• Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    I think its more fair to put the blame on the Armourer than to blame the actor. Still 3 years in American prison is to much to put on someone with no criminal intent. She should be put on home detention or community service for 3 years.

    • Rookwood@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Baldwin was the primary producer on the film and the set conditions had had numerous safety issues up until this point including 3 other firearm misfires. There was a documented safety issue on this set and while Gutierrez-Reed was part of it, the showrunners clearly were too by not taking steps to address it before the tragedy happened.

      • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I don’t disagree that he may be civilly liable for the safety conditions in general on the set. I just don’t think that his role in this particular case amounts to criminal negligence. From what I have heard, he had every reason to think that his weapon was safe to handle and use. In order to be guilty of manslaughter, you have to act with gross negligence, meaning that you know the risk of harm to another due to your action is real and significant and yet you choose to do the action anyway. In this particular case, he would have reasonably believed that the risk in his actions was essentially none at all.

        The negligence was primarily on the armourer and secondarily on the guy who was meant to confirm the armourer (the assistant director? I can’t recall), both of whom failed in their basic due diligence and assured the crew and cast that the firearm was safe when it was not.

        • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          If he were a greenhorn actor on his first day on a non-union set I might give him the benefit of the doubt… But do you know how often an actor handling a firearm gets the full run down on weapon safety procedure in our industry? Every. Single. Production.

          Here’s what happened in Baldwin’s case. He, a seasoned veteran, accepted a weapon from not just an unauthorized person, but a highly visible person on the set. The 1st AD, the guy who handed him the weapon is responsible for enforcing safety on the set in a general sense to protect a production from liability. Everyone on that set who saw that handoff would have known instantly that was an unauthorized handoff because as regular crew the FIRST rule a newbie learns is you NEVER touch other departments stuff EVER. Someone leaves a box of lenses in your way you call someone from camera to pick it up and move it the nessisary three feet out of your way or else you risk being skinned alive.

          But here’s the thing. Baldwin is a Producer. There is an implicit power balance on set. What happens when the guy with instant hiring and firing power, funding the project and given control of the creative and business aspects of production breaks a rule FLAGRANTLY on the set that even the GREENEST of greenhorns would know. A rule that every one knows because of the high profile deaths that caused those rules to come into being… And the chief onset safety officer charged by the production is the one that is the other half of the transaction? What the absolute fuck do you do?

          Do you trust the Production Manager with your complaints? They are the one technically above the 1st AD in charge of Production liability and safety concerns but they are still beholden to the producers. Maybe you could call the Union hotline and get the entire thing shut down? Oh…But this wasn’t a union show? Well shit. Well I guess you got to consider taking the hit and quitting because that’s basically your only option. This particular production already had union numbers dropping and leaving production to unaddressed and flagrantly ignored safety concerns. Union members are allowed to work for non-union shows but the union safety training is hardcore and union guys know transgressions when they occur. They renew the main bullet points in safety talks every show start of every day of shooting where those safety concerns are likely to come up. After awhile there’s some you know by heart. Animals on the set, pyrotechnic safety, spfx weather, car stunts, process car guns… Basic basic shit.

          No. Everything about this situation screams to me that this show, this Production team specifically, was fucking dirty. People love to forget that Producers are employers. They focus on all the creative stuff they do forgetting that end of day someone is in charge of providing a safe working environment. The big studios have safety committees and oversight to take the weight off producers, the unions can shut you down for bad practice instantly… On union shows.

          But not every show has these mitigating checks to producer power and liability. Particularly non-union gigs. That’s the implicit risk of them. Baldwin and every other producer on Rust deserves a slice of the penalty for negligence. They had multiple warning signs and people who took personal financial hits by leaving to protest the culture of safety on their show before this incident because there was no other authority to petition. When there’s no other authority to petition congrats, you are liable when you are found guilty of running a worksite that is flagrantly ignoring well trod industry wide safety standards.

        • Frozengyro@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          They had 3 other firearm misfires on this set. That alone is unacceptable, but to assume any weapon on set is safe at this point would be insane.

      • jaschen@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        You should blame Alec’s parents for giving birth to him. You know, because they were the ones that caused all this. Without them this wouldn’t have happened. Or maybe we should blame the person that introduced their parents together?

    • oNevia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Could be mistaken, but I think people were going after Baldwin for this because he was a producer? As in, he funded and hired the armourer so ultimately it was his fault.

        • rtxn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          He didn’t just point the gun. He had his finger on the trigger, and actually pulled it. Ask any responsible gun owner and you’ll get an earful about it.

          Even if the armourer was found to be responsible, that does not absolve Baldwin’s grossly negligent behaviour.

          • assembly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            Dude it’s a movie set not a firing range. That’s like saying that since it’s dangerous to drive fast that car chase scenes can’t exceed 25mph. It’s a movie set where the scene calls for people shooting at each other. Of course the actor would assume that the group responsible for making sure the weapons are safe did their job and made sure the weapons were safe. I wouldn’t assume an actor has any idea of how a gun works if it was my job to make sure they have something to point and shoot. The job of the actor is literally to point and shoot in a scene.

            • BrotherL0v3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

              1. It was a gun. An actual, functioning firearm. He knew it was a gun & told the police as much afterwards. There is never any good reason to point a gun at someone you are not currently trying to kill. Even if you ignore the common sense and assume there are somehow different rules for movie sets & using blanks, the other armorer they brought in testified that no one should ever be in the line of fire. He absolutely roasted Reed for not telling Baldwin to not point the gun at people in the footage they played for him.

              2. The scene did not call for him to draw his gun, let alone shoot it. He wasn’t pointing it at another actor and playing a scene where he shoots someone, he was pointing it at someone behind the camera for no good goddamn reason. We saw from the BTS footage played in court that this was not the first time he pointed a gun at the camera and shot it outside the actual filming of the movie.

              3. Baldwin neglected to do the training for the seated cross draw, the same maneuver he was doing when he killed someone. No doubt Reed was negligent, but even she tried to get him to do that.

              I simply do not understand why people are letting Baldwin off the hook. He pointed a loaded gun at someone and pulled the trigger. People fucking die when that happens.

              • PopcornTin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                But, you see, he’s one of the good ones. We must rationalize any way we can to save him. Don’t listen to other actors saying they were taught to verify the guns and ammo. Don’t listen to crazy gun nuts who say you don’t point a gun at people no matter what.

                This was purely her fault. Case closed. Do not look any further into it.