Alec Baldwin faces involuntary manslaughter charge over deadly “Rust” shooting
- Thread starter Piscian
- Start date
Alec Baldwin's Rust resumes filming after on-set tragedy
The actor has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter after the film's cinematographer died.
www.bbc.com
Also, charges have been dropped.Alec Baldwin's Rust resumes filming after on-set tragedy
The actor has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter after the film's cinematographer died.
Criminal charges against Alec Baldwin dropped in Rust film set shooting
Baldwin was pointing a pistol at cinematographer Halyna Hutchins during a rehearsal in 2021 when the gun went off
www.theguardian.com
They're telling us the charges can be re filed if appropriate after further investigation which is ongoing.Also, charges have been dropped.
Criminal charges against Alec Baldwin dropped in Rust film set shooting
Baldwin was pointing a pistol at cinematographer Halyna Hutchins during a rehearsal in 2021 when the gun went off
They may have found it very typical for actors to trust staff regarding whether a prop was hot or not and go from there. They'd likely have to show it a duty to check the gun 1st, regardless of what staff tells you about it.
I'm sure the actors avoid pointing prop guns even if told they are not hot, but I doubt it rises to the level of being a duty.
His, "I didn't pull the trigger" has been debunked, but others are stating he may have been holding down the trigger to begin with so when he cocked it, it shot. If he were holding the trigger to begin with, wouldn't it have just shot? Double action required? EDIT: "A single-action revolver usually requires the hammer to be manually cocked, and the trigger be pulled for a shot to be fired. That's why it's referred to as a single-action: because the trigger performs just one action. It drops the hammer. In a double-action revolver, on the other hand, the trigger can both cock and release the hammer." https://www.newsweek.com/what-kind-gun-did-alec-baldwin-rust-fired-1655809 so he could have been holding it wrong, trigger held down, cocked it and it shot without further action by Baldwin.
Absent
And twice is the only way to live.
- Jan 25, 2023
- 1,594
- 1,552
- 118
- Country
- Switzerland
- Gender
- The boring one
Do we have more information on why there were real bullets in the gun in the first place ? How they got here ? I feel it's a pretty major point (I don't buy the "haha you should have checked, joke's on you" dismissal), and that the ones who just brought threse bullets on the set, slash, in the gun, should maybe be considered as carrying a bit of the responsibility.Also, charges have been dropped.
Criminal charges against Alec Baldwin dropped in Rust film set shooting
Baldwin was pointing a pistol at cinematographer Halyna Hutchins during a rehearsal in 2021 when the gun went off
Currently it feels a bit like "of course there would be bullets in it some times, man gotta satisfy his biological need to go play pew pew on tin cans during his free hours, the question is not there".
You might see in cowboy films people "fanning" a revolver, they aim from the hip, pull the trigger, and use their off hand to smack the hammer back as fast as possible. Because the trigger is held down, the hammer comes straight back down again and fires. Apparently cowboys used to do that, including some famous gunslingers, but only as a gimmick. Famous gunslingers seemed to do lots of showing off stuff like that when not actually shooting at people.
By comparison, pump action shotguns which allow for slam firing, you hold down the trigger and rack the slide as fast as you can. US WW1 trench shotguns could do that, it was seen as a useful feature, but has gone out of fashion.
I'm not suprised, it's an amazingly stupid way to shoot at someone, because it's far harder to aim properly. And when you need to shoot someone, hitting them is kind of a priority.
It seems weird to me that they'd do weird stuff like that, apparently dedicating loads of time and effort into becoming really good at it. For people that only did trick shots and the like, fine, but not for people that actually were gunfighters as well.
People do all sorts of pointless and stupid things. Ultimately, there's no good reason anyone should climb mountains, and yet they do.
That's where a lot of the investigation seems to be focused. Right now, it's looking like at the very least, the armorer screwed up by not clearing the guns. As for where the real bullets came from, apparently the guns were, in fact, being used off camera to blow off some steam, pun unintended.
- May 6, 2020
- 1,133
- 1,213
- 118
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- White Male
Ah, the 4Kids treatment.
Absent
And twice is the only way to live.
- Jan 25, 2023
- 1,594
- 1,552
- 118
- Country
- Switzerland
- Gender
- The boring one
It's sad if they don't even trust him with a banana.
I should feel bad about laughing at that, shouldn't I?
Many Old West-era revolvers had minimalist sights, primarily because speed of the draw was usually prioritized over accuracy, and larger sights could get hung up or drag on the holster. So getting rounds out ASAP was probably seen as more important than careful aiming. And considering that half of all Colt Single Action Army revolvers ever sold during the era were chambered in .45 Colt, which could be loaded to deliver more than twice as much energy as a 9x19 Parabellum round, hitting your opponent almost anywhere was nearly guaranteed to at least throw off their aim.
Last edited:
I thought it was mostly a myth that they used revolvers to shoot people that much: rifles were generally preferred.
In preplanned combat like ambushes, sure. In a sudden fight, low-profile revolvers would have been preferable for the same reason as similarly-designed pistols are today. (The whole thing about gunslingers standing off at high noon? Not nearly as common as movies show.)
They weren't accurate or consistent enough to justify optics. Poor metallurgy, progressive rifling, and likely substandard maintenance meant barrel fouling and degradation. Add to that inconsistencies in bullet weight, quality, and alloying, and powder quality and charging, during ammunition manufacture for even less consistency.
Don't make me dig Wyatt Earp's memoirs out.
Thing a lot of people either forget or never learned: Colt SAA's were purpose-designed to kill horses, not the dark-skinned men sitting on them. Famously accurate for its time as it was, it wasn't that accurate. The to-do you read/see online about them are based on later-generation SAA's or replicas, firing contemporary ammunition with contemporary methods and quality assurance standards, being handled by trained shooters who likely also handload.