Prop weapons & personal responsibility

[jaro 101969]

Can't disagree with that.

I think the idea of personal responsibility for firearm safety on set is a small but important measure in the wider context of improving a safety system. The fallout of this incident shows Hollywood as an industry to be slack and uncaring about worker safety. I fully acknowledge that most sets get it right. But the lack of clear rules for criminal legal enforcement (for all involved in the hazardous process) means safety systems are far more likely to fail.

I agree with you too.. The fact that there was a mass walkout of union crew should have been viewed as a warning sign. The AD should also have been more careful Especially considering the previous incident on the film he was fired from because of an accident on that set too.. I just cant understand what was going through his mind !! I would have thought this being a repeat thing for him that he would have been extra careful.. I mean considering the accident in Arkansas on Freedoms Path should have been a wakeup call for him....
If anyone wants to read about that incident refer to this posting please.....

Alec Baldwin Fatal Shooting Film’s First AD Was “Fired” From 2019 Movie Over Gun Going Off, ‘Freedom’s Path’ Producer Confirms

More details are emerging of the pivotal crew member on the set of the Alec Baldwin film

deadline.com

and this article ......

‘Rust’ Tragedy Shakes Armorers and Propmasters: ‘It’s My Job to Make Sure Nobody Gets Hurt’

The death of Halyna Hutchins on the set of "Rust" has put a spotlight on Hollywood's propmasters, especially armorers, and safety protocols.

variety.com

 

[tankerjohn]

Such a sad incident. My initial thought was to blame Alec. After all, the most basic firearm and hunter safety courses emphasize that you should always assume every gun is loaded until you personally clear the chamber, never point a firearm at anyone or anything you don't intend to shoot, and never put your finger on the trigger until you intend to shoot. It was also an axiom during my time in Army combat arms that there's no such thing as an "accidental" discharge, only negligent discharges. Having stewed on it for a few days, I recalled that people had problems with the old Ruger "3-screw" single-action revolvers discharging without pulling the trigger if they didn't know to put the hammer down on an empty chamber. It occurred to me that they were filming a Western and what kind of pistol would they be using in a Western? Single action revolver of course. So maybe there was a similar problem with that pistol. Well, anyway, whether it was unsafe handling or a faulty firearm or some combination of the two, clearly there was a breakdown of safety procedures on multiple levels. I guess we'll have to wait for the investigation for the details. My prayers for the young lady killed and everyone involved.

 

[Jbird45]

Such a sad incident. My initial thought was to blame Alec. After all, the most basic firearm and hunter safety courses emphasize that you should always assume every gun is loaded until you personally clear the chamber, never point a firearm at anyone or anything you don't intend to shoot, and never put your finger on the trigger until you intend to shoot. It was also an axiom during my time in Army combat arms that there's no such thing as an "accidental" discharge, only negligent discharges. Having stewed on it for a few days, I recalled that people had problems with the old Ruger "3-screw" single-action revolvers discharging without pulling the trigger if they didn't know to put the hammer down on an empty chamber. It occurred to me that they were filming a Western and what kind of pistol would they be using in a Western? Single action revolver of course. So maybe there was a similar problem with that pistol. Well, anyway, whether it was unsafe handling or a faulty firearm or some combination of the two, clearly there was a breakdown of safety procedures on multiple levels. I guess we'll have to wait for the investigation for the details. My prayers for the young lady killed and everyone involved.

I know this is beside the point here, but I don't recall Ruger's having an issue going off? Maybe I'm wrong? I know most Ruger's, like my Vaquero, have a transfer bar that the hammer strikes, and the trigger has to be pulled for the gun to fire, which is why Blackhawks and vaqueros are "safe" to carry with 6 cartridges in the cylinder.

The original colts had the firing pin as a piece of the hammer, and if you had a fully loaded cylinder the pin would be resting on the primer of a live round. Hence, with colts and clones, you pull the hammer to half ****, open the gate, load one shell, skip a chamber, load the other 4 pull the hammer all the way back and bring it all the way down. This way, the pin is resting on an empty chamber and you won't screw up the timing of the gun.

But I digress.

 

[tankerjohn]

I know this is beside the point here, but I don't recall Ruger's having an issue going off? Maybe I'm wrong? I know most Ruger's, like my Vaquero, have a transfer bar that the hammer strikes, and the trigger has to be pulled for the gun to fire, which is why Blackhawks and vaqueros are "safe" to carry with 6 cartridges in the cylinder.

The original colts had the firing pin as a piece of the hammer, and if you had a fully loaded cylinder the pin would be resting on the primer of a live round. Hence, with colts and clones, you pull the hammer to half ****, open the gate, load one shell, skip a chamber, load the other 4 pull the hammer all the way back and bring it all the way down. This way, the pin is resting on an empty chamber and you won't screw up the timing of the gun.

But I digress.

Yes, exactly! Old single actions had that issue. I don't know if that was a factor in what happened with Alec Baldwin, but it wouldn't surprise me if it turns out to the be the case. It was one of those things that wasn't a problem if you knew how to safely handle the gun, but many people didn't, so... accidents happened.

The Ruger pistols I referred to are the pre-1973 ones that had three screws on the side, hence the moniker "3-screw". The new ones are much safer.

 

[jaro 101969]

My proposition has nothing whatsoever to do with the results of the investigation.
When someone used to say "We've always done it this way" a favorite Commanding Officer of mine used to reply "Well, then you've always been doing it wrong".

So you are saying our industry has always done it wrong ? Most of the people involved follow all the rules and then there are those who don't and something like this happens.. We are taught NEVER to point a weapon at Anyone , we always aim slightly off so its not aimed at anyone. I had / have the benefit of having been Sec. Ops in the Army so I know how to use a weapon and safety also.. Like I said before I still wonder if there was more wrong with the weapon than just the misfiring problems. I honestly wonder if the weapon was firing off center because I just cant imagine him aiming it directly AT someone..
Yes we can do things differently moving forward and I'm sure that things will be different just as they changed when Brandon Lee tragically died while filming a movie and Jon-Erik Hexum died while filming the TV show Coverup... On set accidents unfortunately happen during action sequences like what happened in 1982 to Vic Morrow while filming Twilight Zone movie.. I only mention these because they happened due to safety faults.. Actors unfortunately have to sometimes rely on others knowing how to do Their own jobs because as actors we have to concentrate on doing ours.. I have been both in front of the camera and worked behind the scenes in various capacities and each person has their jobs.. The armorer makes sure we are safe so we can concentrate on performing and that is something that needs to change. The armorer brought out the cart BUT should have NEVER let the AD pick up the weapon off the cart WITHOUT requiring the safety meeting that NEEDS to be MANDATORY... Also the First Assistant Director David Hills Should NOT be allowed to NOT have the safety meetings and of course when Alec saw that First Assistant Director David Hills did NOT Properly clear the weapon He Should have checked it himself !! Of course hind sight is 20 / 20 !! The strange thing is this wasn't Alec's first movie with a weapon , he has used weapons in Multiple movies in the past and knows what to do before "using" said weapons..
Also remember , There was no union prop master present on the set during the incident..

 

[APBinNCA]

@jaro 101969

I really appreciate your posts here. They confirm what I have been reading in the LA Times. They have interviewed people that you likely know. I made some posts based on that information last night to try to clear up some misunderstandings and tried to keep my own opinions out of it. Unfortunately, I did succumb to the temptation to speculate about how this could have accidentally discharged. I just want to say that it wasn't intended to be insensitive, but more reflective of my own sorrow at the incident. I don't follow media rabbit holes about the latest tragedy, but this one caught my attention and really bothers me.

 

[luvmysuper]

So you are saying our industry has always done it wrong ? Most of the people involved follow all the rules and then there are those who don't and something like this happens.. We are taught NEVER to point a weapon at Anyone , we always aim slightly off so its not aimed at anyone. I had / have the benefit of having been Sec. Ops in the Army so I know how to use a weapon and safety also.. Like I said before I still wonder if there was more wrong with the weapon than just the misfiring problems. I honestly wonder if the weapon was firing off center because I just cant imagine him aiming it directly AT someone..
Yes we can do things differently moving forward and I'm sure that things will be different just as they changed when Brandon Lee tragically died while filming a movie and Jon-Erik Hexum died while filming the TV show Coverup... On set accidents unfortunately happen during action sequences like what happened in 1982 to Vic Morrow while filming Twilight Zone movie.. I only mention these because they happened due to safety faults.. Actors unfortunately have to sometimes rely on others knowing how to do Their own jobs because as actors we have to concentrate on doing ours.. I have been both in front of the camera and worked behind the scenes in various capacities and each person has their jobs.. The armorer makes sure we are safe so we can concentrate on performing and that is something that needs to change. The armorer brought out the cart BUT should have NEVER let the AD pick up the weapon off the cart WITHOUT requiring the safety meeting that NEEDS to be MANDATORY... Also the First Assistant Director David Hills Should NOT be allowed to NOT have the safety meetings and of course when Alec saw that First Assistant Director David Hills did NOT Properly clear the weapon He Should have checked it himself !! Of course hind sight is 20 / 20 !! The strange thing is this wasn't Alec's first movie with a weapon , he has used weapons in Multiple movies in the past and knows what to do before "using" said weapons..
Also remember , There was no union prop master present on the set during the incident..

No doubt this occurred because of a series of errors, and may have been contributed to by equipment problems which might have been caught if not for the series of errors.
If Alec Baldwin knew what to do before using said weapon this would not have happened.
I'm not saying the entire event was his fault, but he was one of several who didn't verify he had a clear firearm in view of practices implemented after the Brandon Lee incident.
In the end, movies and TV shows are make believe.
We don't need the "realism" that a functional firearm brings to an exercise in make believe.
There may be some specific events that under no circumstances can you make the film without a functional weapon, but I submit that since he asked "Why was I given a hot gun?" that this was not one such circumstance.
If (and this entire thread is filled with "if" posts) he had been given a prop replica this could not have occurred.
It is my personal opinion that the only time a real, functional firearm should be used, if ever, on a set is when it is to be used hot round scenario.
Using real firearms as props is not necessary and only adds to the chances that something could go wrong.

 

[Jbird45]

So you are saying our industry has always done it wrong ? Most of the people involved follow all the rules and then there are those who don't and something like this happens.. We are taught NEVER to point a weapon at Anyone , we always aim slightly off so its not aimed at anyone. I had / have the benefit of having been Sec. Ops in the Army so I know how to use a weapon and safety also.. Like I said before I still wonder if there was more wrong with the weapon than just the misfiring problems. I honestly wonder if the weapon was firing off center because I just cant imagine him aiming it directly AT someone..
Yes we can do things differently moving forward and I'm sure that things will be different just as they changed when Brandon Lee tragically died while filming a movie and Jon-Erik Hexum died while filming the TV show Coverup... On set accidents unfortunately happen during action sequences like what happened in 1982 to Vic Morrow while filming Twilight Zone movie.. I only mention these because they happened due to safety faults.. Actors unfortunately have to sometimes rely on others knowing how to do Their own jobs because as actors we have to concentrate on doing ours.. I have been both in front of the camera and worked behind the scenes in various capacities and each person has their jobs.. The armorer makes sure we are safe so we can concentrate on performing and that is something that needs to change. The armorer brought out the cart BUT should have NEVER let the AD pick up the weapon off the cart WITHOUT requiring the safety meeting that NEEDS to be MANDATORY... Also the First Assistant Director David Hills Should NOT be allowed to NOT have the safety meetings and of course when Alec saw that First Assistant Director David Hills did NOT Properly clear the weapon He Should have checked it himself !! Of course hind sight is 20 / 20 !! The strange thing is this wasn't Alec's first movie with a weapon , he has used weapons in Multiple movies in the past and knows what to do before "using" said weapons..
Also remember , There was no union prop master present on the set during the incident..

I am not trying to nit pick here but is aiming off center of someone really a safe method as well? We all know what happens if you flinch or have bad trigger control. I don't know what Alec Baldwin's gun training is, but if he is anti gun I doubt he spends time at the range practicing trigger control and flinch control.

Again, it seems like a domino effect of mistakes at play here. Thanks for your insight as well.

 

[jaro 101969]

@jaro 101969

I really appreciate your posts here. They confirm what I have been reading in the LA Times. They have interviewed people that you likely know. I made some posts based on that information last night to try to clear up some misunderstandings and tried to keep my own opinions out of it. Unfortunately, I did succumb to the temptation to speculate about how this could have accidentally discharged. I just want to say that it wasn't intended to be insensitive, but more reflective of my own sorrow at the incident. I don't follow media rabbit holes about the latest tragedy, but this one caught my attention and really bothers me.

I understand this is a hotbed subject right now because The people involved are well known and people are curious how it could have happened.. Also in response to people I might know, Yes I know some of them and have worked with some of them.. I broke a rule I had promised for myself after joining the forums that I would keep my occupation out of the forum but this made me break my promise and I hope it doesn't affect any of the friendships I have developed since I joined here.. The armorer was young and did not have much experience and had even stated previously she felt she was to young and inexperienced to shoulder that much responsibility. The non union crew had only been on set for a matter of hours when the accident happened. And I saw this mentioned and it could have some to do with the incident if they didn't re block the set for the change...

For the scene, Baldwin was sitting in a wooden pew and practicing a “cross draw,” in which he pulled the gun from its holster and pointed it toward the camera lens, director Joel Souza, who also was injured in the incident, told investigators.

Camera operator Reid Russell said the afternoon shoot went ahead even after “about six” members of the film’s camera crew walked out that morning amid complaints of mistreatment. The union crew was replaced by nonunion workers, and the production resumed after lunch. Shortly before Baldwin accidentally fired the bullet that killed Hutchins, the crew “had to move the camera at a different angle from Alec” because there was a shadow coming from the outside light, Russell told investigators, according to the search warrant.

Russell recalled hearing a loud bang from the firearm, noticing that Souza was bleeding and hearing Halyna say she couldn’t feel her legs. He also said he considered Baldwin a conscientious actor who previously made sure a child wasn’t near him when he discharged a firearm for a prior scene.

So I know some have mixed views of Baldwin but he really is a pretty good guy...

 

[luvmysuper]

FWIW, I feel nothing but sorrow for Baldwin. No human being, regardless of their personal life, should ever feel what he is most assuredly feeling right now.
My heart goes out to him and to the victim and to the victims family.

 

[APBinNCA]

I broke a rule I had promised for myself after joining the forums

My rule was to never go into a firearm discussion. I don't want any information that could be used against me unwittingly published on a public forum. I stuck to not giving my options about firearms or experience with them. I think you also kept a good line even if you did break your promise. Most people here are remarkably civil, which is why I am here.

 

[jaro 101969]

No doubt this occurred because of a series of errors, and may have been contributed to by equipment problems which might have been caught if not for the series of errors.
If Alec Baldwin knew what to do before using said weapon this would not have happened.
I'm not saying the entire event was his fault, but he was one of several who didn't verify he had a clear firearm in view of practices implemented after the Brandon Lee incident.
In the end, movies and TV shows are make believe.
We don't need the "realism" that a functional firearm brings to an exercise in make believe.
There may be some specific events that under no circumstances can you make the film without a functional weapon, but I submit that since he asked "Why was I given a hot gun?" that this was not one such circumstance.
If (and this entire thread is filled with "if" posts) he had been given a prop replica this could not have occurred.
It is my personal opinion that the only time a real, functional firearm should be used, if ever, on a set is when it is to be used hot round scenario.
Using real firearms as props is not necessary and only adds to the chances that something could go wrong.

I agree with you on A Lot of your points. Alec should have Only had a fully prop gun during Rehearsal. There was no reason for him to be practicing with a real gun..

Ideally the following should have taken place...

I mean even during filming he should have only been in possession of a "real weapon"

1: After they had a safety meeting about a real weapon on set..
2: The Armorer had prepped the weapon/s to be used for the "live" blank fire.

The actor would then be in possession of the prop gun during filming right up until the moment before he / she is to discharge the weapon. They director would then call cut and...
3: The Armorer brought the weapon/s onto the set being filmed on.
4: The Armorer would take the dummy weapon/s from the actor..
5: The Armorer communicated to the AD that the weapon/s on the cart was the weapon to be used for said scene..
6: The AD is given the weapon AND the AD verifies that this weapon is only loaded with the proper round/s for said scene.
7: The AD would then hand the weapon to the Actor and then the Actor verifies the weapon is only loaded with the round/s for said scene.
8: Everyone resumes their places
9: Director calls Action and the actor discharges weapon/s
10: After weapons have been discharged the Director calls cut.
11: Armorer then proceeds to remove the real weapon from the actor.
12: Armorer proceeds to give PROP weapon back to actor.
13: Armorer proceeds to take "live" weapons off set.
14: Everyone resumes places.
15: If scene was not completed Director calls action and filming resumes...

I am not trying to nit pick here but is aiming off center of someone really a safe method as well? We all know what happens if you flinch or have bad trigger control. I don't know what Alec Baldwin's gun training is, but if he is anti gun I doubt he spends time at the range practicing trigger control and flinch control.

Again, it seems like a domino effect of mistakes at play here. Thanks for your insight as well.

There is blocking that is supposed to be done prior to the scene being shot showing where to stand and where to aim.. The fact that the "New" Non-Union crew moved the cameras due to lighting issues could also be a factor especially if the set wasn't re-blocked.... Baldwin Had used weapons in multiple previous films and shows. He is / was not a first time amateur on how to handle a firearm on set....

 

[hairless wonder]

But the lack of clear rules for criminal legal enforcement (for all involved in the hazardous process) means safety systems are far more likely to fail.

The problem with this is that movies and TV shows are filmed all over the place--not just in California. To enact your standard would require every state to pass the same laws re guns on set. While someone might argue that the federal government can enact a law, that's a bit of a stretch even under the commerce clause (and I'm far from an Originalist).

 

[hairless wonder]

But the lack of clear rules for criminal legal enforcement (for all involved in the hazardous process) means safety systems are far more likely to fail.

The problem with this is that movies and TV shows are filmed all over the place--not just in California. To enact your standard would require every state to pass the same laws re guns on set. While someone might argue that the federal government can enact a law, that's a bit of a stretch even under the commerce clause (and I'm far from an Originalist).

More aptly, people who despise firearms and publicly lobby to rid the earth of them may want to not handle them as part of their livelihood. I wonder if investigations will uncover foul play on this one. Or just negligence. Either way it’s a sad and tragic event.

I'm not seeing where Alec Baldwin either despised firearms nor publicly lobbied to rid the earth of them. I have seen reports that he opposed the NRA, but that's not the same thing. I also oppose the NRA, but I neither despise firearms nor have I lobbied to rid the earth of them. If anything, I support sensible regulations on firearms, including training, licensure, and insurance requirements. However, even then, I am hesitant, as this would create an artificial financial barrier that would essentially mean those who cannot afford the licensing fees, etc. would be prevented from exercising a right (at least as the courts currently construe it).

 

[hairless wonder]

I agree with you on A Lot of your points. Alec should have Only had a fully prop gun during Rehearsal. There was no reason for him to be practicing with a real gun..

Ideally the following should have taken place...

I mean even during filming he should have only been in possession of a "real weapon"

1: After they had a safety meeting about a real weapon on set..
2: The Armorer had prepped the weapon/s to be used for the "live" blank fire.

The actor would then be in possession of the prop gun during filming right up until the moment before he / she is to discharge the weapon. They director would then call cut and...
3: The Armorer brought the weapon/s onto the set being filmed on.
4: The Armorer would take the dummy weapon/s from the actor..
5: The Armorer communicated to the AD that the weapon/s on the cart was the weapon to be used for said scene..
6: The AD is given the weapon AND the AD verifies that this weapon is only loaded with the proper round/s for said scene.
7: The AD would then hand the weapon to the Actor and then the Actor verifies the weapon is only loaded with the round/s for said scene.
8: Everyone resumes their places
9: Director calls Action and the actor discharges weapon/s
10: After weapons have been discharged the Director calls cut.
11: Armorer then proceeds to remove the real weapon from the actor.
12: Armorer proceeds to give PROP weapon back to actor.
13: Armorer proceeds to take "live" weapons off set.
14: Everyone resumes places.
15: If scene was not completed Director calls action and filming resumes...



There is blocking that is supposed to be done prior to the scene being shot showing where to stand and where to aim.. The fact that the "New" Non-Union crew moved the cameras due to lighting issues could also be a factor especially if the set wasn't re-blocked.... Baldwin Had used weapons in multiple previous films and shows. He is / was not a first time amateur on how to handle a firearm on set....

I don't work in the industry, but I have to wonder why there's anyone handling the guns other than the armorer and the actors who are to use them in a scene. Why the heck is the AD involved in the chain of custody? That makes no sense to me. The fewer people who handle the weapons, the better.

 

[JCinPA]

I can't believe we wasted four pages of bandwidth on this.

Most of us have empathized with Baldwin here, which I think speaks volumes about the members here. Most of us can empathize with the AD who felt "out of her depth" in her position. Then she should not have been in that position!

Look, people, what I was trying to get at in my post about the procedures used for hand-off of a pistol in the CIC of a naval surface vessel is that this is NOT rocket science. In fact, it is far from it, it is dirt simple. I think Phil is trying to get at the same thing (correct me if I'm putting words in your mouth, Phill). And @tankerjohn said it when he said "there are no accidental discharges, only negligent discharges." I've been preaching that to shooters I've coached for 30 years. To those of us familiar with the manual of arms, this is 'tragic' only insofar as it is so stupid and avoidable.

This.
Is.
Not.
Rocket.
Science.

To shooters. We don't need the Spanish Inquisition here. We don't need an episode of CSI to finish the "investigation". We don't need to make excuses for anyone involved because "they must feel horrible." We can judge them while still feeling empathy for what they must be going through ... through their own fault, though.

As a firearms enthusiast and coach of many years, I will tell any of you who are not experienced shooters, with all due respect, your opinions on this are not informed if you are trying to come up with ways to excuse this, or wanting to let those involved off with a wrist slap because they are inexperienced. This was easily avoidable, and that's why no matter how much we want to empathize with those involved, we cannot excuse it.

I'll say it again.

Good procedures were in place, they were ignored, there will be consequences.

And there should be. The fact that there were good procedures to follow, and the fact that production professionals walked off the set over safety concerns tells me all I need to know about negligence here. I only need a lawyer to explain to me if it was gross negligence or criminal negligence.

Sorry to sound harsh, here, but firearms safety understanding does not take a Ph.D level intellect. It's taught to military recruits all over the world fairly easily. I suspect it is difficult to teach to anti-gun elites who think they have a Ph.D level intellect, and all the 'safety training' is beneath them and a waste of their time. That is at least part of the reason people left that set. Real shooters never consider any safety training or safey procedures reviews a waste of time.

'Nuff said. I'll shut up now. As a shooting enthusiast who cringes every time I see an "Officer Friendly" shoot himself in front of school kids video on YouTube (no shortage of them, unfortunately), do I sound judgemental? Yeah, I do. No apologies for that.

 

[hairless wonder]

I suspect it is difficult to teach to anti-gun elites who think they have a Ph.D level intellect, and all the 'safety training' is beneath them and a waste of their time.

Just nitpicking here, but who and what is an anti-gun elite? Is someone an anti-gun elite if he opposes the NRA and support sensible gun regulations? Does it make a difference if he owns a multitude of firearms and shoots competitively? Does someone have to own a firearm in order not to be an anti-gun elite?

There's a lot of verbiage that's been thrown i to the conversation that may be reflected more in an individual viewer's politics than in fact. I would encourage my friends in this forum to refrain from the editorializing and stick to the facts of the matter when discussing this undeniably tragic accident.

 

[luvmysuper]

The problem with this is that movies and TV shows are filmed all over the place--not just in California. To enact your standard would require every state to pass the same laws re guns on set. While someone might argue that the federal government can enact a law, that's a bit of a stretch even under the commerce clause (and I'm far from an Originalist).

This is true of state law, but the film industry could implement the guidelines as a prerequisite for continued employment.

 

[hairless wonder]

This is true of state law, but the film industry could implement the guidelines as a prerequisite for continued employment.

Agreed, but industry guidelines do not criminal laws make. They may prove relevant for civil suits (e.g., for proving a standard of care and negligence), but they would have little to no bearing in a criminal case. I believe MurderousCrow made a point about establishing criminal liability, not just civil liability.

 

[luvmysuper]

If folks avoid the behavior for whatever reason, the likelihood of litigation is lessened in any case.
If the behavior doesn't occur, criminal prosecution is moot.