Self inflicted is a completely different matter, as is the 2yr old finding a loaded gun, they are not valid comparisons to the Rust movie shooting.
And, I don't think that "industry practices /standards" should be the center point or main focus of the trial. That would be a red herring, and only serve to direct attention away from the person who was responsible for the shooting and the death that resulted.
this is one of the reasons we keep having this discussion, the idea that he "simply pulled the trigger". As if simply pulling the trigger was not the final step in the chain of events that led to a tragic needless death.
A lot of the discussion boils down to what I consider the difference between being responsible (criminal or not) and being "guilty".
And I don't mean guilty in the legal sense at this point, a court will determine that. What I mean is guilty in the sense that he did it. There is no question, no reasonable doubt here. He did it. He admitted he did it. Multiple witnesses saw it happen. Whether he realized he was doing it or not, he DID IT.
Not realizing you could cause harm (like the 2yr old) or not believing harm could happen (this incident) doesn't change the facts of what happened, it can only modify the legal penalty and punishment for those responsible.
ANY one person in the entire chain of events doing the right thing would have prevented the killing. The last person with the ability to do that was Baldwin. He did not. He admits he did not.
he's guilty.
(in my opinion)
why he didn't do the right thing (or ANY of the right things) doesn't matter to me.
Putting the industry "on trial" in an actual court or just in the court of public opinion is, I think, the wrong approach. Its easy for people to say the industry didn't do enough, but I think that unfair. There must be tens of thousands (if not an even higher number) of times in movies where guns are used and NO ONE gets shot with a real bullet.
One screwed up situation, where industry rules were IGNORED resulting in a fatality is not enough to condemn the industry as a whole. In my opinion.
will the industry change things? Probably. They'll try to do better, perhaps they can, but remember it wasn't the industry or their rules that created the problem it was individual people doing the wrong things (repeatedly) in the sequence needed to cause a tragic death.
thought?
And, I don't think that "industry practices /standards" should be the center point or main focus of the trial. That would be a red herring, and only serve to direct attention away from the person who was responsible for the shooting and the death that resulted.
I have my doubts that this will be hung around Baldwin's neck, ultimately, at least for having simply pulled the trigger.
this is one of the reasons we keep having this discussion, the idea that he "simply pulled the trigger". As if simply pulling the trigger was not the final step in the chain of events that led to a tragic needless death.
A lot of the discussion boils down to what I consider the difference between being responsible (criminal or not) and being "guilty".
And I don't mean guilty in the legal sense at this point, a court will determine that. What I mean is guilty in the sense that he did it. There is no question, no reasonable doubt here. He did it. He admitted he did it. Multiple witnesses saw it happen. Whether he realized he was doing it or not, he DID IT.
Not realizing you could cause harm (like the 2yr old) or not believing harm could happen (this incident) doesn't change the facts of what happened, it can only modify the legal penalty and punishment for those responsible.
ANY one person in the entire chain of events doing the right thing would have prevented the killing. The last person with the ability to do that was Baldwin. He did not. He admits he did not.
he's guilty.
(in my opinion)
why he didn't do the right thing (or ANY of the right things) doesn't matter to me.
Putting the industry "on trial" in an actual court or just in the court of public opinion is, I think, the wrong approach. Its easy for people to say the industry didn't do enough, but I think that unfair. There must be tens of thousands (if not an even higher number) of times in movies where guns are used and NO ONE gets shot with a real bullet.
One screwed up situation, where industry rules were IGNORED resulting in a fatality is not enough to condemn the industry as a whole. In my opinion.
will the industry change things? Probably. They'll try to do better, perhaps they can, but remember it wasn't the industry or their rules that created the problem it was individual people doing the wrong things (repeatedly) in the sequence needed to cause a tragic death.
thought?