Why you can never be too careful
- Thread starter Aguila Blanca
- Start date
- Status
Aguila Blanca
Staff
It appears that even other people in the industry either don't know or don't agree on what the industry standard protocols are -- or else there simply aren't any "industry standard" protocols.John KSa said:
You have your podcast and, for the opposing view, we have George Clooney, and I have watched probably have a dozen YouTube videos showing experienced, professional Hollywood armorers or prop masters who all described the same scenario that Clooney described -- that firearms are brought onto the set empty, shown clear by the armorer to the cast and crew for each scene involving the firearm, then the ammunition is shown to the cast and crew for that scene to verify that it's either blank or dummy ammo, and then the gun is loaded by the armorer in front of the cast and crew and handed to the actor. Most of those interviews also said that guns are "never" pointed directly at people -- that where the script calls for a gun to be pointed at someone or at the camera, it is pointed off-axis and camera angles are used to trick the audience.
So, unless someone posts the actual language from the Screen Actors Guild (SAG) on the subject, it looks like maybe the industry standard is that there is no industry standard.
I actually did post the SAG guide. You can find it here:
https://www.sagaftra.org/files/safety_bulletins_amptp_part_1_9_3_0.pdf
It specifies that IF a gun is to be pointed at someone, then the armorer or the designated person should set the procedures. The relevant section of the document won't allow me to copy the language to paste it here.
Note also one of the comments in that document:
So in this case, the production company (Alec Baldwin) failed its duty to set up proper, safe environment for the use of firearms on the set.
https://www.sagaftra.org/files/safety_bulletins_amptp_part_1_9_3_0.pdf
It specifies that IF a gun is to be pointed at someone, then the armorer or the designated person should set the procedures. The relevant section of the document won't allow me to copy the language to paste it here.
Note also one of the comments in that document:
So in this case, the production company (Alec Baldwin) failed its duty to set up proper, safe environment for the use of firearms on the set.
The plain fact of the matter is that Alec Baldwin shot and killed a woman. Not the armorer. If there is an exemption in the law for actors, I'd be interested to see it. I have no idea if Baldwin is criminally culpable.
According to Andrew Branca, this met the conditions in Arizona for criminal manslaughter. Is he right? I have no idea. We will just have to wait and see if charges are brought and if so, will he be convicted.
THEN we will know. In the mean time we can post opposing viewpoints all day long. Nothing changes that a woman was shot and killed by Alec Baldwin.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
I missed that. Thanks.ghbucky said:
From the guide:
And then it says there's more information in bulletins #1, #2, #16, and #30 -- which we don't have. Nor do we have the actual SAG contract, to which at least one the professional armorers I watched in a video referred. He didn't refer to a safety bulletin, he referred to the contract.
Not certain this is correct, but I think bulletins #1, #2, #16 and #30 are available as pdf files at https://www.csatf.org/production-affairs-safety/safety-bulletins/
Starting to seem like a person could just set up a camera, hire someone that is 21yo and call them an armorer then negligently kill someone with a gun and walk around free.
There’s a bazillion people that call themselves filmmakers, entertainers and media nowadays.
What if someone like Ted Nugent shot someone at a film location? Would he be given the same out?
A gun is a gun and bullets are bullets...
There’s a bazillion people that call themselves filmmakers, entertainers and media nowadays.
What if someone like Ted Nugent shot someone at a film location? Would he be given the same out?
A gun is a gun and bullets are bullets...
Short of locking up EVERYONE on the set that day, what do you expect at this point?? The investigation is ongoing, NO ONE has been charged at this point. Sure, its frustrating that the investigation about what SEEMS so clear cut is taking so long, but while the "wheels of justice" do grind slowly sometimes, they are grinding forward, still.
This is not some low budget no name "deplorable" that nobody gives a snit about, who accidently shot "bubba" while playing with a gun. This is a big name actor, with a famous (or infamous?) public persona, who, apparently (at this point) shot someone while "playing" with a gun.
And, by extension, the entire movie industry is in the spotlight (in a way they don't like) over their gun handling rules and its enforcement or lack of the same.
I believe the investigation is moving slowly in order to ensure every single thing they turn up is as verified as humanly possible.
The entire argument of "I'm not responsible, I'm just an actor" is repugnant to me, and it seems I'm not alone in that opinion.
I think the entire discussion about actors being allowed to point REAL guns at real people on the set is a red herring, in this case. Yes, during filming, when the script calls for it, they do that, but in THIS case, what Baldwin did WASN'T a scripted act during filming. The innocent woman killed and the guy wounded were NOT actors in a scene that called for having a gun pointed at them.
Therefore, in my opinion, all discussion about what actors are allowed to do with a gun in a scripted scene while filming is not relevant to this specific shooting.
There are some facts about this case many have not heard but seem to hint on needing answers to .
1) The armorer (Hannah Gutierrez-Reed ) is the daughter of Thell Reed who is considered one of the best Hollywood gun experts in the industry and started working in the industry officially on the set of Gunsmoke . She ( his daughter ) has been on sets with her dad since she was a little girl ( age 10 or maybe younger ) She had assisted him over the years as a armorer . She likely has more real on hand experience then other armorers twice her age .
https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainmen...-reed-speaks-fatal-incident/story?id=81600262
2) Reed ( the armorer on rust ) was NOT the person who handed Baldwin the gun . For what ever reason the assistant director was the one who gave Baldwin the loaded firearm . Baldwin stated 99.9% of the time Miss Reed handed him the firearms on set but did not on this occasion . However There are statements that Miss Reed gave the gun to the AD to give to Baldwin to use in the scene .
Not sure how that all works legally or how that may either reduces or exacerbates her responsibility and liability in all this .
Last edited:
I get everyone’s point, I really do, but we all know how easy it is to make sure a gun is safe. Many of us here have taught CHILDREN how to do it.
An actor should be briefed on how to check for an unsafe condition as long as it is
common firearms, revolvers, pistols etc. (not talking about a mini-gun or anything)
I don’t think Mr. Baldwin is the cause of a bullet being in a gun.
But, there’s a definite privilege going on here.
If someone hands me a gun and says it is safe and then I subsequently shoot two people, killing one of them, I don’t think I’d be able to roam about the country doing media appearances.
As many of you have educated me about the specific procedures and safeguards in place in the movie industry that is in place to eliminate the hazards, that is acceptable to me. Seems that the standards for handling a weapon in a movie set are well known. All acceptable.
Where Mr. Baldwin’s negligence lies is accepting the gun in a situation that apparently was well outside the norms. Everyone has a responsibility for safety. Mr. Baldwin should have put the brakes on as soon as conditions changed; or anyone on the set for that matter. Everyone present at the time was negligent.
Again, this is 2021 an accident like this is inexcusable for anyone involved.
An actor should be briefed on how to check for an unsafe condition as long as it is
common firearms, revolvers, pistols etc. (not talking about a mini-gun or anything)
I don’t think Mr. Baldwin is the cause of a bullet being in a gun.
But, there’s a definite privilege going on here.
If someone hands me a gun and says it is safe and then I subsequently shoot two people, killing one of them, I don’t think I’d be able to roam about the country doing media appearances.
As many of you have educated me about the specific procedures and safeguards in place in the movie industry that is in place to eliminate the hazards, that is acceptable to me. Seems that the standards for handling a weapon in a movie set are well known. All acceptable.
Where Mr. Baldwin’s negligence lies is accepting the gun in a situation that apparently was well outside the norms. Everyone has a responsibility for safety. Mr. Baldwin should have put the brakes on as soon as conditions changed; or anyone on the set for that matter. Everyone present at the time was negligent.
Again, this is 2021 an accident like this is inexcusable for anyone involved.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
There are also statements that the gun had been left on a cart, unattended, and that Guttierez-Reed wasn't at the location when the AD handed the gun to Baldwin.Metal god said:
At this point it's all speculation. We have to hope that when the investigation has been completed, the findings will be released. However, if there are criminal charges, the report may remain sealed until after any trial(s).
Part of the problem here, or at least the difference in perspective is, we are gun people. If the guy at the gun shop hands me a revolver right after he checks it, I do too. Just because that is how we were raised. It is an ingrained habit with us. I truly don't know if Hollywood stars like John Wayne and all the rest handled their firearms like we do. I just dont know. maybe it is a different culture. Heck, I dont know, even if some script told me to point a firearm at some other person that I did not intend to kill, I dunno, I would have to really try to point a firearm at someone. Perhaps this is just something "WE" cannnot understand.
I have not heard that the gun was out unattended or sitting on a cart prior to or after Mis Reed and the AD handling it That one is new to me . I've read Reed checked the gun and handed it directly to the AD stating it was a safe gun with no loaded or blank rounds in it .
Yeah and how contaminated the crime scene got before the police secured it if at all . Like who secured the firearm immediately after the shot was fired , did anyone unload/handle the cases/cartridges after the shooting . The finger prints on the casings would be interesting to see who handled the cartridges .
The other aspect to this is that it's widely excepted that firearm was used for target practice maybe even safety training earlier in the day . IDK but that is the exact gun that can have a round left in it accidentally after shooting . It's not like the cylinder pops open and you can CLEARLY see it's empty .
The other thing that comes to mind is if they were shooting live ammo earlier . I'm not sure why but maybe they had both and or all three -blanks , dummy and fully loaded cartridges on the same table when plinking/training . I can easily see them getting mixed up by some noob . I freak out when someone ( usually a friend ) at the range grabs my load development ammo box and pulls one out to look at it
. I immediately get in there face and explain to NEVER EVER touch my ammo unless I specifically hand the box to you and say you can shoot them . I explain these are very specific loads in a VERY specific order and if they get mixed up it could be very dangerous . .
I can see some noob on set while Reed is engaged directly with Baldwin or whomever gabs a round from one box without her noticing , checks it out and puts it back in the wrong box . Or hands it to a second person to look at and that person not knowing which box it came out of and just puts it in the closes box . Later Mis Reed can be pulling from the dummy round box and have no idea there is a live round in there . The problem there is , nobody will admit to that and likely if very new to firearm will have no clue it was them looking at that very bullet earlier in the day is what started this whole thing down the wrong path
Yeah and how contaminated the crime scene got before the police secured it if at all . Like who secured the firearm immediately after the shot was fired , did anyone unload/handle the cases/cartridges after the shooting . The finger prints on the casings would be interesting to see who handled the cartridges .
The other aspect to this is that it's widely excepted that firearm was used for target practice maybe even safety training earlier in the day . IDK but that is the exact gun that can have a round left in it accidentally after shooting . It's not like the cylinder pops open and you can CLEARLY see it's empty .
The other thing that comes to mind is if they were shooting live ammo earlier . I'm not sure why but maybe they had both and or all three -blanks , dummy and fully loaded cartridges on the same table when plinking/training . I can easily see them getting mixed up by some noob . I freak out when someone ( usually a friend ) at the range grabs my load development ammo box and pulls one out to look at it
. I immediately get in there face and explain to NEVER EVER touch my ammo unless I specifically hand the box to you and say you can shoot them . I explain these are very specific loads in a VERY specific order and if they get mixed up it could be very dangerous . . I can see some noob on set while Reed is engaged directly with Baldwin or whomever gabs a round from one box without her noticing , checks it out and puts it back in the wrong box . Or hands it to a second person to look at and that person not knowing which box it came out of and just puts it in the closes box . Later Mis Reed can be pulling from the dummy round box and have no idea there is a live round in there . The problem there is , nobody will admit to that and likely if very new to firearm will have no clue it was them looking at that very bullet earlier in the day is what started this whole thing down the wrong path
Last edited:
Shane Tuttle
Staff
Agreed that at this point, we're merely speculating. This thread has grown long in its tooth, so we're closing it.
- Status