quote:

Thus, I conclude this attempt to pass the buck to be false.

quote:

Originally posted by Navaluk:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
How many times do you think Baldwin has pointed a gun at somebody on a movie set and pulled the trigger and nobody died or got hurt? There may be some more evidence that he should have been aware there was a safety problem on the set but I haven't seen any of it.

Here's the definition of criminal negligence which is one of the required elements of an involuntary manslaughter charge:

"A person acts with criminal negligence, or is criminally negligent, with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he ought to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor's standpoint."

Actually NM 30-2-3 Manslaughter:

Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice.

A.----
B. Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony, OR in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner OR without due caution and circumspection.
...

If we are going to talk out of our asses on this we might as well speak the language that actually applies.

I'll start. Baldwin is going to meet "Karma" right here.

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
Here's a hypothetical.

Let's say the weapon was an M4 loaded with a 30 round magazine.

Would it have been Baldwin's obligation to unload every round in that mag and inspect the ammo before he pressed the trigger on it during the scene?

IMO-
Yes
or at least be present WITH the person loading-
in order to verify the condition of the firearm and ammunition
as being in a non- lethal state

quote:

Seriously? You think a major movie star is going to sit next to an armorer and inspect every round that gets loaded into a gun. On movies like Saving Private Ryan or The terminator movies? Where hundreds, if not thousands, of dummy rounds are fired? That would never happen.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
It's unclear to me whether NM courts require, for criminal negligence, actual knowledge of the risk posed by the conduct. Or is the "should have known" standard applicable?

If actual knowledge is required, Baldwin could rely on the dumbshit defense. He didn't know better.

But if the standard is what he should have known, the rules of gun safety will hang him, I think. Even dumbshits should know better.

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:

quote:

Seriously? You think a major movie star is going to sit next to an armorer and inspect every round that gets loaded into a gun. On movies like Saving Private Ryan or The terminator movies? Where hundreds, if not thousands, of dummy rounds are fired? That would never happen.

On the HIGH budget movies
there is litterally a Team of armorers -
NOT 1 or 2

Those circumstances are Entirely different-

Have you leased firearms(NFA and NON NFA)
to movies and provided armorers---
I have-

Have you been on the set-
I have-

READ
the Safe Set protocol i posted above-

IT is
what the smaller budget films SHOULD do
and generally
will DO

Baldwin CHOSE to be cheap-
Baldwin CHOSE to have a non- armorer handing him a firearm

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
None of this addresses the statement you made.

You think a major movie actor who gets paid millions of dollars per picture is going to sit with an armorer and inspect all the rounds that go into a 30 round magazine for an M4 rifle? Or that when that rifle is handed to the actor on the set, he's going to unload the magazine and check all the rounds?

That is what you are saying is required and that is just not going to happen.

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:

quote:

Seriously? You think a major movie star is going to sit next to an armorer and inspect every round that gets loaded into a gun. On movies like Saving Private Ryan or The terminator movies? Where hundreds, if not thousands, of dummy rounds are fired? That would never happen.

On the HIGH budget movies
there is litterally a Team of armorers -
NOT 1 or 2

Those circumstances are Entirely different-

Have you leased firearms(NFA and NON NFA)
to movies and provided armorers---
I have-

Have you been on the set-
I have-

READ
the Safe Set protocol i posted above-

IT is
what the smaller budget films SHOULD do
and generally
will DO

Baldwin CHOSE to be cheap-
Baldwin CHOSE to have a non- armorer handing him a firearm

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Do you think your doctor who makes tens of thousands of dollars per operation is going to be willing to wash his hands before he performs your surgical procedure?

See how silly this is?

If the requirement to check his ammo load out for the picture is too onerous, he can elect to not take roles that utilize weaponry for the picture.

Part of doing a job is that you follow the rules and laws that are required of it. If you don't, you are liable for the consequences of not doing so.

If the doc doesn't wash his hands and the patient gets an infection, he is committing malpractice, and if enough intent is found, can (and in some cases -rare- have been) charged with a criminal crime.

Same thing with acting and guns. What needs to be determined here is just whether or not Baldwin's behavior was criminal level. That the director and cameraman were shot shows that at the minimum criminal level neglect occurred on the set, and as you well know, the facts of the case need to be determined by a jury.

I don't think that the actor has any responsibility to check other people's on the set's stuff, just his own.

Using the terminator films as an example, how many blank rounds do you think Schwarzenegger actually fired on the set in Terminator? looking at it, probably way less than 500 in the film, so give it maybe 5000 per all the takes. They filmed it over a month or more... and Arnie wasn't a big name when that one was made... it made him.

Blank ammo isn't cheap, and the mechanics of using guns on sets are expensive, so they don't tend to go through millions of rounds.

In Saving Private Ryan, how much of the gunfire was actually postfilming editing? More than you might think, I would bet.

Its not that unreasonable an expectation.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
None of this addresses the statement you made.

You think a major movie actor who gets paid millions of dollars per picture is going to sit with an armorer and inspect all the rounds that go into a 30 round magazine for an M4 rifle? Or that when that rifle is handed to the actor on the set, he's going to unload the magazine and check all the rounds?

That is what you are saying is required and that is just not going to happen.

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:

quote:

Seriously? You think a major movie star is going to sit next to an armorer and inspect every round that gets loaded into a gun. On movies like Saving Private Ryan or The terminator movies? Where hundreds, if not thousands, of dummy rounds are fired? That would never happen.

On the HIGH budget movies
there is litterally a Team of armorers -
NOT 1 or 2

Those circumstances are Entirely different-

Have you leased firearms(NFA and NON NFA)
to movies and provided armorers---
I have-

Have you been on the set-
I have-

READ
the Safe Set protocol i posted above-

IT is
what the smaller budget films SHOULD do
and generally
will DO

Baldwin CHOSE to be cheap-
Baldwin CHOSE to have a non- armorer handing him a firearm

~Ann

quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Do you think your doctor who makes tens of thousands of dollars per operation is going to be willing to wash his hands before he performs your surgical procedure?

See how silly this is?

If the requirement to check his ammo load out for the picture is too onerous, he can elect to not take roles that utilize weaponry for the picture.

Part of doing a job is that you follow the rules and laws that are required of it. If you don't, you are liable for the consequences of not doing so.

If the doc doesn't wash his hands and the patient gets an infection, he is committing malpractice, and if enough intent is found, can (and in some cases -rare- have been) charged with a criminal crime.

Same thing with acting and guns. What needs to be determined here is just whether or not Baldwin's behavior was criminal level. That the director and cameraman were shot shows that at the minimum criminal level neglect occurred on the set, and as you well know, the facts of the case need to be determined by a jury.

I don't think that the actor has any responsibility to check other people's on the set's stuff, just his own.

Using the terminator films as an example, how many blank rounds do you think Schwarzenegger actually fired on the set in Terminator? looking at it, probably way less than 500 in the film, so give it maybe 5000 per all the takes. They filmed it over a month or more... and Arnie wasn't a big name when that one was made... it made him.

Blank ammo isn't cheap, and the mechanics of using guns on sets are expensive, so they don't tend to go through millions of rounds.

In Saving Private Ryan, how much of the gunfire was actually postfilming editing? More than you might think, I would bet.

Its not that unreasonable an expectation.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
None of this addresses the statement you made.

You think a major movie actor who gets paid millions of dollars per picture is going to sit with an armorer and inspect all the rounds that go into a 30 round magazine for an M4 rifle? Or that when that rifle is handed to the actor on the set, he's going to unload the magazine and check all the rounds?

That is what you are saying is required and that is just not going to happen.

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:

quote:

Seriously? You think a major movie star is going to sit next to an armorer and inspect every round that gets loaded into a gun. On movies like Saving Private Ryan or The terminator movies? Where hundreds, if not thousands, of dummy rounds are fired? That would never happen.

On the HIGH budget movies
there is litterally a Team of armorers -
NOT 1 or 2

Those circumstances are Entirely different-

Have you leased firearms(NFA and NON NFA)
to movies and provided armorers---
I have-

Have you been on the set-
I have-

READ
the Safe Set protocol i posted above-

IT is
what the smaller budget films SHOULD do
and generally
will DO

Baldwin CHOSE to be cheap-
Baldwin CHOSE to have a non- armorer handing him a firearm

Dr. Butler, you'd make a great lawyer, I think. I know, that's an insult but your response was truly well written and sensible.

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:

quote:

Thus, I conclude this attempt to pass the buck to be false.

jumping to concussions again , eh ?

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
The lawyers here told us all about how the Rittenhouse trial was going to go..... and they got nothing right.
I'm going to wait for the trial to find out what happens.

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
The lawyers here told us all about how the Rittenhouse trial was going to go..... and they got nothing right.
I'm going to wait for the trial to find out what happens.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
These are adults playing with real guns in front of the camera. Yes, they were PLAYING. It's no coincidence that actors were once more commonly known as "players."

That being so, why is it an unreasonable burden on the acting industry to expect the actors to know the rules of gun safety? Of all people, gun owners (like those of us here) should know you never treat a gun that's handed to you as empty. I don't care if the armorer doing the handing is an expert on every firearm and an Eagle Scout to boot.

If it were anyone else, anywhere else, gun safety wouldn't be too much to expect.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
The lawyers here told us all about how the Rittenhouse trial was going to go..... and they got nothing right.
I'm going to wait for the trial to find out what happens.

Snort!!!!!


Any day now

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
Only if the scalpel is thought to be loaded…..

quote:

Originally posted by Schrodinger:
“The surgeon is in charge.” OK, fine, but we are talking about an actor

quote:

Originally posted by Schrodinger:
Johnny, you make a point.

However, you have a pro in the armorer and just an actor on the other hand.

If the actor would do something to a gun that caused injury, then there would be negligence for the actor not leaving the status of the gun to the pro.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
Shut up, Jim.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
The lawyers here told us all about how the Rittenhouse trial was going to go..... and they got nothing right.
I'm going to wait for the trial to find out what happens.

Snort!!!!!


Any day now