"I didn't pull the trigger"

[Bud_Spencer]

Does anyone believe Baldwin's bullshit?

Anyone want to explain single-action revolvers to him?

 

[phrodeau]

How can a dog shoot a gun? There’s no possible way for a dog to release the safety and pull the trigger.

And yet…

https://www.clarionledger.com/story...ters-its-rare-but-happens-us-miss/2546121002/

 

[Bud_Spencer]

How can a dog shoot a gun? There’s no possible way for a dog to release the safety and pull the trigger.

And yet…

https://www.clarionledger.com/story...ters-its-rare-but-happens-us-miss/2546121002/

You prove my point: Even dogs have to pull the trigger to make them go bang. Ergo, Alec did, too.

Oh, and revolvers don't have safeties.

 

[jomar]

Sounds like the kind of bullshit a committee ends up convincing itself sounds plausible. He honestly may not have been carefully aware of where he was aiming, which in itself is a problem, but of course he pulled the trigger.

 

[LittleDixie]

Baldwin did not check the gun. Baldwin pointed a functioning firearm at another human being. Baldwin pulled the trigger.

This is a straightforward case of negligence.

 

[Cubantripod]

Gus shoot themselves just like cars drive through crowds.

 

[Paul_Chance]

There is a remote possibility that he is telling the truth. When you're dealing with either antique firearms, heavily worn firearms, or simply malfunctioning firearms, it is possible for a single-action weapon (or double-action set with the hammer cocked) to fire from simply being jostled or moved. I am sure the forensics firearms people will be checking/testing for that.

I have personal experience with one such gun (an old, cheap little semi-auto, a classic Saturday night special). The gun was being moved from one shelf to another and discharged (thankfully safely into the floor). The person who was moving the gun insisted she had not done anything other then pick it and set it down. We ended up taking the gun and then the lab put it onto one of those robot arm things that swing around. They simulated moving it from one place to another and sure enough, about 1 in 30 times it just...fired...even though the safety was engaged. I would not have believed it if I hadn't seen it. So, there is a remote possibility that he's telling the truth, which I am sure the lab will check out.

Most forensic labs are familiar with the claim of "the gun just went off" and so have whole batteries of tests just to analyze the probability of that happening.

 

[LittleDixie]

There is a remote possibility that he is telling the truth. When you're dealing with either antique firearms, heavily worn firearms, or simply malfunctioning firearms, it is possible for a single-action weapon (or double-action set with the hammer cocked) to fire from simply being jostled or moved. I am sure the forensics firearms people will be checking/testing for that.

I have personal experience with one such gun (an old, cheap little semi-auto, a classic Saturday night special). The gun was being moved from one shelf to another and discharged (thankfully safely into the floor). The person who was moving the gun insisted she had not done anything other then pick it and set it down. We ended up taking the gun and then the lab put it onto one of those robot arm things that swing around. They simulated moving it from one place to another and sure enough, about 1 in 30 times it just...fired...even though the safety was engaged. I would not have believed it if I hadn't seen it. So, there is a remote possibility that he's telling the truth, which I am sure the lab will check out.

Most forensic labs are familiar with the claim of "the gun just went off" and so have whole batteries of tests just to analyze the probability of that happening.

Which is why any gun person will say to never point it at anyone and always assume it's loaded.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Its entirely plausible he didn't pull the trigger. If the hammer wasn't locked and he just released it then it would go off. If he wasn't, isn't a gun person its logical to think that he thought as everybody else who has posted here thinks. That pulling the trigger is a requisite.

While you should never point a loaded weapon at someone this was a movie set. You should be assuming you're dealing with a prop that can't hurt anybody to begin with. Alec however was the producer so he's still fucked on that front because he should have had enough experts on hand to make sure the environment was safe.

I think its pretty obvious what happened here however. You had real guns instead of props for whatever reasons, probably they wanted to shoot off blanks and get a more realistic feel than you get with after effects. Then you had a bunch of guys who wanted to pop off a few rounds, no way of knowing how many had handled a weapon before or had any formal training at all. Then the incident happens because someone forgot to empty the weapon.

It really could have happened to anybody who wasn't paranoid as shit but there are times when being an idiot still holds consequences.

 

[Lazaran]

.
A right wing gun nut Deplorable / disgruntled crew member brought live ammo onto the set and likely tampered with the gun Baldwin was handed.

Identify the person who brought the ammo onto the set and you will have enough to charge someone with a crime.

Baldwin did nothing wrong in his actions leading up to the shooting, but desperate Deplorables want to smear him because of his ridiculing of their orange god.

SAD!!!

 

[KeithD]

How did the live ammunition get on the set? Those working on the set had the right to assume there was no live ammunition within miles of them.

 

[Sean Renaud]

You were never a young man were you? If someone told me I was gonna spend a few days out in the middle of nowhere with firearms you'd damn skippy I'd be shooting at tin cans, water bottles, rabbits, big rocks. cacti maybe the sun.

 

[Champakian]

How did the live ammunition get on the set? Those working on the set had the right to assume there was no live ammunition within miles of them.

No. No they did not.

That violates the first hard rule of gun safety
which is, "Always assume the weapon is loaded."

ALWAYS

It's NRA 101.



Second rule is even if you have verified that the gun is unloaded,
you never point it at another person.


Then again, I get the sense that you abhor guns
and don't want to know a damned thing about them...

 

[Champakian]

I also get the sense that Alec Baldwin is sufficiently Left-wing
to earn such excuse making from the same people who would
want Sarah Palin to swing from the end of a rope (sans trial)
had she accidentally shot someone, which, of course, she wouldn't.

Passionate defense would necessarily become a lynch mob...

 

[Champakian]

Maybe it's just me, but
does it seem that Alec Baldwin
is morphing into Teddy Kennedy...?

 

[bellisarius]

Baldwin should be exercising his right to remain silent. He may talk himself into being charged yet.

 

[Champakian]

He gives me the impression that he truly believes
that he is smarter than everyone else on his stage.

 

[jomar]

There is a remote possibility that he is telling the truth. When you're dealing with either antique firearms, heavily worn firearms, or simply malfunctioning firearms, it is possible for a single-action weapon (or double-action set with the hammer cocked) to fire from simply being jostled or moved. I am sure the forensics firearms people will be checking/testing for that.

...

Its entirely plausible he didn't pull the trigger. If the hammer wasn't locked and he just released it then it would go off. If he wasn't, isn't a gun person its logical to think that he thought as everybody else who has posted here thinks. That pulling the trigger is a requisite

…

Eh, while I think y’all are correct about such a remote possibility in such guns, wouldn’t it be the armorer’s job to keep guns up to safety standards?

Besides that, if the gun had actually accidentally discharged Baldwin would have been beside himself at the time of the incident claiming he didn’t know what happened he didn’t pull the trigger the gun just went off as it swept by her omg.

His statement at this time smacks of maneuvering.

 

[JohnnySavage]

On his interview with Snuffanopolis he said he pull the hammer back and let it go. Mystery solved.

 

[Champakian]

He also said that he would never, ever point a gun at any person.

It was a magic curve around the corner bullet...

 

[bellisarius]

Keep talking Alec, keep talking.

 

[mayfly13]

There is a remote possibility that he is telling the truth. When you're dealing with either antique firearms, heavily worn firearms, or simply malfunctioning firearms, it is possible for a single-action weapon (or double-action set with the hammer cocked) to fire from simply being jostled or moved. I am sure the forensics firearms people will be checking/testing for that.

I have personal experience with one such gun (an old, cheap little semi-auto, a classic Saturday night special). The gun was being moved from one shelf to another and discharged (thankfully safely into the floor). The person who was moving the gun insisted she had not done anything other then pick it and set it down. We ended up taking the gun and then the lab put it onto one of those robot arm things that swing around. They simulated moving it from one place to another and sure enough, about 1 in 30 times it just...fired...even though the safety was engaged. I would not have believed it if I hadn't seen it. So, there is a remote possibility that he's telling the truth, which I am sure the lab will check out.

Most forensic labs are familiar with the claim of "the gun just went off" and so have whole batteries of tests just to analyze the probability of that happening.

Its entirely plausible he didn't pull the trigger. If the hammer wasn't locked and he just released it then it would go off. If he wasn't, isn't a gun person its logical to think that he thought as everybody else who has posted here thinks. That pulling the trigger is a requisite.

You guys having had experience with guns and saying that it's rare, but not impossible ---

I'm starting to believe him.
His behavior would have been too inexplicably cretinoid otherwise

People aren't willing to consider it because he's such an awful person.
A wife beater and he, too exploited his almost minimum wage-earning stuff.
He should be charged, alongside the other directors, for recklessly endangering his crew by cutting corners.

 

[mayfly13]

How did the live ammunition get on the set? Those working on the set had the right to assume there was no live ammunition within miles of them.

yeah, it's weird how live ammunition was precisely in one of the three guns deliberately put on that table for the scene.
It's less likely, but not impossible that some disgruntled employee planted it.

 

[Champakian]

You guys having had experience with guns and saying that it's rare, but not impossible ---

I'm starting to believe him.
His behavior would have been too inexplicably cretinoid otherwise

People aren't willing to consider it because he's such an awful person.
A wife beater and he, too exploited his almost minimum wage-earning stuff.
He should be charged, alongside the other directors, for recklessly endangering his crew by cutting corners.

He's an ACTOR!

A damned good one.

Now his brother Billy couldn't pull this off, but it looks like he's starting to.


And those other instances where he pulled it off
have led up to this one, that is perfectly clear...

 

[Comshaw]

Does anyone believe Baldwin's bullshit?

Anyone want to explain single-action revolvers to him?

Does it really matter if he literally pulled the trigger? The real question should be how much culpability does he have for this?

The bare facts are he pointed a gun at another person, it went off and killed her.
Accident? If you look at the totality of the facts, not fucking hardly. Incompetence, arrogance, an idiocracy, yes.

Let's start with the most basic thing he did, you don't EVER, EVER point a gun at anything unless you are ready to shoot it. EVER. It doesn't matter if you THINK it wasn't loaded, it doesn't matter if you THINK it was checked. It doesn't matter if it SHOULDN'T have been. Even with all those excuses, he managed to kill his cinematographer with a "harmless" "unloaded" prop gun. Why?

Let's go down the list:

Anyone that has been around guns for a while knows the rule I quoted above. Another is you never handle one unless you check to see if it's loaded.

Someone was using that gun (with live ammo) to target practice with. As the producer, he allowed that (or closed his eyes to it) to happen. If you have REAL guns you will be pointing at other people, why in the fuck would you allow live ammo anywhere near the place?

As the producer, he refused to allow those with the responsibility (his armorer and others) to keep the set safe by doing their job as prescribed. And when they decided to quit because of the unsafe conditions, he filled those jobs with incompetent and untrained personnel who, rather than do the job as it should be, would do it the way he wanted it done.

As I said at the beginning, it doesn't matter if he used his finger to pull the trigger or not. As the producer, by his actions (or inaction) he was responsible for EVERYTHING that led up to him killing the woman.

In essence, by his actions, he did pull the trigger. Everything above says he is responsible for the killing. His political leanings, his wealth, his popularity matter not a fucking bit. Whining, excuses and blaming others shouldn't deflect from that.

Comshaw