun is available for the model of firearm being used (which is hugely common), then you end up with a live gun. In such instances, blank firearms of various loads (usually the minimum load to let the action cycle, if needed) are used. Likewise, slide action and brass are particularly irritating for VFX houses, and there are several relatively high-budget things (TV shows, mostly) which get routinely eviscerated by people who care, because they just CGI in muzzle flash and nothing else; this is where the famous shots of The Walking Dead which show an M4 firing with its ejection port closed and with no ejecting brass come from.
There are, occasionally, instances where the director, production staff, and actors are all on board with making things as real as possible, which necessitates the use of blanks. And sometimes, live firearms (usually with interior threading inside the muzzle to fit a blank-firing adaptor which will still allow the action to cycle with the lower pressure incurred by the blank) are the best solution to that. At a minimum, live guns adapted for blank fire are universally more reliable than purpose-built blank guns. If we're on a theatre stage and a blank gun malfunctions, we improvise and go on. On a film set, if a blank gun malfunctions, the studio is out a huge amount of money as the shot is reset, so there's a strong incentive to use blank-adapted guns on film if you can't use CGI for some reason.
But here's the thing. There are strong, stringent, should-not-be-farking-broken safeties in place on a film set or stage play in order to keep things safe. There are multiple layers of safeties and cutouts at all times** to ensure that this shiat doesn't happen, and what it means here is that not only did multiple someones screw up prior to the actor ever handling the weapon (oh, and there will be consequences about that), but it means that is Alec Baldwin a farking moron - because no matter what else happened, he still pulled the trigger while pointing a weapon directly at a person. No matter how bad anyone screws up along the line, if the actor doesn't do that, nobody gets hurt. This is something that gets hammered into the actors I train over and over and over again. The actor with his hand on the weapon is the final safety cutout in EVERY SINGLE SCENE, and if he doesn't have the mental wherewithal to understand the concepts of trigger discipline and muzzle awareness, then he doesn't belong onscreen handling weapons in the first place.
**Rule 7: Live ammunition NEVER appears on the same set with any sort of non-rubber firearm. If a firearm capable of firing any sort of ammunition (blank or not) is on set, live ammunition is forbidden. (The Theatrical Firearms Handbook, Kevin Inouye, 2014)
Glossary: Blank: An explosive cartridge with an explosive propellant in various quantities (full, 3/4, 1/2, 1/4, primer only), a primer to set off the propellant, and a casing to hold it all, with no explicit projectile. Blank Firing Gun: A prop which resembles a weapon, built explicitly to fire blanks and cannot be loaded with real ammunition. Blank-adapted Gun: A real firearm, capable of firing actual ammunition, which has been adapted with a (usually hidden) device to partially block the barrel and create enough chamber pressure to cycle the action. Is loaded with blank ammunition, but in the same caliber as real ammunition (ie, 5.56x45mm quarter-load blank; .30-06 full load blank). These tend to be "Hero Props"; used for close-ups and/or shots showing the disassembly or loading of the weapon. Electric Non-Gun: Electrically actuated prop which has a motor which moves the slide, kicks out empty brass cartridges, and ignites flash paper contained within the muzzle to simulate muzzle flash. These are custom-built by prop houses, not commercially available, and are often the target of legal action by the real firearm companies since they necessarily resemble the real thing. H&K is particularly bad in this regard. Rubber Gun:a rubber or silicone casting of a real firearm, painted to look genuine. Use of these is preferable at all times, unless there is a specific reason to use anything else.
RonFilipkowski: New video from Madison Cawthorn tonight: "Our culture is trying to completely demasculate all the young men. You can look at testosterone levels in young men today, and they are lower than throughout all of history .. If you are raising a young man, raise them to be a monster!" https://t.co/ZhHSghQ5zt
A person in his position would not do well in a society of monsters.
The Capitol assault also has been used as a blanket condemnation of all those who gathered in D.C. that day to protest the election's outcome. About 20,000 people attended the rally at the White House, and perhaps about 1,000 of them then moved to the Capitol, where somewhat over half of them actively participated in the breach. That means about 3 percent of the day's protesters took part in the assault - and yet the entire group that peacefully rallied was indicted in social media and some media posts.
Interesting. So are we to assume that the Right has always carefully reflected on who in a larger group was actually responsible for committing some wrong and who from that same group was not? This is interesting. I thought, for example, in the wake of 9-11 there were groups of angry "patriots" attacking Sikhs and other vaguely middle-Eastern groups around the country. I seem to remember seeing a popular photograph floating around in which some fine young specimen of fairness and intelligent blame allocation had painted on his truck, "the only thing I need to know about Islam I learned on 9-11." I seem to have some vague memories of Republican candidates for office, and office holders themselves, essentially accusing the populations of entire nations being criminals and disease-ridden filth when those "migrant caravans" were "invading" America. And, curiously, I don't seem to recall a large counter-movement among the party voicing disagreement any time things like this happened.
Indeed, the vilification of all who rallied at the White House is extended by some to anyone who is Republican. For some time, Republicans have been broadly labeled as "white supremacists."
That's correct. Because if you decide that you're still OK affiliating yourself with an organization that has essentially adopted these principles by allowing for them to be loudly and often stated and declared by numerous people who affiliate themselves with that organization, you stand for those things yourself whether or not you have the courage to admit it. That, or you're a coward too scared to oppose them. There's no other possibility. If you don't like that, if that makes you feel bad, then that's unfortunate, but probably to be expected. After all, lots of cowards loathe themselves, deep down.
Holz said, "58 applications says y'all aren't desperate for workers, you just miss your slaves."
I liked this one.
But Holz said the construction company instead tried to offer Florida's minimum wage of $8.65 to start, even though the wage was scheduled to increase to $10 an hour on September 30. He added that it wanted full-time availability, while scheduling only part time until Holz gained seniority.
I've seen lots of variations of that one before. Crappy part time jobs with deranged, completely irregular schedules that make it nearly impossible to get another part time job to earn more. C'mon serf, you should be happy you're working at all.