Will Alec Baldwin serve jail time? - Alec Baldwin Discussion

[–] liscarkat (18410) 7 months ago

Hard to say. He shares responsibility for the death on one person and the injury of another. It was his responsibility to check the gun as soon as it was handed to him, to see if it was loaded, and if so, what it was loaded with. Yes, it was his responsibility, it's basic firearms safety. If that's not the way they do it on movie sets, then they're doing it wrong and they need to change.

reply

[–] Lord Rake (4454) 7 months ago

According to every other actor and director, that is the way it is done on movie sets. I just did a quick search to see how old the armorer Baldwin hired was, then I read this on NPR
"Alec Baldwin, pointed what was supposed to be an unloaded gun toward the camera. It fired off, killing cinematographer Hutchins"
IT fired off. They wont even admit he pulled the trigger, the gun is alive.

They will put the gun in a jail cell before they put Baldwin in one.

reply

[–] strntz (12254) 7 months ago

If that's not the way they do it on movie sets, then they're doing it wrong and they need to change.

That's the answer right there.

In this day and age, we no longer "need" to have real guns anywhere near actors - people who are not trained as stunt people. If they make actors responsible for movie set accidents, very few actors will agree to handle a gun at all.

With CGI, realistic gunplay is only a mouse click away, and there will never be a gun related death on a movie set again.

reply

[–] liscarkat (18410) 6 months ago

Okay, but if he had simply checked the gun, nothing bad would have happened. It only takes a few seconds, and it's not so technical that anybody can't learn to do it quickly and easily. You don't have to be trained as a stunt person. My dad taught me and impressed me with the importance of it when I was eight, and it wasn't difficult. CGI isn't a substitute for real guns. The tech already exists for safety: empty guns, and blanks (when used properly). If I were an actor, I wouldn't worry about being responsible for movie set accidents, because I'd be sure to check any gun I handled to be sure it wasn't loaded with live rounds. It's easy. That this isn't standard practice on movie sets is astonishing.

reply

[–] parkerbot (9075) 7 months ago

We can all hope.

reply

[–] bozo_500 (13118) 7 months ago

All through it you get the vibe from him that although its tragic and regretful he doesn't seem to think he was at fault in anyway (even though he was clearly at fault for not practicing basic firearm safety, and as a producer a lax set with all the guns and live ammunition laying around)

Usually when a person shows no accountability/guilt they end up going to jail ,

reply

[–] MillerJones (531) 7 months ago

Nonsense.

He hired a professional who was suppose to take care of all these they clearly did not how is that his fault.

You are making things up and the whole thing is typical of today witch hunt in a culture especially in US someone has to be blamed.

reply

[–] strntz (12254) 7 months ago

He hired a professional who was suppose to take care of all these they clearly did not how is that his fault.

The production team hired a cheaper option, so the production team bears responsibility at some level to the accident. There were several concerns raised about safety on the set *before* the shooting. Alec Baldwin wasn't just the actor, he was part of the production team.

reply

[–] MillerJones (531) 7 months ago

Cheaper option so what people have budgets.

If people was not happy with safety leave these workers have lots of protection no one is forcing them to stay.

Doesn't matter if he was part of production he is not the firearms specialist someone else is who was hired this requires licenses etc which they had.

You are looking for a scapegoat you really think this man wanted to kill or harm people if so he could have done it many other ways.

production team by the way do not run everything people who have been in the industry know full well its not that simple.

reply

[–] strntz (12254) 7 months ago

Slow down and take a breath. I'm not advocating for Baldwin to be charged with killing the cinematographer. I'm on the record here on MC saying he's an actor who was handed a gun the armorer declared as "cold".. Baldwin has no more duty to be a gun expert than Betty White if she handled the gun.

Cheaper option so what people have budgets.

Budgets are fine. Saving money is fine, as long as what you're saving is excessive money and not shortcutting safety. The problem here is that the Rust production team went cheap on a job where cheap doesn't work, and their cheaping out on the armorer led directly to Hutchin's death.

Doesn't matter if he was part of production he is not the firearms specialist someone else is who was hired this requires licenses etc which they had.

It absolutely matters. If I hire an incompetent boob to protect you to save money and he fails to protect you, it's on me.

You are looking for a scapegoat you really think this man wanted to kill or harm people if so he could have done it many other ways.

That's silly. Even the people who want him charged as the shooter (of which I am not one) aren't saying Baldwin was intentionally trying to kill Hutchins.

And no, I'm not looking for a scapegoat - I have no dog in this fight. I have said repeatedly here on MC that if I'm on the jury and the prosecution is going for a murder charge based on the gun incident, they don't get a guilty vote from me.

But, if I'm on the jury and his charges are based on his bungling of his production that led to the death of Hutchins, they do indeed get a guilty vote from me.

reply

[–] MillerJones (531) 7 months ago

It's very simple you have regulations.

It does not matter if you go cheap or most expensive if you pass the regulations is all that matters.

Baldwin does not control everything.

Unless they have some documents which shows safety was not up to the standards to meet regulations and he was the one which was in charge of that side of things and neglected it knowing it failed in areas no case at all.

It's typical of US system it does not care about the truth it is one of the worst so called justice systems in the world.

reply

[–] strntz (12254) 7 months ago

Baldwin does not control everything.

Correct, not everything - he's one of many producers on the film. He might also have some ownership of the film. I suspect that how much he was involved in hiring a poorly experienced armorer and ignoring the safety issues that were raised *before* the shooting occurred will be addressed at the trial. For now, I'm willing to wait for the specifics.

Unless they have some documents which shows safety was not up to the standards to meet regulations and he was the one which was in charge of that side of things and neglected it knowing it failed in areas no case at all.

They will have the testimony of the first person they offered the armorer and prop master job to. He's said on the record that he told the producers he would agree to be just the armorer, but *not* also take on the job of prop master after he read the script as there were too many guns on the set to manage. He thought they needed two people for that job.

They will also have the evidence of emails where eventual armorer Hanna Gutierrez was scolded for safety violations by the producers of Rust *before* the shooting, and Gutierrez' reply that she needed to focus on weapons and not props, so the producers were aware of the problems with safety and work load.

reply

[–] liscarkat (18410) 6 months ago

It's not nonsense, it is his fault, at least partially, and nobody is making anything up.

reply

[–] TheHardSell (1714) 7 months ago

If he have celeb friends that will write a letter to the jugde on his behalf he will go free.

reply

[–] howgamer (3931) 7 months ago

No. Rich celeb, just can't see it happening.

reply

[–] PaladinNJ (21510) 6 months ago

I don't see it happening.

reply

[–] ewd76 (1184) 6 months ago

If he wins in state court the Trump administration will persecute.

reply