Comments by "James Bliehall" (@JBliehall) on "Armorer explains what went wrong on 'Rust'" video.

  1. THAT is true and the root of the safety issue on Rust.
    22
  2. Erin, that's true. Hexum was playing Russian roulette and fired a BLANK round into his head! Pieces of wadding forced parts of his skull into his brain and he later died. Brandon Lee was a completely different scenario. On the set of The Crow someone had loaded solid bullets into cartridges with no powder but a real primer. They shot the .44 Magnum pistol during the filming and the primer lodged the bullet into the barrel. No one checked the gun the next day and they were using "full load" blanks for maximum effect. The blank round fired and exited the bullet with such force it killed Brandon Lee. This was a full live round that killed her and went thru her and into the AD
    3
  3. Gross Negligence.
    3
  4.  @makeamericagratefulagain  THAT I can't argue with!! (;<})
    2
  5. True. My Dad believed in physiognomy. If you look like you don't know what you are doing.................you most probably don't.
    2
  6. No, it was proven to be a full-load live round. This isn't another Brandon Lee fiasco.
    2
  7. Not in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    2
  8. Mike, Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. Multiple news sources have been wrong on so many aspects of this tragedy. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio last week. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, we all would believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor
    2
  9. Robert, this was a Hollywood movie. The rules change. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    2
  10. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    2
  11. CJ, Brandon Lee was a completely different scenario. On the set of The Crow someone had loaded solid bullets into cartridges with no powder but a real primer. They shot the .44 Magnum pistol during the filming and the primer lodged the bullet into the barrel. No one checked the gun the next day and they were using "full load" blanks for maximum effect. The blank round fired and exited the bullet with such force it killed Brandon Lee. This was a full live round that killed her and went thru her and into the AD
    2
  12. They are used mostly in the "face on" view to show that the gun isn't empty. The primers aren't visible in that view angle.
    2
  13. very well stated.
    2
  14.  @zen4men  I understand the feelings people have because this good woman was killed. But it was negligence, pure and simple. They have used real guns to shoot safe blanks in hundreds of thousands of movie scenes and not had anyone hurt. Only Brandon Lee was killed on set by a firearm and this armorer should have learned from that incident. That was over 25 years ago. Here's some statistics from the CDC: [In the US, an average of 3,500 to 4,000 people drown per year. That is an average of 10 fatal drownings per day. Drowning is the leading cause of unintentional injury-related death for children ages 1-4. Drowning remains in the top 5 causes of unintentional injury-related death from birth to 5 years old. Twenty-three percent of child drownings happen during a family gathering near a pool. Drowning is the cause of death for most boating fatalities. It’s estimated that another 5 to 10 people receive hospital-related care for nonfatal drowning injuries for every fatal drowning victim.] [According the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, every year 500,000 people are treated for ladder-related injuries and approximately 400 of these incidents prove to be fatal. In 2007 alone, more than 400 people died as a result of falls on or from ladders or scaffolding. -Liberty Mutual - Research Institute for Safety] I hope you get my point. I won't even go into drunk drivers and knifings and bludgeon deaths. Safe "hot" and "cold" sets have been here for years. They simply didn't follow the safety standards that have been used to ensure safety on either set and a tragedy resulted
    2
  15.  @zen4men  I went into the military at 17. So I have 52 years of firearms experience. Several moths ago I went to clean my .308 Win sniper rifle in preparation to do some SWAT training. I was wiping it down and the 10 round magazine was out. As I went to clean the trigger guard, that little "alarm bell" went off. I ran the bolt and a 175 grain Lake City round left the breech. I was shaking I was so distraught with myself. Stay safe and happy.
    2
  16. Yes that's true. And he never would have explained the correct safety procedures to the uneducated. You expect a good, intensive fact-filled interview with him saying, "No." "Ah, yes." "Well maybe." "Not always." "Sometimes"............................... Really?
    2
  17. Alec Baldwin, the actor. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive.
    2
  18. Mike, that's correct. They used my weapons training systems in the TV series "Stars Earn Stripes" several years ago. Dean Cain was 1 of the 8 actors (along with Peekaboo Street, Alisha Ali, Terry Ewes and others) teamed with 8 Afghani/Iraqi veterans (including Chris Kyle) and they competed as teams over the 4 week period. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_Earn_Stripes It was mostly live fire with fully automatic weapons, FN rifles and pistols and live fire .50 BMG's.. The actors were trained in gun safety and use on set. So in that instance he is not correct. Live ammunition can be on set in particular circumstances, but the armorers were fastidious and nearly overly concerned about keeping the live rounds and dummy rounds Simunitions rounds separated and inventoried. I am a military veteran and I always felt safe on set.
    2
  19. TMA, Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    2
  20. The difference between a "dummy" round and "live" round and a "blank" round is so very evident. He should have known.
    2
  21. Jeb, very true.
    2
  22. Ronald, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scene.
    2
  23. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  24. That's just to senseless to be imaginable.
    1
  25. that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scen
    1
  26. She was still the armorer. If she even remotely felt she could not maintain safety on the "cold" set she should have alerted Baldwin. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  27. yet another moronic, stupid conspiracy theory...or fairy tale. You lame people are really beyond help.
    1
  28. And your proof of that idiotic statement is...? Moronic conspiracy website don't count.
    1
  29. He had NOTHING to do with the walk-outs.
    1
  30.  @nitrojunkie22  When a cop illegally shoots an unarmed person they DON"T fire the chief or hold him liable.
    1
  31. That is too idiotic for words..........
    1
  32.  @makeamericagratefulagain  Read this very slowly so you understand the real world. Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. Have you never watched a Hollywood "action film?" In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH through San Francisco. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor or the camera and it's cut into later scenes in the movie. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio last week. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, we all would believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor.
    1
  33. ​ @makeamericagratefulagain  I have 5 (soon 6) weapons training systems and have trained just about every military, LE and government agency that carries a weapon. I just finished training the Firearms Instructors for the 351st Special Warfare Training Squadron at Kirtland AFB. Please don't attempt to lecture me on weapons and safety and who's responsible. They used my weapons training systems in the TV series "Stars Earn Stripes" several years ago. 8 actors including Dean Cain, Peekaboo Street, Alisha Ali, Terry Crews and others, were teamed with 8 Afghani/Iraqi combat veterans including Chris Kyle. They competed as teams over the 4 week period. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_Earn_Stripes It was mostly live fire with fully automatic weapons, FN rifles and pistols and live fire .50 BMG's. It was designated a "hot set" when the firearms were loaded with live rounds and a "cold set" when no live rounds were accessible. Irrespective of their past experience both the actors and veterans were schooled in gun safety and use on both the "hot" and "cold" sets. So in that regard he is not correct. Live ammunition can be on set in particular circumstances, but the armorers were fastidious and nearly overly concerned about keeping the live rounds, dummy or blank and Simunition rounds and guns separated and inventoried. So unless you can enlighten me as to your experience and abilities, don't preach.
    1
  34.  @makeamericagratefulagain  You never read (or maybe never understood) my previous posts. It is not the actor's responsibility to check the status of the weapon. They may well do it now after this tragedy but they weren't REQUIRED to do it anymore than the actor being required to check the rigging in a climbing scene or the mechanical safety of the auto they use in a chase scene.
    1
  35. I think that is not correct. Snap Caps are used when you have concern as to breaking the firing pin of a firearm, most notably the .22 rimfire. Some snap caps contain a primer, but very few. Dummy rounds have the standard size brass casing, an already fired or disabled primer (usually painted black), a real "bullet" and they are filled loosely with small copper or lead BB's. You can shake a dummy round and know immediately it is a safe round.
    1
  36. True. And he never would have educated the less than informed viewers that don't know the first thing about appropriate safety on a movie set. As we all know what they do in movies does not translate to safe practices in real-life.
    1
  37. that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. The armorer is responsible for weapons' safety. KOB-TV here in Albuquerque had a news program on this tragedy. The armorer was quoted as saying because of budget constraints "she had other responsibilities than sole armorer."
    1
  38. Sadly, that seems true.
    1
  39. That appears to be true.
    1
  40. Snow, that's not always true. They used my weapons training systems in the TV series "Stars Earn Stripes" several years ago. Dean Cain and 7 other actors (along with Peekaboo Street, Alisha Ali, Terry Crews and others) teamed with 8 Afghani/Iraqi veterans (including Chris Kyle) and they competed as teams over a 4 week period. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_Earn_Stripes It was mostly live fire with fully automatic weapons, FN rifles and pistols and live fire .50 BMG's.. The actors were trained in gun safety and use on set. So some of the "experts" aren't correct. Live ammunition can be on set in particular circumstances, but the armorers were fastidious and nearly overly concerned about keeping the live rounds and dummy rounds and blanks and Simunition rounds separated and inventoried. I am a veteran and I always felt safe on set
    1
  41. Rooster, this is Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  42. They are very evident by sight. Dummy" rounds have bullets inserted in the casing but no powder and are filled loosely with small BB's so you can shake them and know they are not live rounds. They also have an evident "hit" on the primer so you also know they can't operate as a "live" round. "Blank" rounds have a crimped end that is VERY noticeable.
    1
  43. Gerry, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  44. 70, the safety rules are different on a Hollywood movie set. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio yesterday. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun, the armorer handed it to Alec Baldwin. He then rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He let the hammer run free and it fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? We all would believe he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check them.
    1
  45. that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks in the gun, not live rounds. The armorer is responsible for weapons' safety. KOB-TV here in Albuquerque had a news program on this tragedy. The armorer was quoted as saying because of budget constraints "she had other responsibilities than sole armorer." The Santa Fe PD stated on KOB TV that they were using the "prop" guns (which were "real" guns) for target practice after the day's filming. If they were and live rounds were on the set and not inventoried and cleared by the armorer, a lot of people are guilty of gross negligence. But ultimately Alec Baldwin has some level of responsibility.
    1
  46. Yes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  47. I don't think that's accurate. Multiple news sources have been wrong on so many aspects of this tragedy. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio last week. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, we all would believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor
    1
  48. True. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  49. That is so far fetched as to be nonsensical. The actors and some production people were target shooting after filming ended. That's how the live rounds got onto a "cold" set. It certainly wasn't done in some "sabotage" conspiracy.
    1
  50.  @cndvd  State that it's Gross Negligence" to have live rounds on a cold set and I agree. But "sabotage" and "intentional murder" is more that a stretch of real events.
    1
  51. Good idea, but such firearms were never designed or manufactured. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company“ not whether they are real or inactive replicas. If they do not use CGI, they have to be real guns to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design a special blank firing gun for every movie from the Civil War, WW II, Vietnam and modern day handgun and rifle semi-automatics. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  52.  @douglasmatheson403  Don't go through the effort of making a video. Just link me to the guns that only fire "special sized blanks" and the "special sized" blank ammunition that only fits into those "special sized guns." To satisfy the film industry, firearms and ammunition manufacturers would have to make "special guns and ammunition" for every firearm used in any movie, from pre-Civil War, to the old West, to WW I & II, Korea, Vietnam and modern day firearms. It never was profitable and is an answer to a really non-existent problem. Tragic this woman died, but hundreds of thousands of scenes have been safely filmed world-wide since the 1920's. They have used real guns to shoot safe blanks in all of them. Only Brandon Lee was killed on set by a firearm and this armorer should have learned from that incident. That was over 25 years ago. Do you want to stop real tragedies? Here's some statistics from the CDC: [In the US, an average of 3,500 to 4,000 people drown per year. That is an average of 10 fatal drownings per day. Drowning is the leading cause of unintentional injury-related death for children ages 1-4. Drowning remains in the top 5 causes of unintentional injury-related death from birth to 5 years old. Twenty-three percent of child drownings happen during a family gathering near a pool. Drowning is the cause of death for most boating fatalities. It’s estimated that another 5 to 10 people receive hospital-related care for nonfatal drowning injuries for every fatal drowning victim.] [According the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, every year 500,000 people are treated for ladder-related injuries and approximately 400 of these incidents prove to be fatal. In 2007 alone, more than 400 people died as a result of falls on or from ladders or scaffolding. -Liberty Mutual - Research Institute for Safety] That's YEARLY statistics! I won't even go into drunk drivers and knifings and bludgeon deaths. Safe "hot" and "cold" sets have been here for years. They simply didn't follow the safety standards that have been used to ensure safety on either set and a tragedy resulted
    1
  53. Sutoob, Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. There was a plexiglass shield in front of the camera to protect the camera crew from the wadding in the blank round. Alec Baldwin was supposed to draw, aim the gun at the camera and fire a blank round. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on Good Morning America and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio yesterday. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun, the armorer handed it to Alec Baldwin. He then rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? We all would believe he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check them and unfortunately he didn't.
    1
  54. That's not correct. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company“ not whether they are real or inactive replicas. If they do not use CGI, they have to be real guns to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design a special blank firing gun for every movie from the Civil War, WW II, Vietnam and modern day handgun and rifle semi-automatics. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  55. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? Anyone that knows anything about firearms believes he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check the weapon or the rounds in it. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  56. Alan, all of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  57. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high building action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  58. Very understandable theory if you are deep into street drugs.......................
    1
  59. The armorer is responsible for all firearms safety. Not the actors. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  60. Just nonsense. And actor Jon-Eric Nexum did put a balnk gun against his head on the set while playing Russian Roulette. It killed him.
    1
  61. Good advice.
    1
  62. that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  63. The armorer is responsible for all aspects of weapons safety-no one else.
    1
  64. True.
    1
  65. No that's not true. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  66. They should be but they aren't. Multiple sources have been wrong on so many aspects of this tragedy. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio yesterday. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun, the armorer handed it to Alec Baldwin. He then rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He let the hammer run free and it fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? We all would believe he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check them.
    1
  67. True.(or replica) The uneducated need to research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design a special blank firing gun for every movie from the Civil War, the old west, WW I & II, Vietnam and every modern day handgun and rifle. Get the point? The armorer, not the actors, must ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. They didn't and the director died.
    1
  68. That's not correct. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  69. No fast dangerous car scenes, no high building scenes, no ocean scenes, no fake fires, no marital arts scenes, no fake furniture used as a weapon scenes, no ..........
    1
  70. Had absolutely NOTHING to do with this tragic event unless you are a moronic conspiracy believer!!!!!!!
    1
  71. Tom, that's not possible in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  72. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  73. Multiple sources have been wrong on so many aspects of this tragedy. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio yesterday. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun, the armorer handed it to Alec Baldwin. He then rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He let the hammer run free and it fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? We all would believe he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check them.
    1
  74. That's not correct (Hint Hint) Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  75. When there is a "face on" camera angle, even those with little or no firearms knowledge recognize when there are no rounds in a revolver. Additionally when actors are shown loading handgun magazines or En-Blocs in rifles, a blank round is very evident.
    1
  76. No it had gunpowder and a primer. Dummy" rounds have bullets inserted in the casing but no powder and are filled loosely with small BB's so you can shake them and know they are not live rounds. They also have an evident "hit" on the primer so you also know they can't operate as a "live" round. "Blank" rounds have a crimped end that is VERY noticeable.
    1
  77. Scott, very true. The difference between a "dummy" round and "live" round and a "blank" round is so very evident. He should have known.
    1
  78. Yes and she also hated Swiss cheese. So..................??
    1
  79. Jon, what you state is very incorrect. Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. Have you never watched a Hollywood "action film?" In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH through San Francisco. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor or the camera and it's cut into later scenes in the movie. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to duplicate every firearm from the Civil War up to modern semi-automatics. You just need to ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. There was a plexiglass screen to protect the camera crew from the wadding in the blank round. The armorer handed the gun directly to Alec Baldwin. Baldwin was supposed to draw his handgun, point it at the camera and fire a blank round. But he rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position and accidentally let the hammer run free. It fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? Anyone that knows anything about firearms believes he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check the weapon or the rounds in it. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. From a 79 y-o Republican Conservative Weapons Instructor with 5 patented weapons training systems and a Life Member of the NRA that voted for Trump THE FIRST TIME. As the Jewish Defense League motto says, "Never Again!."
    1
  80. That is beyond preposterous. Jez...............
    1
  81. Not true. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  82. To say that's really idiotic is being very kind.
    1
  83. [ The "blank" rounds look identical to the full brass shot rounds I have in several different calibers.] Really? 60 years with weapons and I have NEVER seen a "blank" that looks anything near a live round.
    1
  84. Randall, In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have been killed filming high-speed chases. What are they supposed to do film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor or the camera and it's cut into later scenes in the movie. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio last week. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, we all would believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor.
    1
  85. This was always to be a "cold set." There were no scenes planned with live rounds.
    1
  86. Fred, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  87. Bobby, Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have been killed filming high-speed chases. What are they supposed to do film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's way beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. "Replicas" can’t fire a blank. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds
    1
  88. Very sad................but true. She stated, "Because of the limited budget, I had more responsibilities than just being the armorer." The investigation team said they found live rounds in her equipment bag.
    1
  89. Not in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  90.  @mikeboone4425  Stay safe and happy and well. No one is here forever....
    1
  91. That looks to be the case.
    1
  92. No, that's not rue. I'm really sorry you never in your life watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie they can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have also been killed filming high-speed movie chases. What are they supposed to do, film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH through the streets of San Francisco so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) the actor points the gun at the camera or another actor and shoots. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at the camera or another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's totally false. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” Go to 1:40 They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s Here’s a scene from Westworld 1973 Go to 2:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwNqorvjtg And contrary to what some "experts" are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ It has nothing to do with whether they are real guns or inactive replicas. If they do not use CGI, they are forced to use real guns to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Research “Blank Guns in Movies.” Chiappa of the UK is the only manufactured handgun I know of that fires a special sized 6 mm blank round that will not operate in a “real” gun. The report, muzzle flash and recoil is abysmal so CGI would still have to be implemented. They have a very limited selection of handguns and they make no rifles. They are more for stage acts than movies. There was never enough sales potential for major firearms manufacturers to invest in either special firearms or special sized blank rounds. To satisfy the movie industry they would have to design a special blank gun for every gun used in a movie from the Civil War, the old west, WW I & II, Vietnam and every modern day handgun and rifle. There was no profit in it. The armorer, not the actors, must ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. They didn't and the director died. No, not really. I have little or no feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But Baldwin was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  93. Brandon Lee was a completely different scenario. On the set of The Crow someone had loaded solid bullets into cartridges with no powder but a real primer. They shot the .44 Magnum pistol during the filming and the primer lodged the bullet into the barrel. No one checked the gun the next day and they were using "full load" blanks for maximum effect. The blank round fired and exited the bullet with such force it killed Brandon Lee. This was a full live round that killed her and went thru her and into the AD
    1
  94. That is an over reacting answer to a non-issue. Yes, the woman tragically lost her life, but gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. Have you never watched a Hollywood "action film?" In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. Stunt drivers have lost their lives filming high-speed chase scenes. To prevent that again, should we have a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH through San Francisco? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point the gun at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor or the camera and it's cut into later scenes in the movie. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, anyone that has safely handled a firearm believes he SHOULD have checked he rounds. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor.
    1
  95. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design and manufacture "period" guns to match those on every movie set from the Civil War to modern day semi-automatics. It has no need or requirement. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. They didn't.
    1
  96. I have little or no use for Alec Baldwin, but this is really not his fault.
    1
  97. The latter yes, the former no. I have little or no feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But Baldwin was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  98. Steve, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  99. Craig, that's not accurate. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and the actors “shooting at each other.” Contrary to what some people are saying "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ It has nothing to do with whether they are “real” or not. If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Irrespective of what the "expert" state, I have never seen nor can you reference on the internet a "prop" gun that fires only a special blank sized cartridge and won't accept a real live round. Remember, they would have to make the guns and blank rounds for literally every handgun and rifle ever made and shown in the movies, from western revolvers to WW II weapons to the modern semi-automatics of today. The firearms and ammunitions manufacturers are having a tough enough time staying in business. There isn't enough profit motivation in it to design a plethora of "safe prop guns."
    1
  100. I have little or no use for Alec (not Alex) Baldwin. But the ultimate responsibility lies with the armorer. If you can't trust the armorer to keep the "cold" set safe.............replace her.
    1
  101. THAT CERTAINLY ISN'T TRUE!!!!!!! Not in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  102. Eric, that simply is not true. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Alec have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high elevation action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive in a high-speed chase. Thousands and thousands of action scenes have been filmed and the actors are NEVER expected to check the status of the guns. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor.
    1
  103. Gilbert. they may have made an effort to save "money" but saying they made an effort to cut "safety" is a bit of an overstatement.
    1
  104. If you test them how do you then use them? This was gross negligence allowing live rounds on a "cold set." Blanks are very evident by their crimped ends and no bullet installed in the casing.
    1
  105. Multiple sources have been wrong on so many aspects of this tragedy. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio yesterday. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun, the armorer handed it to Alec Baldwin. He then rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He let the hammer run free and it fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? We all would believe he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check them.
    1
  106. ac·ci·dent /ˈaksədənt/ 1. an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury. "he had an accident at the factory" 2. an event that happens by chance or that is without apparent or deliberate cause.
    1
  107. That is so simple and so very true. Good point.
    1
  108. Charles, that simply is not true. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Alec have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high elevation action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive in a high-speed chase. Thousands and thousands of action scenes have been filmed and the actors are NEVER expected to check the status of the guns. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor.
    1
  109.  @charleswarden291  Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have been killed filming high-speed chases. What are they supposed to do film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's totally false. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” Go to 1:40 They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s Here’s a scene from Westworld 1973 Go to 2:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwNqorvjtg And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company“ not whether they are real or inactive replicas. If they do not use CGI, they have to be real guns to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design a special blank firing gun for every movie from the Civil War, WW II, Vietnam and modern day handgun and rifle semi-automatics. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive.
    1
  110. More importantly they are not REQUIRED to check the status of the firearm. That is the sole responsibility of the armorer.
    1
  111. Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  112. Adam, thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  113. True. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  114. CGI is time consuming and expensive.
    1
  115. Since that's the only issue with the interview I'd say she did very good.
    1
  116. 1960, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes.
    1
  117. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? Anyone that knows anything about firearms believes he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check the weapon or the rounds in it. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  118. Who had absolutely NOTHING to do with this tragic event unless you are a moronic conspiracy believer!!!!!!
    1
  119. Stupid beyond words...........
    1
  120. Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  121. No not really. As I stated in my original post, there is no motivation nor profit in any firearms manufacturer making a firearm that would hold a special sized blank round And no sales motivation for ammunition manufacturer to assemble specially sized rounds that would only fit in those guns. They would have to make "special" guns and "special" blanks to replicate every gun ever used in a movie. Ever era from the Civil War, the early west, WWI & WWII, Korea, Vietnam and today's plethora of rifles and handguns Literally hundreds, if not thousands. Hundreds of thousands of scenes have been safely filmed world-wide since the 1920's. They have used real guns to shoot safe blanks in all of them. Only Brandon Lee was killed on set by a firearm and this armorer should have learned from that incident. That was over 25 years ago
    1
  122. Jon-Eric Hexum.
    1
  123. Gross negligence.
    1
  124. Very very true.
    1
  125. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. The armorer is responsible for weapons' safety. KOB-TV here in Albuquerque had a news program on this tragedy. The armorer was quoted as saying because of budget constraints "she had other responsibilities than sole armorer." The Santa Fe PD stated on KOB TV that they were using the "prop" guns (which were "real" guns) for target practice after the day's filming. If they were and live rounds were on the set and not inventoried and cleared by the armorer, a lot of people are guilty of gross negligence. But ultimately Alec Baldwin has some level of responsibility.
    1
  126. Not really. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  127.  @MrLexGr  Okay, Here’s a scene from Westworld 1973 Go to 2:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwNqorvjtg
    1
  128.  @MrLexGr  Stay safe. Have a great holiday.
    1
  129. James, I have little or no feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But Baldwin was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  130. Dallis, The armorer is responsible for weapons' safety. KOB-TV here in Albuquerque had a news program on this tragedy. The armorer was quoted as saying because of budget constraints "she had other responsibilities than sole armorer." The Santa Fe PD stated on KOB TV that they were using the "prop" guns (which were "real" guns) for target practice after the day's filming. If they were and live rounds were on the set and not inventoried and cleared by the armorer, a lot of people are guilty of gross negligence. But ultimately Alec Baldwin has some level of responsibility.
    1
  131. Powder in no way sounds the same as small brass BB's when a cartridge is shaken. It doesn't even feel the same. And the primers are always blackened so you can see it immediately.
    1
  132. That is inherently wrong. Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed all over the world with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  133.  @HeavensGremlin  Your British (or whatever country you reside) use REAL guns and blanks in their movies. Don't lecture the rest of us on "gun usage."
    1
  134. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  135. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor point the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  136. Multiple news sources have been wrong on so many aspects of this tragedy. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio last week. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, we all would believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor.
    1
  137. Not really. Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. Have you never watched a Hollywood "action film?" In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH through San Francisco. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point the gun at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor or the camera and it's cut into later scenes in the movie. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, anyone that has safely handled a firearm believes he SHOULD have checked he rounds. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor.
    1
  138. The actors are not REQUIRED to check the status of the firearm. That is the sole responsibility of the armorer.
    1
  139. A Rod, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. The armorer is responsible for weapons' safety. KOB-TV here in Albuquerque had a news program on this tragedy. The armorer was quoted as saying because of budget constraints "she had other responsibilities than sole armorer." The Santa Fe PD stated on KOB TV that they were using the "prop" guns (which were "real" guns) for target practice after the day's filming. If they were and live rounds were on the set and not inventoried and cleared by the armorer, a lot of people are guilty of gross negligence. But ultimately Alec Baldwin has some level of responsibility.
    1
  140. Simply because it wasn't. Unless you believe the myriad of moronic conspiracy theories
    1
  141. He wasn't "joking" it was in the screenplay. . Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. Have you never watched a Hollywood "action film?" In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH through San Francisco. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point the gun at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor or the camera and it's cut into later scenes in the movie. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, anyone that has safely handled a firearm believes he SHOULD have checked he rounds. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor.
    1
  142.  @trumpone4443  Typical of the uneducated morons. No rebuttal just profanity laced nonsense.....pathetic the lack of common courtesy and knowledge some people don't have.
    1
  143.  @trumpone4443  And you hide behind a fake name. If HALF of what you claim you did is true, post your real name and we'll look over your resume. If not it's simple-you're a liar, plain and simple.
    1
  144. Not true. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  145. I don't think it had anything to do with his ego. Actors are not REQUIRED to check the status of the firearm. That is the sole responsibility of the armorer. SHOULD he have cleared it? Yes. But he trusted an armorer with little experience. A tragedy in the making.
    1
  146. No, the armorer has complete responsibility for weapons safety on the set. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But Baldwin was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  147. SIG, Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  148. The DA in Santa Fe just stated on Good Morning America that the AD NEVER touched the gun. Get your facts correct before posting nonsense. Baldwin was handed the gun by the armorer and rotated the cylinder, pointing it at the camera. There was a Plexiglas shield in front of her and the camera. He never even pulled the trigger, he "fanned" the hammer and the gun fired a live round. 5 "dummy" rounds were in the gun. Unfortunately the 1 live round in the gun killed her.
    1
  149. Dennis, Jon-Eric Hexum from Voyagers! was "kidding around" playing Russian roulette and fired a BLANK round into his head! Pieces of his skull entered his brain and he died shortly after that.
    1
  150. That is idiotic beyond words..................
    1
  151. 1995, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes
    1
  152. and Lon Chaney
    1
  153. James, so how would they get from a pocket into a firearm? And why wouldn't the armorer checked the firearms before they were brought on set? Makes no sense.
    1
  154. KBee, I'll respond as I did with Ryan, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. The armorer is responsible for weapons' safety. KOB-TV here in Albuquerque had a news program on this tragedy. The armorer was quoted as saying because of budget constraints "she had other responsibilities than sole armorer." The Santa Fe PD stated on KOB TV that they were using the "prop" guns (which were "real" guns) for target practice after the day's filming. If they were and live rounds were on the set and not inventoried and cleared by the armorer, a lot of people are guilty of gross negligence. But ultimately Alec Baldwin has some level of responsibility.
    1
  155. Andrew, this was a Hollywood movie. The rules change. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  156. Hollywood and the people that pay money to see their idiotic movies will forgive anything and everything. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, we all would believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor.
    1
  157. That's not correct. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  158. A Smith, that's true. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  159. Charles, that's not correct. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  160. West, All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes.
    1
  161. Ryan, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. The armorer is responsible for weapons' safety. KOB-TV here in Albuquerque had a news program on this tragedy. The armorer was quoted as saying because of budget constraints "she had other responsibilities than sole armorer." The Santa Fe PD stated on KOB TV that they were using the "prop" guns (which were "real" guns) for target practice after the day's filming. If they were and live rounds were on the set and not inventoried and cleared by the armorer, a lot of people are guilty of gross negligence. But ultimately Alec Baldwin has some level of responsibility.
    1
  162. No, I don't. Real gunfire in a movie is real guns shooting blanks. It's been done and filmed thousands and thousands of time with no mishaps. Live rounds should never been brought to a "cold set."
    1
  163. It is. The armorer has ultimate responsibility for firearms safety on the set.
    1
  164. That is simply not true. (and very biased.)
    1
  165. Rick, that's true. She obviously was a non-firearm's experienced person, trying to learn during the interview.
    1
  166. No, that is not true. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed. And the main firearm safety rule is to NEVER point a weapon at anything you are not willing to destroy. So you never watched a Hollywood "action film?" In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have been killed filming high-speed movie chases. What are they supposed to do film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point the gun at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's totally false. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” Go to 1:40 They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s Here’s a scene from Westworld 1973 Go to 2:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwNqorvjtg And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company“ not whether they are real or inactive replicas. If they do not use CGI, they have to be real guns to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report.
    1
  167.  @mortsdans  And they all liked Raisin Bran. And they all drank coffee. And they all slept on their right side. and they all....................... People can see a stupid conspiracy in any circumstance. Kill her in the motel room with a garrote? No, let's be so stupid as to "Kill Her in Plain Sight." You people see (and believe) too many moronic Hollywood thrillers.
    1
  168. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them.
    1
  169. You really can't be serious.........
    1
  170.  @joseph2219801  What are 'the odds" of winning the lottery" 180,000,000 to 1. But somebody always wins.
    1
  171. John, I am not here to defend Alec Baldwin. But gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  172. True. Prop guns are reals guns.
    1
  173. Guest, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes.
    1
  174. 86, that's not correct. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. The armorer is responsible for weapons' safety. KOB-TV here in Albuquerque had a news program on this tragedy. The armorer was quoted as saying because of budget constraints "she had other responsibilities than sole armorer." The Santa Fe PD stated on KOB TV that they were using the "prop" guns (which were "real" guns) for target practice after the day's filming. If they were and live rounds were on the set and not inventoried and cleared by the armorer, a lot of people are guilty of gross negligence. But ultimately Alec Baldwin has some level of responsibility.
    1
  175. Live rounds? Gross negligence. Real guns? They have to be to fire blanks. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  176. The first of your comment is true. They should never have had live-rounds on a "cold set." I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  177. They used my weapons training systems in the TV series "Stars Earn Stripes" several years ago. Dean Cain and 8 actors (along with Peekaboo Street, Alisha Ali, Terry Ewes and others) teamed with 8 Afghani/Iraqi veterans (including Chris Kyle) and they competed as teams over the 4 week period. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_Earn_Stripes It was mostly live fire with fully automatic weapons, FN rifles and pistols and live fire .50 BMG's.. The actors were trained in gun safety and use on set. So in that instance he is not correct. Live ammunition can be on set in particular circumstances, but the armorers were fastidious and nearly overly concerned about keeping the live rounds and Simunitions rounds separated and inventoried. I am a military veteran and I always felt safe on set.
    1
  178. Live ammunition is true. But real guns are used and have been for >100 years using blanks.
    1
  179. Stefano, some of that is correct. But real firearms have been used on Italian movie sets too. Contrary to what some people believe "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. "Not real" replicas can’t do that. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. nd they would have to duplicate every firearm from the Civil War up to modern semi-automatics. You just need to ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. There was a plexiglass screen to protect the camera crew from the wadding in the blank round. The armorer handed the gun directly to Alec Baldwin. Baldwin was supposed to draw his handgun, point it at the camera and fire a blank round. But when he rotated the cylinder, which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position, he accidentally let the hammer run free. It fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? Anyone that knows anything about firearms believes he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check the weapon or the rounds in it. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set.
    1
  180. Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  181. Javier, that's not possible in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  182. Curtis, a motive? Only in the delusional minds of the conspiracy crowd.
    1
  183. Cosmic, Brandon Lee was a completely different scenario. On the set of The Crow someone had loaded solid bullets into cartridges with no powder but a real primer. They shot the .44 Magnum pistol during the filming and the primer lodged the bullet into the barrel. No one checked the gun the next day and they were using "full load" blanks for maximum effect. The blank round fired and exited the bullet with such force it killed Brandon Lee. This was a full live round that killed her and went thru her and into the AD
    1
  184. Because any other conspiracy based theory is too moronic for words; that's why.
    1
  185. You're good at swearing but you must never have seen a Hollywood action film with firearms. Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have been killed filming high-speed chases. What are they supposed to do film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's way beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. "Replicas" can’t fire a blank. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds
    1
  186.  @WAViolenceLLC  So you have never seen a movie where the actors point guns at each other and are shooting off blank rounds?? REALLY?? You are missing a lot. It's been done hundreds of thousand of times since the original silent films. And it is totally in contrast to what you believe is "safe gun practices." BTW they also drive autos at extreme speeds in city streets in the movies. I guess you believe they shouldn't that either because it's "against safe driving practices."
    1
  187. That never happened in this instance. It was a full load live round.
    1
  188. Roberto, that's not correct. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  189. Wrong. Dummy round has a casing, no powder, a deactivated primer, a REAL bullet and small BB's to allow you to shake it and know immediately it is a Dummy. Wrong. No Blank firing only firearm has ever been manufactured. Every scene of the hundreds of thousands filmed since the 1920's used REAL guns firing blank rounds. Research “Guns in Movies.” No Blank only firearm has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design a special blank firing gun for every movie from the Civil War, WW II, Vietnam and modern day handgun and rifle semi-automatics. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds
    1
  190.  @Debbiebabe69  69, I stand corrected. They do have handguns in 6 mm that fire blanks only. They certainly don't eclipse all the firearms needed by the film industry, but you are correct. Sorry I also misunderstood the grammar in your post. Most of us would have stated it: Spent Round" NO gunpowder NO bullet Not: Spent Round gunpowder NO bullet NO Stay safe.
    1
  191. Randy, no real gun has ever been made that will fire only special sized blank rounds. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  192.  @randydowning4231  and during filming it would be very evident what a "not real" gun it is.
    1
  193. Gary, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. The armorer is responsible for weapons' safety. KOB-TV here in Albuquerque had a news program on this tragedy. The armorer was quoted as saying because of budget constraints "she had other responsibilities than sole armorer." The Santa Fe PD stated on KOB TV that they were using the "prop" guns (which were "real" guns) for target practice after the day's filming. If they were and live rounds were on the set and not inventoried and cleared by the armorer, a lot of people are guilty of gross negligence. But ultimately Alec Baldwin has some level of responsibility.
    1
  194. Daniel, that's not correct. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research the history of "Guns in the Movies." No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  195. Ah, the moronic conspiracy theory!!!
    1
  196. and it is entirely different than a live round.
    1
  197. Not really. Multiple news sources have been wrong on so many aspects of this tragedy. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio last week. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, we all would believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor
    1
  198. He listed the safe guards that SHOULD have been used-not the ones that were on the set of Rust.
    1
  199. Research “Blank Guns in Movies.” Chiappa of the UK is the only manufactured handgun I know of that fires a special sized 6 mm blank round that will not operate in a “real” gun. The report, muzzle flash and recoil is abysmal so CGI would still have to be implemented. They have a very limited selection of handguns and they make no rifles. They are more for stage acts than movies. There was never enough sales potential for major firearms manufacturers to invest in either special firearms or special sized blank rounds. To satisfy the movie industry they would have to design a special blank gun for every gun used in a movie from the Civil War, the old west, WW I & II, Vietnam and every modern day handgun and rifle. There was no profit in it. The armorer, not the actors, must ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. They didn't and the director died.
    1
  200. The DA in Santa Fe just stated on Good Morning America that the AD NEVER touched the gun. Get your facts correct before posting nonsense. Baldwin was handed the gun by the armorer and rotated the cylinder, pointing it at the camera. There was a Plexiglas shield in front of her and the camera. He never even pulled the trigger, he "fanned" the hammer and the gun fired a live round. 5 "dummy" rounds were in the gun. Unfortunately the 1 live round in the gun killed her
    1
  201.  @tc6818  The "multiple" sources have been wrong on so many aspects of this tragedy. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Morning Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio yesterday. They BOTH said the AD never handled the gun, the armorer handed it to Baldwin. He rotated the cylinder which requires holding the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He let the hammer run free and it fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them.
    1
  202. Mike, that's not correct. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. The armorer is responsible for weapons' safety. KOB-TV here in Albuquerque had a news program on this tragedy. The armorer was quoted as saying because of budget constraints "she had other responsibilities than sole armorer."
    1
  203. That simply is not true. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Alec have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high elevation action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive in a high-speed chase. Thousands and thousands of action scenes have been filmed and the actors are NEVER expected to check the status of the guns. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor.
    1
  204. Where did you read that Baldwin was shooting live rounds?? If you can't reference it, don't state it. There are enough moronic rumors surrounding this tragedy.
    1
  205. ac·ci·dent /ˈaksədənt/ 1.n unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury. "he had an accident at the factory" 2. an event that happens by chance or that is without apparent or deliberate cause. So exactly what was it??
    1
  206.  @svgs650r  On that I can agree. But the implication of your statement was more sinister.
    1
  207. Not really. She was entrusted with a responsibility for which she was incompetent and unsupervised.
    1
  208. Marco, very true and a good post. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have been killed filming high-speed chases. What are they supposed to do film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. They just didn't follow the safety rules that have been in place for decades.
    1
  209. There was a plexiglass screen to protect the camera crew from the wadding in the blank round. The armorer handed the gun directly to Alec Baldwin. Baldwin was supposed to draw his handgun, point it at the camera and fire a blank round. But he rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position and accidentally let the hammer run free. It fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? Anyone that knows anything about firearms believes he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check the weapon or the rounds in it. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Brandon Lee was a completely different scenario. On the set of The Crow someone had loaded solid bullets into cartridges with no powder but a real primer. They shot the .44 Magnum pistol during the filming and the primer lodged the bullet into the barrel. No one checked the gun the next day and they were using "full load" blanks for maximum effect. The blank round fired and exited the bullet with such force it killed Brandon Lee. This was a full live round that killed her and went thru her and into the AD
    1
  210. Not really. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  211. True. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor point the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  212. David, Not in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  213. Zen, a "simple solution?" No not really. As I stated in my original post, there is no motivation nor profit in any firearms manufacturer making a firearm that would hold a special sized blank round And no sales motivation for ammunition manufacturer to assemble specially sized rounds that would only fit in those guns. They would have to make "special" guns and "special" blanks to replicate every gun ever used in a movie. Ever era from the Civil War, the early west, WWI & WWII, Korea, Vietnam and today's plethora of rifles and handguns Literally hundreds, if not thousands. Hundreds of thousands of scenes have been safely filmed world-wide since the 1920's. They have used real guns to shoot safe blanks in all of them. Only Brandon Lee was killed on set by a firearm and this armorer should have learned from that incident. That was over 25 years ago
    1
  214. In a word......no.
    1
  215. Too far-fetched to be real.
    1
  216. Not true. "Dummy" rounds have no powder or primer but a real bullet. Blank rounds have no bullet but do have a primer and a reduced powder charge.
    1
  217. And he allows all the horror and death and suffering in the world....."of those he truly loves." It's a certainty, god works his miracles in strange ways. Understood only by the religious zealots that set aside common sense and understanding.
    1
  218. Bill, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting, "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  219. Not unless you believe in moronic conspiracy theories. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  220. No, not really. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But Baldwin was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  221. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. You just ensure that the guns have no live rounds in them.
    1
  222. That isn't always true. They used my weapons training systems and I was a technical consultant on the TV series "Stars Earn Stripes" several years ago. 8 actors including Dean Cain, Peekaboo Street, Alisha Ali, Terry Crews and others, were teamed with 8 Afghani/Iraqi combat veterans including Chris Kyle. They competed as teams over the 4 week period. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_Earn_Stripes It was almost all live fire with fully automatic weapons, FN rifles and pistols and live fire .50 BMG's. It was designated a "hot set" when the real firearms were loaded with live rounds and a "cold set" when the same real firearms were on set and no live rounds were accessible. Irrespective of their past experience both the actors and combat veterans were schooled in gun safety and use on both the "hot" and "cold" sets. Even the combat veterans NEVER checked the status of any real gun on set. They ALL respected and believed the armorers. So in that regard some of the so-called "experts" are not correct. Live ammunition can be on set in particular circumstances, but the armorers were fastidious and nearly overly concerned about keeping the live rounds, dummy or blank and Simunition rounds and guns separated and inventoried. I am a combat veteran and I always felt safe on set. The real issue here was having live rounds on a "cold set" of Rust.
    1
  223. Idiotic, to say the least.
    1
  224. Ed, that's necessarily true. They used my weapons training systems in the TV series "Stars Earn Stripes" several years ago. Dean Cain was 1 of 8 actors (along with Peekaboo Street, Alisha Ali, Terry Ewes and others) teamed with 8 Afghani/Iraqi veterans (including Chris Kyle) and they competed as teams over the 4 week period. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_Earn_Stripes It was mostly live fire with fully automatic weapons, FN rifles and pistols and live fire .50 BMG's.. The actors were trained in gun safety and use on set. So some of the "experts" aren't correct. Live ammunition can be on set in particular circumstances, but the armorers were fastidious and nearly overly concerned about keeping the live rounds and dummy rounds and blanks and Simunition rounds separated and inventoried. I am a veteran and I always felt safe on set
    1
  225. Pure nonsense.
    1
  226. That's not true in a Hollywood movie.
    1
  227. That moronic conspiracy theory is idiotic beyond words. I will never understand how the conspiracy crowd can be so stupid as to believe that is how it happened. On set with all the witnesses and not in the quiet of the hotel? And the gun had only 1 live round and 5 dummy rounds. Dumb beyond words.
    1
  228. Yet another moronic conspiracy theory.................jez.
    1
  229. No, this was not a Brandon Lee repeat. This was a full load manufactured live round.
    1
  230. It wasn't a "suicide." Jon-Eric Hexum was playing Russian roulette and fired a BLANK round into his head! That's what happened. Gross negligence.. Brandon Lee was a completely different scenario. On the set of The Crow someone had loaded solid bullets into cartridges with no powder but a real primer. They shot the .44 Magnum pistol during the filming and the primer lodged the bullet into the barrel. No one checked the gun the next day and they were using "full load" blanks for maximum effect. The blank round fired and exited the bullet with such force it killed Brandon Lee. This was a full live round that killed her and went thru her and into the AD
    1
  231. Peter, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live ro
    1
  232. Clay, Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design a special blank firing gun for every movie from the Civil War, the old west, WW I & II, Vietnam and every modern day handgun and rifle. Get the point? The armorer, not the actors, must ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. They didn't and the director died.
    1
  233.  @clayoreilly4553  Clay, I'm really sorry you never in your life watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie they can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have been killed filming high-speed movie chases. What are they supposed to do film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH through the streets of San Francisco so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) the actor points the gun at the camera or another actor and shoots. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's totally false. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” Go to 1:40 They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s Here’s a scene from Westworld 1973 Go to 2:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwNqorvjtg And contrary to what some uneducated "experts" are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ It has nothing to do with whether they are real or inactive replicas. If they do not use CGI, they have to be real guns to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report.
    1
  234.  @clayoreilly4553  Hundreds of thousands of scenes have been safely filmed world-wide since the 1920's. They have used real guns to shoot safe blanks in all of them. Only Brandon Lee was killed on set by a firearm and this armorer should have learned from that incident. That was over 25 years ago. Do you want to stop real tragedies? Here's some statistics from the CDC: [In the US, an average of 3,500 to 4,000 people drown per year. That is an average of 10 fatal drownings per day. Drowning is the leading cause of unintentional injury-related death for children ages 1-4. Drowning remains in the top 5 causes of unintentional injury-related death from birth to 5 years old. Twenty-three percent of child drownings happen during a family gathering near a pool. Drowning is the cause of death for most boating fatalities. It’s estimated that another 5 to 10 people receive hospital-related care for nonfatal drowning injuries for every fatal drowning victim.] [According the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, every year 500,000 people are treated for ladder-related injuries and approximately 400 of these incidents prove to be fatal. In 2007 alone, more than 400 people died as a result of falls on or from ladders or scaffolding. -Liberty Mutual - Research Institute for Safety] That's YEARLY statistics! I won't even go into drunk drivers and knifings and bludgeon deaths. Safe "hot" and "cold" sets have been here for years. They simply didn't follow the safety standards that have been used to ensure safety on either set and a tragedy resulted
    1
  235. The "multiple" sources have been wrong on so many aspects of this tragedy. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Morning Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio yesterday. They BOTH said the AD never handled the gun, the armorer handed it to Baldwin. He rotated the cylinder which requires holding the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He let the hammer run free and it fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them.
    1
  236.  @brianweit7823  Brian, Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  237. You would have to be a complete moron to believe that.
    1
  238. Gross negligence.
    1
  239. Only in the distorted minds of the moronic conspiracy believers. Shoot her on the set with dozens looking on? Stupid beyond words.
    1
  240. You really need help............
    1
  241. That isn't entirely correct. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have been killed filming high-speed chases. What are they supposed to do film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's totally false. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” Go to 1:40 They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s Here’s a scene from Westworld 1973 Go to 2:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwNqorvjtg And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company“ not whether they are real or inactive replicas. If they do not use CGI, they have to be real guns to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design a special blank firing gun for every movie from the Civil War, WW II, Vietnam and modern day handgun and rifle semi-automatics. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive.
    1
  242.  @free-birdrocker8809  Maybe you hate Alec Baldwin so much it clogs your mind from rational thought. Let me repeat part of my post: [I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive.]
    1
  243. Josh, they used my weapons training systems in the TV series "Stars Earn Stripes" several years ago. 8 actors including Dean Cain, Peekaboo Street, Alisha Ali, Terry Crews and others, were teamed with 8 Afghani/Iraqi combat veterans including Chris Kyle. They competed as teams over the 4 week period. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_Earn_Stripes It was mostly live fire with fully automatic weapons, FN rifles and pistols and live fire .50 BMG's. It was designated a "hot set" when the firearms were loaded with live rounds and a "cold set" when no live rounds were accessible. Irrespective of their past experience both the actors and veterans were schooled in gun safety and use on both the "hot" and "cold" sets. So he is not correct. Live ammunition can be on set in particular circumstances, but the armorers were fastidious and nearly overly concerned about keeping the live rounds, dummy or blank and Simunition rounds separated and inventoried. I am a veteran and I always felt safe on set. The real issue here was having live rounds on a "cold set" of this movie.
    1
  244. Not true. I am not here to defend Alec Baldwin. But gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  245. Hollywood????
    1
  246. ??????
    1
  247. There was a plexiglass shield in front of the camera to protect the camera crew from the wadding in the blank round. Alec Baldwin was supposed to draw, aim the gun at the camera and fire a blank round. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on Good Morning America and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun, the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. He then rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? We all would believe he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check them and unfortunately he didn't.
    1
  248. How would he REALLY know what went wrong? He would be offering more speculation like the rest of the uneducated and uninformed.
    1
  249.  @Sgt_Bill_T_Co  Roger that. Click-bait title which they all use. Stay safe.
    1
  250. The DA in Santa Fe just stated on Good Morning America that the AD NEVER touched the gun. Baldwin was handed the gun by the armorer and rotated the cylinder, pointing it at the camera. There was a Plexiglas shield in front of her and the camera. He never even pulled the trigger, he "fanned" the hammer and the gun fired a live round. 5 "dummy" rounds were in the gun. Unfortunately the 1 live round in the gun killed her
    1
  251. That simply is not true. "Multiple" sources have been wrong on so many aspects of this tragedy. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Morning Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio yesterday. They BOTH said the AD never handled the gun, the armorer handed it to Baldwin. He rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He let the hammer run free and it fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them rather than some "unnamed references."
    1
  252. That's not correct. Many in the media have posted totally erroneous comments as to what happened on the set. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them.
    1
  253. Dummy rounds have a real bullet (projectile) a real casing, a deactivated primer and have small lead or copper BB's in them in place of the powder so you know by shaking them they are inactive and safe. Most importantly the actors are not REQUIRED to check the status of the firearm. That is the sole responsibility of the armorer.
    1
  254. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  255. Turn your CAPS LOC off!! It's moronic. And so are your comments. He didn't take 2 shots and hit 2 people. How people can be so dumb just amazes me.
    1
  256. He didn't have to check it. I have little or no feelings or respect toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But Baldwin was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  257.  @karlmarxstolemybike3382  All of that is true. He was not responsible and had no requirement to check the status of the firearm. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them.
    1
  258. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  259. Not really. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But Baldwin was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  260. True. You would think some of these people never watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have been killed filming high-speed movie chases. What are they supposed to do film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point the gun at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's totally false. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” Go to 1:40 They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s Here’s a scene from Westworld 1973 Go to 2:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwNqorvjtg And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company“ not whether they are real or inactive replicas. If they do not use CGI, they have to be real guns to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design a special blank firing gun for every movie from the Civil War, WW II, Vietnam and modern day handgun and rifle semi-automatics. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  261. Humble, I'm really sorry you never in your life watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie they can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have also been killed filming high-speed movie chases. What are they supposed to do, film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH through the streets of San Francisco so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) the actor points the gun at the camera or another actor and shoots. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at the camera or another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's totally false. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” Go to 1:40 They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s Here’s a scene from Westworld 1973 Go to 2:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwNqorvjtg And contrary to what some "experts" are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ It has nothing to do with whether they are real guns or inactive replicas. If they do not use CGI, they are forced to use real guns to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Research “Blank Guns in Movies.” Chiappa of the UK is the only manufactured handgun I know of that fires a special sized 6 mm blank round that will not operate in a “real” gun. The report, muzzle flash and recoil is abysmal so CGI would still have to be implemented. They have a very limited selection of handguns and they make no rifles. They are more for stage acts than movies. There was never enough sales potential for major firearms manufacturers to invest in either special firearms or special sized blank rounds. To satisfy the movie industry they would have to design a special blank gun for every gun used in a movie from the Civil War, the old west, WW I & II, Vietnam and every modern day handgun and rifle. There was no profit in it. The armorer, not the actors, must ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. They didn't and the director died.
    1
  262. Click-bait title.
    1
  263. They were using the guns for target practice after filming according to the Santa Fe PD.
    1
  264. That's not correct. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But Baldwin was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  265. Garrett, this was a Hollywood movie. The rules change. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  266. Very bad analogies.......
    1
  267.  @Jin-Ro  They found live-rounds in possession of the armorer. She was totally inexperienced for the responsibilities she had. She will be held responsible. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  268. There's no profit in it for the manufacturers and suppliers. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  269. Ill-informed to say the least.
    1
  270. Yes, if you believe moronic conspiracy theories..........
    1
  271. Ah... so you know the Brandon Lee story! But that isn't the case here. He fired a full load live round. There was a plexiglass screen to protect the camera crew from the wadding in the blank round. The armorer handed the gun directly to Alec Baldwin. Baldwin was supposed to draw his handgun, point it at the camera and fire a blank round. But he rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position and accidentally let the hammer run free. It fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? Anyone that knows anything about firearms believes he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check the weapon or the rounds in it. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set.
    1
  272. Dummy rounds have a real bullet (projectile) a real casing, a deactivated primer and have small lead or copper BB's in them in place of the powder so you know by shaking them they are inactive and safe. Most importantly the actors are not REQUIRED to check the status of the firearm. That is the sole responsibility of the armorer.
    1
  273. No you are wrong. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  274. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research "Guns in the movies." No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  275. David, that is very true and as you stated it's misunderstood by many. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research "Guns in the movies." No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  276. WG, or 1 group that knows what their responsibility is. They used my weapons training systems in the TV series "Stars Earn Stripes" several years ago. 8 actors including Dean Cain, Peekaboo Street, Alisha Ali, Terry Crews and others, were teamed with 8 Afghani/Iraqi combat veterans including Chris Kyle. They competed as teams over the 4 week period. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_Earn_Stripes It was almost all live fire with fully automatic weapons, FN rifles and pistols and even live fire .50 BMG's. It was designated a "hot set" when the firearms were loaded with live rounds and a "cold set" when no live rounds were accessible. Irrespective of their past experience both the actors and veterans were schooled in gun safety and use on both the "hot" and "cold" sets. So in that regard he is not correct. Live ammunition can be on set in particular circumstances, but the armorers on the set I was on were fastidious and nearly overly concerned about keeping the live rounds, dummy or blank and Simunition rounds and guns separated and inventoried. I am a combat veteran and never felt that the set wasn't safe. I would have said something immediately.
    1
  277. Yes, he was. It was in the screenplay. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them.
    1
  278. Hundreds of thousands of scenes have been safely filmed world-wide since the 1920's. They have used real guns to shoot safe blanks in all of them. Only Brandon Lee was killed on set by a firearm and this armorer should have learned from that incident. That was over 25 years ago. Do you want to stop real tragedies? Here's some statistics from the CDC: [In the US, an average of 3,500 to 4,000 people drown per year. That is an average of 10 fatal drownings per day. Drowning is the leading cause of unintentional injury-related death for children ages 1-4. Drowning remains in the top 5 causes of unintentional injury-related death from birth to 5 years old. Twenty-three percent of child drownings happen during a family gathering near a pool. Drowning is the cause of death for most boating fatalities. It’s estimated that another 5 to 10 people receive hospital-related care for nonfatal drowning injuries for every fatal drowning victim.] [According the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, every year 500,000 people are treated for ladder-related injuries and approximately 400 of these incidents prove to be fatal. In 2007 alone, more than 400 people died as a result of falls on or from ladders or scaffolding. -Liberty Mutual - Research Institute for Safety] That's YEARLY statistics! I won't even go into drunk drivers and knifings and bludgeon deaths. Safe "hot" and "cold" sets have been here for years. They simply didn't follow the safety standards that have been used to ensure safety on either set and a tragedy resulted
    1
  279. Good thought but it will never happen. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design a special blank firing gun for every movie from the Civil War, WW II, Vietnam and modern day handgun and rifle semi-automatics. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  280. Joe, that is incorrect. Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. Have you never watched a Hollywood "action film?" In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH through San Francisco. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor or the camera and it's cut into later scenes in the movie. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio last week. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, we all would believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor.
    1
  281. Thief, true. But the uneducated will go on and on and on..................
    1
  282. tah, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  283. No, not in the real world.
    1
  284. Hexum was playing Russian roulette and fired a BLANK round into his head! That's not correct.
    1
  285. Moo, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds. Contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. The armorer is responsible for weapons' safety. KOB-TV here in Albuquerque had a news program on this tragedy. The armorer was quoted as saying because of budget constraints "she had other responsibilities than sole armorer." The Santa Fe PD stated on KOB TV that they were using the "prop" guns (which were "real" guns) for target practice after the day's filming. If they were and live rounds were on the set and not inventoried and cleared by the armorer, a lot of people are guilty of gross negligence. But ultimately Alec Baldwin has some level of responsibility.
    1
  286. No that's not true. . I have little or no feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But Baldwin was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed. There was a plexiglass screen to protect the camera crew from the wadding in the blank round. The armorer handed the gun directly to Alec Baldwin. Baldwin was supposed to draw his handgun, point it at the camera and fire a blank round. But he rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position and accidentally let the hammer run free. It fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun? Anyone that knows anything about firearms believes he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check the weapon or the rounds in it. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. "Little Mexican girl" or not.
    1
  287. Stop with the CAPS and MAYBE someone will read your post!
    1
  288. Todd, Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have been killed filming high-speed chases. What are they supposed to do film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's way beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. "Replicas" can’t fire a blank. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design a special blank firing gun for every movie from the Civil War, WW II, Vietnam and modern day handgun and rifle semi-automatics. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds
    1
  289. Mark, that simply isn't true. Have you never watched a Hollywood "action film?" In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have been killed filming high-speed movie chases. What are they supposed to do film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point the gun at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's totally false. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” Go to 1:40 They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s Here’s a scene from Westworld 1973 Go to 2:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwNqorvjtg And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company“ not whether they are real or inactive replicas. If they do not use CGI, they have to be real guns to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design a special blank firing gun for every movie from the Civil War, WW II, Vietnam and modern day handgun and rifle semi-automatics. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  290. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor points the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  291. Especially in a revolver. The "spent primers" evident from the rear as you rotate the cylinder and look at each round.
    1
  292. "Dummy" rounds have bullets inserted in the casing but no powder and are filled loosely with small BB's so you can shake them and know they are not live rounds. They also have an evident "hit" on the primer so you also know they can't operate as a "live" round. "Blank" rounds have a crimped end that is VERY noticeable.
    1
  293. True. I have no use for Alec Baldwin, but he was not responsible for ensuring weapons safety on the supposedly "cold" set. Anyone that handles weapons knows he SHOULD HAVE checked the gun, but he wasn't REQUIRED to do so anymore than expecting the actors to check the harness cabling for a high building action scene or checking the cars before a high-speed chase. Literally 10's of thousands of scenes have been filmed where the actor point the blank firing gun at the camera or another actor and fires. Are we to believe ALL the actors and extras were expected to check the guns for live rounds? No, they weren't. The armorer allowed live rounds on and near the "cold" set. Unless Baldwin knew about it and did noting to sanitize the set, he has no responsibility.
    1
  294. Live rounds on a "cold set?" Gross negligence. But gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed world wide with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  295. I see no connection between the 2.
    1
  296. Today that isn't possible. Research “Blank Guns in Movies.” Chiappa of the UK is the only manufactured handgun I know of that fires a special sized 6 mm blank round that will not operate in a “real” gun. The report, muzzle flash and recoil is abysmal so CGI would still have to be implemented. They have a very limited selection of handguns and they make no rifles. They are more for stage acts than movies. There was never enough sales potential for major firearms manufacturers to invest in either special firearms or special sized blank rounds. To satisfy the movie industry they would have to design a special blank gun for every gun used in a movie from the Civil War, the old west, WW I & II, Vietnam and every modern day handgun and rifle. There was no profit in it. The armorer, not the actors, must ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. They didn't and the director died.
    1
  297. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. Should Baldwin have checked the loads in the handgun to ensure it was safe? Yes, all of us that safely handle firearms believe he SHOULD have. But he was not REQUIRED to check them. That is the responsibility of the armorer not the actor. It really isn’t much different than expecting the actors to check the safety rigging in a high above ground action scene or the safety of a car they are going to drive at high-speed.
    1
  298. That's really not accurate. Have you never watched a Hollywood "action film?" In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's tragic that this woman was killed but stunt drivers have been killed filming high-speed movie chases. What are they supposed to do film the Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and have the cars run at 25 MPH so it's not dangerous? If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point the gun at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's totally false. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” Go to 1:40 They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s Here’s a scene from Westworld 1973 Go to 2:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwNqorvjtg And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company“ not whether they are real or inactive replicas. If they do not use CGI, they have to be real guns to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. And they would have to design a special blank firing gun for every movie from the Civil War, WW II, Vietnam and modern day handgun and rifle semi-automatics. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds. And they never believed it "was safe to have live rounds on set." It was gross negligence.
    1
  299.  @RoughAndWretchedRAW  So you saw the two videos I linked you to and believe the "camera angle" made them safe? No, not really.
    1
  300. Michael, that's not true in Hollywood. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's idiotic. And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live ro
    1
  301. No on a movie set.
    1
  302. Patricia, Gun safety rules aren’t the same in a Hollywood movie. All of us have watched a Hollywood "action film." In a movie you can't follow the same safety rules you do in real life. It's like having a Steve McQueen Bullitt scene and having the cars run at 25 MPH. If it's in the screenplay (and we have seen it many times in other movies) you point it at the camera or actor and shoot. It's then cut into later scenes. Thousand and thousands of movies since the 1920's have been filmed with "real guns" firing blank rounds and actors pointing the guns at another actor. Some "expert" said they change the camera angle so no one points a gun at another actor. That's beyond belief. Here’s a scene from the 1960’s “Gunsmoke.” They used real guns with blanks and aimed accurately at each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6HrpJSq5s And contrary to what some people are posting "prop" guns can be "real" guns or “replicas” or plastic “look-a-likes.” “Prop” simply means “Property of the Production Company.“ If you do not use CGI, they have to be real to fire blank rounds with the resultant muzzle flash, smoke and loud report. Replicas can’t fire a projectile. Research “Guns in Movies.” No “prop” gun has ever been designed or manufactured that fires a special sized blank round that would not fit in a “real” gun. And no special sized blank round has ever been developed that would not fit into a real gun. There was never enough sales potential for manufacturers to invest in either of them. You just ensure there are blanks or dummy rounds in the gun, not live rounds.
    1
  303. That's a moronic "fact" from a conspiracy website. There was a plexiglass screen to protect the camera crew from the wadding in the blank round. The armorer handed the gun directly to Alec Baldwin. Baldwin was supposed to draw his handgun, point it at the camera and fire a blank round. But he rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger back and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position and accidentally let the hammer run free. It fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I have little or no use or feelings toward Alec Baldwin, but he is not at fault. Should he have checked the loads in the handgun? Anyone that knows anything about firearms believes he SHOULD have. But he is not REQUIRED to check the weapon or the rounds in it. The armorer is responsible for all weapons safety on the set. The District Attorney for Santa Fe was on the Good Morning America Show and one of the production crew that was standing behind Alec Baldwin was interviewed on KKOB radio. They BOTH said the Assistant Director never handled the gun; the armorer handed it directly to Alec Baldwin. There was a plexiglass screen in front of the camera to protect the crew from the wadding in the blank round. We have seen the same scene in many, many movies, he was to draw, point the gun at the camera and fire the round. It would later be cut into the movie. Baldwin drew the gun, pointed it at the camera and rotated the cylinder which requires pulling the trigger to the rear and holding the hammer back off its down and safe position. He accidentally let the hammer run free and it hit and fired the only live round in the gun. The other 5 were dummy rounds. I guess I'd believe them before I'd believe some idiotic factoid..
    1