Henry Ruggs III

[travisura]

8 minutes ago, Pimpdaddy said:

...if i'm handed a gun, at that point I am responsible for what happens with it... it takes less than one minute to dump the barrel and reload it after verifying whats in it... jail time....

Alec was handed the gun by the props master under the assumption that it was safe and ready to be used in the scene. It's not his job to make sure the prop guns are safe. There was no way he would've known that there was a live round.

[travisura]

38 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

He absolutely did. Whether you think it's loaded or unloaded, you never point a weapon at anything or anyone you don't want to destroy and you most certainly don't take for granted a weapon is "safe" unless you have unloaded it or seen it unloaded. You always treat any firearm as though it's loaded even when it's not. That's basic firearms safety 101. 

 

It was supposed to be a prop gun for use in a movie. It was supposed to be loaded with blanks. When filming the scene, he obviously had to point it and shoot (have you ever seen an action movie before?). He was handed the gun under the assumption that it was safe to use. It's not his job to verify that. Of course you can assign blame after the fact, but Baldwin should not be liable for this. It falls on the person whose sole job is to make sure that the prop weapons are safe.

[Pimpdaddy]

4 minutes ago, travisura said:

Alec was handed the gun by the props master under the assumption that it was safe and ready to be used in the scene. It's not his job to make sure the prop guns are safe. There was no way he would've known that there was a live round.

i get that... it is still his job to verify that gun. hes using it...had he took the one minute to verify...this would have been avoided....guns are dangerous if you are uneducated about them...as he was...

[Pimpdaddy]

20 minutes ago, Mage said:

It was supposed to be a prop gun.  Baldwin is not responsible for what is in the gun.  You would not be expected to be handed a gun on a movie set that could kill someone.  Actors are never the ones who handle the guns or what is in them.  

well...it fired a bullet... when his ass goes to jail, i'll bet actors will start checking... 

[SmokinwithWilly]

14 minutes ago, Mage said:

It was supposed to be a prop gun.  Baldwin is not responsible for what is in the gun.  You would not be expected to be handed a gun on a movie set that could kill someone.  Actors are never the ones who handle the guns or what is in them.  

Any time a gun is put in your hand, you treat it as if it is loaded. He pointed the firearm at people not in the movie and pulled the trigger. At the very least, that's extremely poor judgement. 

 

5 minutes ago, travisura said:

It was supposed to be a prop gun for use in a movie. It was supposed to be loaded with blanks. When filming the scene, he obviously had to point it and shoot (have you ever seen an action movie before?). He was handed the gun under the assumption that it was safe to use. It's not his job to verify that. Of course you can assign blame after the fact, but Baldwin should not be liable for this. It falls on the person whose sole job is to make sure that the prop weapons are safe.

I didn't say he was liable. I said he was responsible for his actions. He pointed a weapon loaded with an unknown (to him) ordinance. There were live rounds on the set along with blanks and dummy rounds. When the gun is in your hand, you are responsible. It takes a couple of seconds to visually verify what is loaded if you didn't watch the gun get loaded in front of you. You always have to know what is in your hand. 

[PhillyB]

2 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

He absolutely did. Whether you think it's loaded or unloaded, you never point a weapon at anything or anyone you don't want to destroy and you most certainly don't take for granted a weapon is "safe" unless you have unloaded it or seen it unloaded. You always treat any firearm as though it's loaded even when it's not. That's basic firearms safety 101. 

 

well duh but due to the unique protocols that are supposed to be employed on a film set he's not legally liable for this one as an actor 

edit: though he could be as a producer 

[SmokinwithWilly]

7 minutes ago, PhillyB said:

well duh but due to the unique protocols that are supposed to be employed on a film set he's not legally liable for this one as an actor 

Never said he was legally liable as an actor. I said he was responsible for the weapon in his possession. According to reports, there had already been 2 accidental discharges on set which would make one think, hey I need to be extra careful. It would have taken a couple seconds to release the wheel on the revolver, visually verify they are dummy rounds and close the gun.

His legal liability as a producer has yet to be determined and that's likely where his liability will come into play. What he knew about the armored and her experience and safety conditions on set will most definitely be scrutinized. 

I'm a huge proponent  of gun safety and think complacency is the biggest danger surrounding gun ownership and use. It's terrible this happened when it was 100% preventable, but man, you just never take anything for granted when you're holding a functional weapon.

[KSpan]

6 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

Never said he was legally liable as an actor. I said he was responsible for the weapon in his possession. According to reports, there had already been 2 accidental discharges on set which would make one think, hey I need to be extra careful. It would have taken a couple seconds to release the wheel on the revolver, visually verify they are dummy rounds and close the gun.

His legal liability as a producer has yet to be determined and that's likely where his liability will come into play. What he knew about the armored and her experience and safety conditions on set will most definitely be scrutinized. 

I'm a huge proponent  of gun safety and think complacency is the biggest danger surrounding gun ownership and use. It's terrible this happened when it was 100% preventable, but man, you just never take anything for granted when you're holding a functional weapon.

I'm with you 100% on the overall safety aspect but your assumption here is that an actor would have the knowledge necessary to make that determination. The arming protocols are what they are so that every situation is treated as if an actor has no knowledge and to eliminate any risk of people making decisions about things they think they know about but actually don't, or at the least have less knowledge about than the experts hired to oversee it.

It's a crappy and strange situation all around and if there is ultimately a lapse in judgment/error on Baldwin's part then he should be accountable for it, but determining the status of rounds in the gun is not one of them.

[Darknight]

He's done done.

[SmokinwithWilly]

19 minutes ago, Darknight said:

He's done done.

Stupid. Just so fuging stupid. 

[Shocker]

It is a miracle he didn’t get killed in that crash.

[Captroop]

1 hour ago, Darknight said:

He's done done.

Okay, if I had any sympathy for him (in the sense that him throwing his whole life away was a tragedy on top of the loss of life) that just completely erased it.

Hammered drunk. Armed. Traveling NASCAR speeds on public streets.

He's too dumb to have a place in society. Fug him forever.

[Happy Panther]

3 hours ago, Pimpdaddy said:

it is still his job to verify that gun. 

nope

[outlaw4]

This is another reason I left Vegas. What really doesn't help (other than the obvious access to booze) is the streets are often straight and quite wide. I was rear ended twice in my time there.